So, nothing...
If we had spent the same amount of time and money trying to determine why our observations do not match our models of gravity
My gut instinct tells me they're not going to find anything, because dark matter isn't here, it's in another brane, and all we're seeing is the gravitational effect. Something like that seems to be a logical answer
Dark matter is just as imaginary as Pixie dust or Unicorns.
And never will be. Flush another billion or so just because they can't admit Relativity is wrongReally, can you articulate this rather better than an inane one line claim that "goes no-where" - maths & experimental evidence please ?
.... no evidence for it and there never has been any evidence for it. It was simply imagined on the spot when we noted that our models failed to match our observationsDoing this again, coming at Physics topics without basic understanding of the key issues re "Balance of Probability"
Susskind, think dark matter will just turn out to be an ordinary particle we've missed up until now.
You don't spend millions of dollars building detectors to find place holdersYes you do, the process continues also be exclusion, this is how Science works. Try try to understand key economics, money flows around global economy, enables increased tech overall not just in any one field as many branches of engineering need to converge, people also pay taxes & buy etc. See studies confirm high leverage of (basic) Science research re outcomes
They are actually looking for dark matterAs well, remember if you can the "Sherlock Holmes method" re inference & deduction, my thought is type of 'saturation' effect which disturbs the gravitational noise variance re photon interaction but, thats a mere guess so far...
.."it is a place holder" claim is simply not trueNo.
You don't spend millions of dollars building detectors to find place holders. They are actually looking for dark matter.
You don't spend millions of dollars building detectors to find place holders.
"And so the search continues,"
Planning for the next-generation dark matter experiment at Sanford Lab is already under way.
For over 70 years, people have been looking for dark matter. If even a tenth of that time and money had been used to try to understand the anomalies we observe,
is not scientific to use a kludge when a model fails
So, nothing...
Did you even read the article? It says right there:
"So far LUX hasn't detected a dark matter signal, but its exquisite sensitivity has allowed scientists to all but rule out vast mass ranges where dark matter particles might exist."
Do you have any idea how valuable it is to be able to exclude entire ranges of energies/models in science?
So, as you have been asked before: what is your theory that should have been tested instead of what they are testing for? Just saying "do something else" is just stupid drivel.
My gut instinct tells me they're not going to find anything, because dark matter isn't here, it's in another brane, and all we're seeing is the gravitational effect... Feels more like a ghost to me, something in the inter-brane ether, if of course branes exist. Fun.
Flush another billion or so
amazing how much money
Money spent on finding Pixie dust or Unicorns
You don't spend millions of dollars
failure and the need for endless funding
If even a tenth of that time and money
If you spend over 30 years and hundreds of millions of dollars
How can something so hard to find impact the entire universe via gravity?
The United States can afford it, even if you think money is more important than knowledge. Thanks for making capitalism look like a full blown mental illness, however, and showing us all you can't think beyond hoarding shiny tokens like stupendously angry squirrels.
Yes, the knowledge that after 30 years and hunderds of millions of dollars
It is amazing how much money and effort have gone into the search for what is essentially an imaginary particle.
dogbert is just being skeptical and that has tremendous value to science@doubledown
DoubleDownOn9,still smarting about being proven wrong in the climate thread?
Don't waste a lot of time on Stumpy. He is all about the dogma. Lack of evidence is not a problem for him.
circle the wagons, hyper-vigilant against attacks, challenges, feedback or questions. We get prickly and rigid, insistent that we're on top of things...Dealing with the brittle fragid person means living in what's known as a double bind
dogbert is just being skeptical and that has tremendous value to science.
After all if left to our senses we dogmatize like infallible popes!
Einstein didn't trust his observations and it caused him to miss one of the greatest predictions of science
indio007 claimsAnd never will be. Flush another billion or so just because they can't admit Relativity is wrongReally, can you articulate this rather better than an inane one line claim that "goes no-where" - maths & experimental evidence please ?
Yet it works for so many things from Global Positioning Satellites (GPS) to energies for accelerating particles in colliders to the colour of gold to the melting point of mercury etc
Or maybe you are being non-relativistically incoherent in that you havent (yet) come up with any alternative [relativity] maths/experiments to explain why GPS works so well by summing special & general relativity constantly to ensure high accuracy is maintained & used globally ?
https://en.wikipe...g_System
& many many more...
Riddle me this Batmen. At what point in time of not finding "the missing matter" known as dark matter will it be when relativity is admitted as incorrect?
Observation does not match relativity.
So, as you have been asked before: what is your theory that should have been tested instead of what they are testing for? Just saying "do something else" is just stupid drivel.
Yes, please enlighten us.
But seriously, what they are doing really is the most logical thing. If it doesn't look that way... well, to be blunt, it means you don't understand the subject as well as you think you do.
DoubleDownOn9,
Don't waste a lot of time on Stumpy. He is all about the dogma. Lack of evidence is not a problem for him.
My limited comprehension of physics in full view here: I've always been under the understanding that Gravity forms around objects that have mass. ...
Is it possible that Gravity preexists those objects?
Displaced dark matter pushing back and exerting pressure toward the matter *is* gravity.
