Replies

Why am I am very, very suspicious of a theory of cosmic design (er, accident) that requires that 90+ percent of ALL matter be undiscoverable and unknown and “dark” - just so the “mathematics” looks “pretty” and “complete” and “congruent”?

Should not the mathematics and the “cosmological theories” tell why WHAT we see is WHAT we see?

Rather than assume that 90% of what is in the universe can never be seen and must be invisible? (Personally, rather than believe in “dark matter” - I've seen much more evidence for a Designer or a “God” than I've seen of dark matter and dark energy.

Then again.... Speaking of “dark energy” ...

Dark matter is what the Emperor's clothes were made of until the little boy noticed them and by his very observation (Heisenburg Principle) caused them to cease to exist.

I agree the whole dark matter thing is just a little bit hinky. I'm reminded of the theory of aether as the material that allowed light waves to propagate through space. They didn't understand how waves could travel through nothing, so they made something up--- something you couldn't see and had no mass. Pretty convenient.

I want to see if I can convince my bill collecters there's such a thing as 'dark money'. I gave it to them, they just can't detect it.

Should not the mathematics and the “cosmological theories” tell why WHAT we see is WHAT we see?

That's what they are trying to do. We "see" that the galaxies appear not to have enough mass to cause the orbits of their stars to be as "tight" as they are, so just as with the aether, it is postulated that there must be some mass there, that we cannot "see" directly. Then the challenge is to explore the implications of that assumption. That is, are there other observations that can be explained via "dark matter". Any way, independent of galactic gravity, to detect if it's there or not. In the case of the "aether", those experiments, by Michelson and Morley in 1887, attempting to detect the relative motion of the earth through the aether, failed to find any such motion, even though they knew that the earth was indeed moving. That failure eventually lead to Einstein postulating that maybe the speed of light in a vacuum is constant, regardless of the motion of the source and the receiver. That in turn lead to E=MC^2.