Posted on 05/20/2016 11:56:18 AM PDT by MtnClimber
He was fired when Hillary fired all the cattle guards on federal land.
I’m pretty good with the current theory of relativity. Have an uncle that could be better, but that is about it.
As I recall, there have been experiments to determine if the force of gravity varies with distance, and as far as I know none so far has shown any variation, over distances long or short.
Should be a very interesting next 100 years in physics.
Matter of fact, it's all dark!
(With apologies to Pink Floyd)
Hmmm...That does not seem to be the consensus among scientists.
I’ll enlighten you. It’s called a testable and falsifiable hypothesis. It’s an important part of science. Dark matter is a product of insanely hard mathematics.
But if an input is wrong, or the equation is a false construct, the math cannot predict a thing.
But that aside, a hypothesis is made based upon observation. The resulting equation describing that hypothesis tells you there should be dark matter. It tells you that that its 84% of the universe. You look everywhere, in every possible way. But you cannot find a single particle or sign of it.
At that point in science, you have to assume your hypothesis may be wrong and go back to the beginning, and test your way forward again.
But what you may not do and still call it science, is to say “we didn’t find what was predicted, ergo, it’s invisible”, and cobble on more math to explain THAT.
This is precisely the magical thinking we ridicule young earth creationists for. When confronted with the amount of time it takes a light to travel from a known star exceeding their date of 4500 years, they tell us god created the light in mid flight. This is their way of reconciling the observed, with known physics. It’s childish.
The logic of the lack of evidence of dark matter, but still believing in it, is also found in the Malleus Maleficarum.
Dark matter appears to be the same.
It is set up now to where nothing can falsify Dark Matter. If it isn’t found, then more magic is ascribed to it. The one conclusion you may not reach, is that is doesn’t exist.
Math is fine. Mathematics predicted to Ptolomy the diameter of the earth. He turned out to be accurate to within 1%. His math described a reality. This is science.
Dark matter is much more akin to the “science” that proved the existence of witches, etc. It is deeply flawed and in another 200 years people will laugh at us.
Great that they can soon test it.
https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2011/08/18/10609/
Doesn’t gravity have to be faster than light in order for it to work?
A quote in the article from one of the scientists...
“Science is not a consensus endeavor: the data rule.”
He needs to pass this on to all the warmist “scientists” out there.
He chickened out.
A mildly interesting notion, certainly one of the better crackpot theories I’ve seen.
If it’s that simple (and correct), then it would have been adopted & proven long ago. That it hasn’t, vs the enormous effort going into such strained concepts as String Theory and Dark Matter, is a good Occam’s Razor indication that it’s not true.
That he’s explaining the basic concept of vectors in Chapter 4 (of 11) indicates we’re not dealing with a particularly sophisticated author nor a sophisticated intended audience.
It’s an interesting notion, but seems an extended pursuit would fail to produce seriously useful results.
Dark Matter may very well be a Dead End. It was worth pursuing as hard science, but like String Theory isn’t working out so well. Time for some different approaches.
And thanks for mentioning the “light mid flight” notion. I’m surprised how few “young Earth” types have considered it, and how many (when presented therewith) don’t grasp the absurd consequences.
Dark Matter = The ‘Epicycles’ of old. Might be a useful mathematical plug in in some situations, but does not describe reality. I think somewhere cosmology took a real wrong turn. Lots of it seems like assumptions built on assumptions, ad infinitum. Even if all of these assumptions have a 95% probability of being correct, when enough are strung together, the chance of a correct end result becomes nil.
Why limit one's imagination?
Electric Universe theory explains most, if not all, of cosmological phenomina observed without the use of undetectable and unprovable contrivances (black holes, dark energy, dark matter, etc).
Electric Universe theory will also explain many terrestrial and extra-terrestrial geological phenomena.
Electromagnetic forces are many orders of magnitude more powerful than gravity, and do explain what we see quite nicely.
Spend a little more time with it before you dismiss it as "crackpot".
Usually if a seemingly good idea isn’t accepted there’s a good reason why.
Especially if a whole lotta people are looking for the solution for a long time.
The paper looks more like an senior undergrad “pick a subject” research assignment, spending lots of time reviewing basics before moving on to sort “hey this is neat” applications and borrowing random pictures from popular sources.
Allrighty then. Suit yourself. Stick with black holes, dark matter, and dark energy. Go with the flow.
If dark matter is gravitationally active, why doesn’t it in-fall to stellar system, indeed, galaxy scale objects that one would expect to occasionally impact with visible objects. Yet this is not observed anywhere in the cosmos.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.