So, if 80% of the Universe is missing
Think about it, in 1916, Einstein published the exact angle of gravitational lensing as starlight passes the immediate peripheral disk of the Sun, he did not include in his calculations a "missing mass" component for gravity that he had already calculated did not exist.
All these same GR calculations are used to this day to calculate gravitational lensing throughout the Universe, they have never been modified no matter what the distance of the observed gravitational lensing from Earth.
All these same GR calculations ...
So, if 80% of the Universe is missing
What is missing? By the size of the box, though, you know it isn't two tons of popcorn, or two tons of feathers, but that it doesn't have to be, though it could be, two tons of neutronium. This is basic figuring stuff out 101. Crows do it when they make hooks to snare things in holes.
Your misinformed or disinformed. Take your pickNo.
https://www.youtu...1GU_HDwY
Riddle me this Batmen. At what point in time of not finding "the missing matter" known as dark matter will it be when relativity is admitted as incorrect?Did you not read my post, you pretend not to understand basic Science re "Balance of Probabilities" re very wide range of experimental evidence which fits maths well for Decades, see my last post re issues raised ?
Another 10 years ? 20 years? 100 years? 1000 years?
Research is being done on what is basically an intellectual placeholder that is simply embraced because science can admit it's been wrong for 100 yearsShow it, how does this 'research' cover All issues Eg - Au,Hg, Hafele-Keating & so many confirmations for so many Decades ?
Observation does not match relativityProve it please ?
There is no way out of itThere is, start with more than one mere interpretation, show that "research" ?
So tell me where I take Crow Counting 101? MIT? Maybe Axemaster can help here?
All these same GR calculations ...
The relativistic mass of the Earth is the mass of the Earth and the mass of the dark matter connected to and neighboring the Earth which is displaced by the Earth.
The GR calculations for the Earth's gravity already include the mass of the dark matter.
Now hold on here...
antialias_physorg5 /5 (10) 12 hours ago
Erm...hello? Are you mental?
It's one thing if cranks start to whinge about how money goes to real research instead of their pet/crank theory. But when the cranks start to whinge about how money should go to some endeavour when it's actually going EXACTLY THERE then insanity has reached a new peak.
'Fluidic Electrodynamics: On parallels between electromagnetic and fluidic inertia'
http://arxiv.org/abs/1202.4611
"It is shown that the force exerted on a particle by an ideal fluid produces two effects: i) resistance to acceleration and, ii) an increase of mass with velocity."
The increase in mass of an object is the mass of the object and the mass of the dark matter connected to and neighboring the object which is displaced by the object. This is the relativisitc mass of the object.
The relativistic mass of the Sun is the mass of the Sun and the mass of the dark matter connected to and neighboring the Sun which is displaced by the Sun.
The relativistic mass of the Milky Way is the mass of the Milky Way and the mass of the dark matter connected to and neighboring the Milky Way which is displaced by the Milky Way.
zorro62042.6 / 5 (5) 12 hours ago
My gut instinct
Andrew Palfreyman4.2 /5 (10) 8 hours ago
...I am dismayed at the sheer number of cranks and ignorami in this comments section.
So tell us, what's any of this got to do with why Zwicky placed his Cosmic Fairy Dust in an envelope far beyond the radial arms of Spiral galaxies?
So tell us, what's any of this got to do with why Zwicky placed his Cosmic Fairy Dust in an envelope far beyond the radial arms of Spiral galaxies?
He is referring to the state of displacement of the dark matter.....couldn't find the pictures. Maybe the satellite hasn't reached the point yet where it can send us some video? You know, like the Pluto flyby.
'The Milky Way's dark matter halo appears to be lopsided'
http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.3802
"the emerging picture of the dark matter halo of the Milky Way is dominantly lopsided in nature."
The Milky Way's halo is lopsided due to the matter in the Milky Way moving through and displacing the dark matter, analogous to a submarine moving through and displacing the water.
Docile, you're back. Hello. Boy, just wait till Axemaster gets wind that you've found a pathway around the cesorship
That's to hide the fact that they're generating revenue by taking payments from various conservative organizations
Any doubts, compare with the forums, well moderated.
@indio007
You can shout and protest all you like, but that does not help your position.
What you need to do is prove GRT wrong.
Last time I checked Mercury's perihelion had advanced by 43 arc seconds since GRT was published, as predicted.
Docile, you're still here. HELLO to you......... just wait till Axemaster gets wind that you've found a pathway around the censorship ban he brokered with PO, is he ever gonna be mad.
@indio007
You can shout and protest all you like, but that does not help your position.
What you need to do is prove GRT wrong.
Last time I checked Mercury's perihelion had advanced by 43 arc seconds since GRT was published, as predicted.
Einstein, wrong from the get go...
https://www.youtu...3IBXTgEc
Einstein, wrong from the get go...(link)No, prove it !
Hey Mike, you are apparently not familiar with this work. http://allais.mau...ence.htmSure, apparently because there is no evidence of replication of key experiments - ie not fully following discipline of:-
Matter moves through and displaces the dark matter.Not sure if matter displaces anything - maybe spacetime. Anyway spacetime in the presence of matter doesn't produce dark energy, or vacuum pressure, if you prefer. So spacetime outside of regions of matter produces more vacuum pressure than inside bodies of matter. This gradient in pressure is what I interpret as entropic gravity. Fits in with GR which I understand takes into account the vacuum pressure.
"Dark matter" is a placeholder for "that which causes the things we observe". Nothing more, nothing less. It is a name given to a range of hypotheses that fulfill the above criterium. And what they are doing is trying to find out which of these work and which don't. With the current experiment they have already excluded a big swath of those that don't.Yes, what we are observing is entropic gravity arising from natural variations in the vacuum pressure - probably due to BB turbulence. Not really in the business of writing papers, only posting to my Astrophysics Ideas and Opinions website on facebook.
If you have a better theory that should be tested first then write a paper on it.
Fits in with GR which I understand takes into account the vacuum pressure.
The dark matter pushing back and exerting pressure toward the matter *is* the vacuum pressure.How do you get matter out of pressure? Maybe the dark energy? Mattter is what gets squeezed. If you want to call that pushing back, well I guess, but pressure is what does the original pushing.
How do you get matter out of pressure? Maybe the dark energy? Mattter is what gets squeezed. If you want to call that pushing back, well I guess, but pressure is what does the original pushing.
Just as the water squeezes the submarine, the dark matter squeezes the Milky Way.Pressure squeezes the Milky Way.
Pressure squeezes the Milky Way.
Since modern science is based on the assumption "priori" of Big Bang we need dark matter "unicorns" to be real, if we look back into the past to see how and why we got here and then took our current data we might realize black hole space magic is not necessary. This for many is impossible to comprehend, as the authority has told them how and what to think and deviation is heresey. Any other potential is not considered or discounted because we have decided we already know, which is ludicrous as the standard model says it does not know what 93% of reality is. And the gatekeepers of unquestionable science go on being smug in their ignorance and intolerant in their rightiousnes. If this continues we will waste another hundred years and be rights here where we are now. Clueless because we want to believe in the miracles of our forefathers.
The dark matter displaced by the Milky Way pushing back and exerting pressure toward the Milky Way *is* the pressure.So who started this pushing contest?
So who started this pushing contest?
You are in a bowling alley filled with a supersolid.
You roll the bowling ball.
The bowling ball displaces the supersolid. The supersolid displaces the bowling ball as it fills-in where the bowling ball had been.
By definition, there is no loss of energy in the interaction between the bowling ball and the supersolid and the bowling ball rolls on forever through the supersolid.
Demonstrate ...
The "ideal fluid" is the dark matter.
The purpose of the present work is to trace parallels between the known inertia
forces in fluid dynamics with the inertia forces in electromagnetism that are known to induce resistance forces on masses both due to acceleration and at constant velocity.
Newton's second law has limited scope of application when transient phenomena are present. We
consider a modification of Newton's second law in order to take into account a sudden change (surge) of angular momentum or linear momentum.
You don't know what "demonstrate" means and I wasted a lot of time just now.
Milgrom's law requires incorporation into a complete theory if it is to satisfy conservation laws and provide a unique solution for the time evolution of any physical system.
My only beef is ...
I just explained
That is so far removed from explained that I can't think of a worse example.
My beef is your inability to understand, "The law of inertia SUGGESTS that the physical vacuum can be MODELED as an ideal fluid, agreeing with the space-time ideal fluid APPROACH from general relativity" means:
you do not understand that when they "suggest" they don't mean "it absolutely is that way shut up" which is what you may mean when you use that term.
The "ideal fluid" is the dark matter.Spacetime, or dark matter, or whatever you call it, is not an ideal fluid for massive particles.
Is the issue your inability to understand "physical vacuum" refers to 'empty' space? Or, is the issue your inability to understand an "ideal fluid" has mass?
The "ideal fluid" is the dark matter.Spacetime, or dark matter, or whatever you call it, is not an ideal fluid for massive particles.
After 30+ years and hundreds of millions of dollars
After 30+ years and hundreds of millions of dollars
B-37, BINGO!
I would like to take this time to knowing nod at anti-alias, point with a smirk, and say "look, more data came in, right on the line."
The law of inertia suggests that the physical vacuum can be modeled as an ideal fluid, agreeing with the space-time ideal fluid approach from general relativity.Ideal fluid approach from GR? That's news to me.
After 30+ years and hundreds of millions of dollars there is zero evidence dark matter is particulate or weakly interacting.Right. So you want to redefine dark matter as spacetime? Why?
Ideal fluid approach from GR? That's news to me.
After 30+ years and hundreds of millions of dollars there is zero evidence dark matter is particulate or weakly interacting.Right. So you want to redefine dark matter as spacetime? Why?
GR formulas do not operate with real physical objects, but with abstract geometric objects. Therefore GR is geometric theory. Not physical theory. Order without absolutes is impossible to be defined.
""Scientists are confident that dark matter exists because the effects of its gravity can be seen in the rotation of galaxies and in the way light bends as it travels through the universe. ""
"
All scientists?
And it's not polite to ...
GR formulas do not operate with real physical objects, but with abstract geometric objects.
Therefore GR is geometric theory. Not physical theory.
Order without absolutes is impossible to be defined.
Exist? Can you demonstrate this with experiments?
There is order. So ?
""GR deals with Mercury. Therefore it is a physical theory.""
Your explanations is too unscientific. Can you be more specific?
By the way why should be spacetime? Space and time sound better.
GR formulas do not operate with real physical objects, but with abstract geometric objectsWrong & Prove it !
Therefore GR is geometric theory. Not physical theory. Order without absolutes is impossible to be definedIF you had *physics* knowledge AND read some posts here *and* looked up the links you wouldn't come across as so immensely ignorant !
Your explanations is too unscientific. Can you be more specific?Read viko_mx, understand Physics viko_mx, get an essential education viko_mx in the huge range of experimental evidence for approx 100yrs, why can't you understand at least ONE of them ?
""GR deals with Mercury. Therefore it is a physical theory.""
Your explanations is too unscientific. Can you be more specific?
Personal explanation please. And calm down a little. You nervousness do not help..Beg your pardon, you had claimed "I know Physics well", so then why can't you read/interpret/understand the Physics links I have referenced ?
So what is the connection of mercury with GR reliability?You are betraying the position that you don't have *any* training at all in Physics, your inability to even articulate a question with precision confirms my doubt of your claim "I know Physics well".
When GR formulas distort the space..No, they don't distort space, you should know from Physics this is a shortcut interpretation re acceleration & curvature etc.
....Can be reprogrammed by the will of the CreatorTell us please how this so called "creator" communicates ?
.. reason why officially adopted theories for gravity by consensus do no work in the cosmic spaceProve it ?
.. extrapolations and predictions diverge strongly with the observed realityProve it ?
Hat12085 /5 (2) 4 hours ago
@Mike_Massen
Just in case you didn't realize it you are trying to communicate logically with a moron.
Docile, you're back. Hello. Boy, just wait till Axemaster gets wind that you've found a pathway around the cesorship
I'm not Docile.
Mike_Massen3 /5 (2) 6 hours ago
viko_mx saysDQM is my sock puppet.
@indio007
Watched the video. The only thing missing is, "Those goddamn jews!", and "Heil Hitler".
You true believers need to get this on fact straight. Dark matter theory exists because relativity does not match observation. PERIOD.So do you use GPS? How's it working?
'Empty' space has mass and is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it and is what waves in a double slit experiment.What waves is the mass of empty space and the particles of matter which exist in it. You can't have one without the other, it appears. It's like a teeter-tooter. One goes up, the other comes down, unless the bell rings and they both jump off and go back to class.
Sometimes I cannot figure out why I still come around this site....
It has dawned on me that NONE of the proponents of the DM narrative on this forum have ever read one word of what Zwicky wrote about his hypothesis, that DM would only be found in a envelope enshrouding Spiral galaxies.Ever hear the term on the fritz? Always wondered where it came from.
After reading about how comments sections like these harm science literacy
Well, ST, there is a real simple answer, stop reading what others say about what Zwicky wrote, just look it up & read it for yourself, do that & you won't need to chase those links.
Well, ST, there is a real simple answer, stop reading what others say about what Zwicky wrote, just look it up & read it for yourself, do that & you won't need to chase those linksAnd the best specific link is ?
Benni is apparently Docile@Zzz
I wouldn't be surprised if Zephir has more than 20 sock puppets on here@Whopper
Those of you about to click the 1 Star ...admitting you have never actually read...@benjiTROLL - her highness of earth wobbles, galactic years and ODE failure
You true believers need to get this on fact straight. Dark matter theory exists because relativity does not match observation. PERIOD.So do you use GPS? How's it working?
When it all turns to noise, you start to see patterns. I now think of this place as the most septic laboratory on earth, and so I can't stay away. It's interesting and important to know why the howler howls and the rational cannot put a dent in stupid@SuperThunder
And the best specific link is ?
And your critical analysis is ?
Your just regurgitating BS about GPS proving relativity. Decrees are not proof.Proof enough for me. My GPS works just fine. Still in denial?
When it all turns to noise, you start to see patterns. I now think of this place as the most septic laboratory on earth, and so I can't stay away. It's interesting and important to know why the howler howls and the rational cannot put a dent in stupidSounds to me like talk radio.
Sounds to me like talk radio.
If Bertrand Russel were alive, I'd write up a crazy conjecture about semiotic cognitive speciation and make him get a restraining order against me about it@SuperT
The inquiry needs a higher resolution.absolutely
i think you should still write it up, personally!
WTF does that have to do with dark matter? Your just regurgitating BS about GPS proving relativity. Decrees are not proof.Beg Pardon ?
"What waves is the mass of empty space and the particles of matter which exist in it."
It seems that critical thinking and rhetoric insulate the thinker from the other discipline near perfectly. Rhetoric can't get two steps past a critical thinker, yet anti-critical thinking rhetoric can be implanted in a person, if caught before they become critical thinkers, making them unreachable by all critical thinking means
So you participated in the writing of control software for GPS system?Note: There are other GPS by other countries ALL of them use relativity corrections !
This GPS system works perfectly without GR correction.WHY can't you prove ANY of your claims ?
You can't even be bothered with doing an internet search for Zwicky's original dissertations on DM?Have you Failed to notice there are many links,
..So to avoid that discussion, you want to go on a psycho-babble binge about applying "Critical Thinking" to pop-sci's narratives about DM.Hey didn't YOU bring up Zwicky ?
In a double slit experiment as the particle exits a single slit it is guided by its associated wave in the dark matter which exits bothI've seen your vague comments but, all have NIL supportable maths or Physics...
What can you do to distinguish yourself from all those that refuse to address the Maths ?
The "subquantic medium" is the dark matter.Really - how ?
You have just described a magnetic field.
indio007 claimedanything at all to offer even a glimmer of substantive evidence for your claim even a bit ?
Got plenty but there is a character limit. I'm not giving u more because you should go find out yourself.
Do you even know know GPS clocks are set? What inertial reference frame are the clocks set to?
Your talking crap about relativity. There are no known solutions for 2 or more bodies.the Relativity is non linear. One body can not simply be added to another body.
Everything has to be "normalized". After the normalization there is fudging... i mean "data-fitting".
What waves in a double slit experiment is the dark matter.So the particle itself only goes through one slit. The interference fringes are then caused by the dark matter? Just checking.
4 Nil experiment :-(
So the particle itself only goes through one slit. The interference fringes are then caused by the dark matter? Just checking.
The particle is both boat and surfer simultaneously.Like black magic. I get it now. By the way, how does the particle know which slit to pass through? I know. It consults the fairy godmother. Right?
You true believers need to get this on fact straight. Dark matter theory exists because relativity does not match observation. PERIOD.
You true believers need to get this on fact straight. Dark matter theory exists because relativity does not match observation. PERIOD.So do you use GPS? How's it working?
WTF does that have to do with dark matter? Your just regurgitating BS about GPS proving relativity. Decrees are not proof.
anything at all to offer even a glimmer of substantive evidence for your claim even a bit ?
Got plenty but there is a character limit. I'm not giving u more because you should go find out yourself.
Occam's razor.
(cont)
It seems that critical thinking and rhetoric insulate the thinker from the other discipline near perfectly. Rhetoric can't get two steps past a critical thinker, yet anti-critical thinking rhetoric can be implanted in a person, if caught before they become critical thinkers, making them unreachable by all critical thinking means.
Occam's razor.
Dark matter is displaced by matter.
Dark matter displaced by matter pushing back and exerting pressure toward matter *is* gravity.
Occam's razor.
Dark matter is displaced by matter.
Dark matter displaced by matter pushing back and exerting pressure toward matter *is* gravity.
LST@...
If only they were universal. Then the chosen examples of where the effects MAY apply would be valid as it wouldn't matter which effects that support GRT were chosen. However to say "Gravity curves space and light must follow the path, hence why we see gravitational lensing" would be backed up by the curved path of light we observe in EVERY SINGLE GRAVITY WELL. But we don't....do we?
So using the effect of gravitational lensing as support for GRT when light does not curve in every gravity well boils down to selecting one bullshit interpretation that fits the bill, and ignoring all the examples where it must apply as well, but doesn't.
Why do you think there are 5 candidates for a "particle" that produces only one effect. Because not one fit every circumstance...
The particle travels a well defined path through a single slit. We can't know which slit that is unless we detect the particle.Really? Per https://en.wikipe...periment a wave is split into two separate waves that later combine into a single wave. Check it out.
What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double slit experiment, the dark matter.
Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality, both are waves in the dark matter.
Dark matter displaced by matter relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.
The particle travels a well defined path through a single slit. We can't know which slit that is unless we detect the particle.Really? Per https://en.wikipe...periment a wave is split into two separate waves that later combine into a single wave. Check it out.
ST, here's Critical Thinking for you, go read for yourself what the original author of an hypothesis states, rather than what media sources write about that author. Is that comprehensible to you?
You can't even be bothered with doing an internet search for Zwicky's original dissertations on DM? What I think is that you've already done it & won't admit it because what you discovered is that Zwicky's original papers do not comply with the present day pop-sci narratives. Isn't that really it?
GPS proves that the effects predicted by GRT are real.
Got a problem with that ?
If only they were universal. [more irrelevant stuff dropped ]
However to say "Gravity curves space and light must follow the path, hence why we see gravitational lensing" would be backed up by the curved path of light we observe in EVERY SINGLE GRAVITY WELL. But we don't....do we?You Need to appreciate measurements in Physics applying to design of instruments, ie engineering of sensors/data acquisition issues; resolution, accuracy, noise floor, error.
GPS proves that the effects predicted by GRT are real.
Got a problem with that ?
If only they were universal. [more irrelevant stuff dropped ]
GRT predicts certain effects to occur in the GPS system.
These effects indeed occur in the GPS system.
This confirms that the predicted effects are real.
To have a point you need an example where GRT makes a _wrong_ prediction.
Do you have any? I don't.
The particle travels a well defined path through a single slit. We can't know which slit that is unless we detect the particle.Really? Per https://en.wikipe...periment a wave is split into two separate waves that later combine into a single wave. Check it out.
Just an aside - there is no "wave" until you have a "particle" (in motion) - it's empty space...
Wouldn't this indicate the presence of a "field" associated with the presence of a particle?
The chaotic nature of the dark matter causes the probabilistic results associated with a double slit experiment.What probabilistic results?
'Empty' space has mass which is displaced by the particle moving through it.Yep.
It's the particle moving through and displacing the dark matter which creates the wave in the dark matter.So dark matter is the mass contained by empty space. Of course. I should have known.
So dark matter is the mass contained by empty space. Of course.Finding the dark matter in empty space is going to be pretty tricky it would seem. Especially if it is in particulate form. But you never know about the fairy godmother.
Finding the dark matter in empty space is going to be pretty tricky it would seem. Especially if it is in particulate form. But you never know about the fairy godmother.More likely the fairy godmother is found in the form of energy. Mass-energy equivalence, you know. Doesn't seem like a particle detector would be the way to go to find the fairy godmother in the form of energy.
GPS proves that the effects predicted by GRT are real.
Got a problem with that ?
If only they were universal. [more irrelevant stuff dropped ]
GRT predicts certain effects to occur in the GPS system.
These effects indeed occur in the GPS system.
This confirms that the predicted effects are real.
To have a point you need an example where GRT makes a _wrong_ prediction.
Do you have any? I don't.
more? Ok
Tunneling time
non-local Entanglement.
superluminal gravity
superluminal charge conservation
Finding the dark matter in empty space is going to be pretty tricky it would seem. Especially if it is in particulate form. But you never know about the fairy godmother.More likely the fairy godmother is found in the form of energy. Mass-energy equivalence, you know. Doesn't seem like a particle detector would be the way to go to find the fairy godmother in the form of energy.
@indio007
Watched the video. The only thing missing is, "Those goddamn jews!", and "Heil Hitler".
I rest my caseYou have Neverr made any substantive attempt whatsoever to make *any* case in the first place !
What probabilistic results?
The "field" consists of dark matter. The wave of wave-particle duality is a wave in the dark matter.Watch the sparks fly as the fairy godmother waves her magic wand.
How do they know the chaotic nature of dark matter if it has never been detected?What probabilistic results?
The probabilistic results of a double slit experiment which is caused by the chaotic nature of the dark matter.
How do they know the chaotic nature of dark matter if it has never been detected?I know. Its too chaotic to be detected. Too blurry. Right?
The probabilistic results of a double slit experiment which is caused by the chaotic nature of the dark matter.Does this mean each time you run the experiment you get a different set of interference fringes?
The probabilistic results of a double slit experiment which is caused by the chaotic nature of the dark matter.Does this mean each time you run the experiment you get a different set of interference fringes?
the mainstream theory that we observe a curved path for light in the presence of a gravitational field. [/q
The mainstream theory that we observe ?
What is this text supposed to mean?[if you claim gravity is curving the path of light in an immense field like that of a galaxy, IT HAS TO DO IT EVERY TIME
Still waiting for a counterexample.
GR doesn't predict the behavior of the the galaxy hence dark matter.
No theory of gravity does.
they don't agree.
They disagree right?
are you only a crank if you toss aside the fundamental basis of the theory that has led to 5 candidates and propose, that in order to see what we see, there is a different organizational regime at play in the universe.
You are a crank if you stand beside science that can't explain jack shit without invoking immeasurable, undetectable, unobserved variables
a technique that you can't apply universally.
And you are blind if you think that is not what you are doing.
probabilistically most of the electrons will wind up in the middle every time.Probabilistically and every time in the same sentence?
Light cannot ONLY curve in "large gravity wells"...it must curve in EVERY one.Certainly. There are more things that we can't observe than the large scale effects that we can observe.
We do not observe this.
Light cannot ONLY curve in "large gravity wells"...it must curve in EVERY one.
probabilistically most of the electrons will wind up in the middle every time.Probabilistically and every time in the same sentence?
You are a crank if you stand beside science that can't explain jack shit without invoking immeasurable, undetectable, unobserved variables and claim they are at work, and claim they are measurable using a technique that you can't apply universally.I'd prefer a plausible theory regardless if its falsifiable or not.
You are a crank if you stand beside science that can't explain jack shit without invoking immeasurable, undetectable, unobserved variables and claim they are at work, and claim they are measurable using a technique that you can't apply universally.I'd prefer a plausible theory regardless if its falsifiable or not.
Light cannot ONLY curve in "large gravity wells"...it must curve in EVERY oneIndeed, as there is nil evidence of any low level cutoff, the question arises is how much and is it measurable with conventional instruments and if not then what type,of instruments do you need at what resolution level to discern a difference ?
We do not observe thisWithin what level of instrumentation please ?
If it is non-falsifiable it is not a theory.If it is non-falsifiable it is not a fact. Please.
Have come across this phenomenologically inspired divergence for decades, it seems to cause levels of angst, in English we presume we cover the rationale but, it so often has different unclear core meanings. So can we converge on a facet of the language/logic that offers a helpful base ?If it is non-falsifiable it is not a theoryIf it is non-falsifiable it is not a fact. Please
Those of you focused on falsify-ability as if has useful metric, could you articulate how that fact could be falsified to perhaps disconnect the abstraction with observation as a truth in that context ?
Those of you focused on falsify-ability as if has useful metric, could you articulate how that fact could be falsified to perhaps disconnect the abstraction with observation as a truth in that context ?
... Note that there are things that do not fall. Hot smoke, a hot air ballon, all kinds of bugs, birds and bats, a plane, a chopper . I just falsified the theory that everything falls ! Your pencil could actually fly away instead. Are you living in Oklahoma? Houses fly up in that area. Explain that with Newton's theory !Ah I see, I took a habitual shortcut & meant to include in an experimental framework in context squarely with the equation - all else being equal - in that best appropriate experimental framework - to me its second nature to manage material properties as part of the planning for experimental controls. It just that the usual crowd here who go off on a tangent have an outlook somehow thought by them to be "clean" even divine because they avoided high school & uni, its amazing how many could have saved so much time being as fortunate as I to have moved from a hobby to career via uni & Physics, prob time for another glass of whine ;-)
Are you living in Oklahoma? Houses fly up in that area.Let me guess. What goes up has to come down. As a matter of fact in the end times everything comes down.
Explain that with Newton's theory !
Ah I see, I took a habitual shortcut & meant to include in an experimental framework in context squarely with the equation - all else being equal - in that best appropriate experimental framework - to me its second nature to manage material properties as part of the planning for experimental controls. It just that the usual crowd here who go off on a tangent have an outlook somehow thought by them to be "clean" even divine because they avoided high school & uni, its amazing how many could have saved so much time being as fortunate as I to have moved from a hobby to career via uni & Physics, prob time for another glass of whine ;-)
Are you living in Oklahoma? Houses fly up in that area.Let me guess. What goes up has to come down. As a matter of fact in the end times everything comes down.
Explain that with Newton's theory !
Those of you focused on falsify-ability as if has useful metric, could you articulate how that fact could be falsified to perhaps disconnect the abstraction with observation as a truth in that context ?The subject dark matter measurement experiment puts new extended null limits on the existence of dark matter, and seems to claim this as a useful metric.
Hey, the Moon never falls down!I don't expect to be around when it happens, but my guess is the black hole in the center of the galaxy will eventually swallow up everything in the galaxy. That's only because when this black hole feeds, it feeds on this galaxy. Black hole evaporation aside, I see nothing to stop this process.
[Your theory that a pencil will fall does not fly. Some things go up, like smoke, bugs, birds, bats, butterflies, planes, choppers, hot air balloons, helium, hydrogen, dust, feathers, even houses in Oklahoma. That could happen to your pencil, too.
How wrong can a crank be?
I was re-checking some articles which I hadn't time to comment on before, when I noticed this thread which may be of interest to you and others discussing the galaxy and its core/ring features/motions...Apologies for any inconvenience caused. Cheers. :)
http://phys.org/n...ays.html
I'm surprised that your Hypothetical DM discussion makes no mention of this new info/observation of outward motion of galaxy's stars; which effectively undermines currently assumed effects/distribution of DM (if it exists at all as hypothesized).
It would seem to make many of the prior mainstream hypotheses re 'Rotation Curves' and astrophysical 'structure' and 'behavior' and 'red/blue-shift assumptions/interpretations' not a little suspect and n need of revision to include this latest mainstream knowledge re ACTUAL (not presumed) stellar motions in galaxies.
...!
currently assumed effects/distribution of DM (if it exists at all as hypothesized).DM is only hypothesized as a possible reason why spinning galaxies don't fly apart as would normally be predicted from their rotations and mass distributions.
Of course, every article has to add "Spooky Action at a distance" to every quantum entanglement article.Not as spooky as he claims. People don't realize the earth is in free fall. When you move something there must be an opposite reaction. That is the observer moves in the opposite direction from the object being moved about a point on the line connecting the two entangled objects while the entangled object does NOT move.
Then there is the gravity propagates faster the C. This is the real elephant in the room.People don't realize when you accelerate the medium the objects moving in the medium travel faster than they would without the acceleration. For example I remember something about the diameter of the U being about 93b light years when it has been expanding for only 13.7b years. So gravity must have spread 93/2=46.5 b light years in both directions. This would be approximately 46.5/13.7=3.4 times the speed of light.
my2cts asks of the universe :How wrong can a crank be?
If that's a scientifically valid question, these comments just kicked the LHC down to "2nd most perfectly built to answer a question scientific instrument." Right now, it looks like they can be so wrong as to peg the needle into "not even wrong" territory (complete misfire of the language centers of their brains), and I think with an upgrade we can get enough power output to get them into "transcendentally wrong" territory (so wrong they forget to enact life functions). I think we can generate mini-black holes of wrong with this eventually and maybe tap the realms of "metaphysically wrong" wherein they will be so wrong it crashes nature like a 486 loaded with spyware. This may be the planet eating scientific monster device the LHC got credit for being.
My case is that you all worship at the feet of Einstein. You have even bothered to search for breadcrumbs.
Gunter Nimtz - superluminal tunneling time
A L Kholmetskii - superluminal coloumb field
non local entanglement is all over this very site!
every article has to add "Spooky Action at a distance"
Then there is the gravity propagates faster the C.
Nimtz "results" ... interpretation might be controversial. Of course , they have to save Einstein.
Kholmetskii, Alexsander L., et al. "Experimental test on the applicability of the standard retardation condition to bound magnetic fields." Journal of applied physics 101.2 (2007): 023532.
"Entanglement does not conflict with SR."
Because you say so?
Gravity propagates at least 50x faster than C.
Your link is broken.
There can be no stable orbit found using Gravity influence being a retarded potential.
There is no experimentally detected gravitational aberration.
My case is that you all worship at the feet of Einstein. You have even bothered to search for breadcrumbs.
http://http://arxiv.org/...9087.pdf deals with all of this.
DM is only hypothesized as a possible reason why spinning galaxies don't fly apart as would normally be predicted from their rotations and mass distributions.Yes, I knew that. :)
my2cts! I can't find the actual article now where you asked, but no, I don't think the LHC was built by cranks (unless you mean attached to pullies, but I would hope they'd use motors). What I meant was that the phys.org comments section is like a large hadron collider for studying howlers instead of particles. This is the right place to study crazy up close at high energies.:)Ok, mate, a joke's a joke, and you've had some laughs at certain perceived 'howlers' expense. How about now contributing to the actual topic/science discussion.
I wont put a fake facade of politeness over my disdain for the willfully irrational, so don't expect me to smiley face and "okay buddy come on" at you as a way of cheerfully being even more insulting than just being honest and saying "stop howling, read something."If you knew my history/approach to discourse, you'd know my 'smileys' are genuine. Please don't project your or others own insincerity etc on me, Thanks. :)
Anyhow, I asked for considered scientific objective opinion re implications latest astronomical observation may have for Rotation Curves, and DM hypothesized to 'explain' same...
This result was completely unexpected and all the more surprising as it appeared to mainly affect old stars, several billion years old. Until now, it was thought that the spiral arms mostly affected the dynamics of young stars (only a few tens-of-million-years old).
What's your opinion re implications for DM etc 'explanations'. :)After a quick first read it sounds like the outer regions of the spiral arms are penetrating what some call the dark matter halo. So then there's nothing to keep them from flying out of the galaxy.
This result was completely unexpected and all the more surprising as it appeared to mainly affect old stars, several billion years old. Until now, it was thought that the spiral arms mostly affected the dynamics of young stars (only a few tens-of-million-years old).I should think the older stars would be the more likely ones to begin breaking the DM halo.
.. missed by all PHD's in this thread and clearly by psycho Mike, is that if you claim gravity is curving the path of light in an immense field like that of a galaxy, IT HAS TO DO IT EVERY TIME..No !
Uncle Ira,
What does a skippy even mean ?Uncle Ira,Skippy, in case you have not noticed it, I have not been down voting the karma points for you or two-pennies-Skippy or the Thunder-Skippy either. But I see where you have been following me around down voting my karma points. That sorta makes you the hypocrite, eh? And the difference between a smart Skippy like me, and a really stupid Skippy like you, is I don't just say I don't care, I really don't care. You seem to care a lot because you keep on bringing it up. So sit over there in the corner, with the silly looking pointy cap on your head. Yeah you can mumble and mutter to your self while you are doing it. And while you are doing that, see how many times you can say "fail" and "learn physics" while you are wondering why you look like a couyon with your silly looking pointy cap on your head
What does a skippy even mean ?
When are you going to apologise for; stalking & defaming etc simple ?
Last chance, leave off me couyon. You will really have something to whine about if you keep pushing it. See, this is how it is, I do not care how I look to the rest of the class. I do not care what a few couyons here think but you are only here because you carePlease re-read your idle, narrow redneck claims & WHY you confuse evidence with idle claim !
Uncle Ira, re votes you confuse me with Mike_Masson who just joined on 17th Dec 2015 & like so many posts where you skippy things against others you are consistent in that confusion.
Please re-read your idle, narrow redneck claims
Do you get it, Uncle Ira, being a mere follower of prejudice,stalking and defaming me are not just not smart they are potentially criminal & inappropriate.
potentially criminal
Ira-Skippy hurt my feelings and made me look silly on the physorg interweb place so I want you to go get him and haul him off the Parrish Prison.
This is the wrong approach. The difficulty is that the mechanical properties of vapors is more easily analyzed by its electromagnetic properties. In fact, the viscosity of the material can be obtained in this manner, and I have calculated it for a vacuum, which indicated that black matter exists "right next door". From this, the vacuum of space can be and has been determined!Been searching on that. How does this vacuum viscosity affect planetary orbits?
dirk_bruere
Dec 14, 2015