Serious Blow to Dark Matter Theories?


Recommended Posts

Serious Blow to Dark Matter Theories? New Study Finds Mysterious Lack of Dark Matter in Sun's Neighborhood http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120418111923.htm Dark Matter continues to fail as a fix for the General Theory of Relativity. Interesting times ahead in physics. Dennis

Dark Matter and Dark Energy may meet the same fate as luminiferous aether.

A crucial experiment that will determine if some flavor of MOND is right or if general relativity is right would come in handy.

The problem for MOND is this: In the solar system MOND will predict the same as Newtonian Gravitation. Which unfortunately totally fails to account for why GPS is right on the mark. Newtonian Gravitation totally misses the gravitational red shift which is as real as rain.

Perhaps some flavor of Beckenstein's graviational theory will replace General Relativity.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem for MOND is this: In the solar system MOND will predict the same as Newtonian Gravitation. Which unfortunately totally fails to account for why GPS is right on the mark. Newtonian Gravitation totally misses the gravitational red shift which is as real as rain.

Perhaps some flavor of Beckenstein's graviational theory will replace General Relativity.

Beckenstein's relativistic MOND theory and the Moffat or Mannheim modifications to General Relativity all suffer from having no physical model to explain why these curve fitting exercises give results better than plain General Relativity plus Dark Matter. Improved predictions yes - real explanations no.

At least there is some movement away from the generations old idea of General Relativity as a bedrock.

Dennis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem for MOND is this: In the solar system MOND will predict the same as Newtonian Gravitation. Which unfortunately totally fails to account for why GPS is right on the mark. Newtonian Gravitation totally misses the gravitational red shift which is as real as rain.

Perhaps some flavor of Beckenstein's graviational theory will replace General Relativity.

Beckenstein's relativistic MOND theory and the Moffat or Mannheim modifications to General Relativity all suffer from having no physical model to explain why these curve fitting exercises give results better than plain General Relativity plus Dark Matter. Improved predictions yes - real explanations no.

At least there is some movement away from the generations old idea of General Relativity as a bedrock.

Dennis

If we wait long enough we will get enough New Stuff from Way Out There to turn our bedrocks into mush.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Dark Matter" is promoted by "Expansionists" -- people who think the universe is expanding. I don’t think Einstein’s theory of gravitation entails Expansionism.

So instead of saying that this latest discovery is a problem for Einstein’s TOG, say it’s yet another problem for the Expansionists.

Those reading this thread probably know about Halton Arp but in case not look him up. He demolishes Expansionism on observational grounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Dark Matter" is promoted by "Expansionists" -- people who think the universe is expanding. I don’t think Einstein’s theory of gravitation entails Expansionism.

So instead of saying that this latest discovery is a problem for Einstein’s TOG, say it’s yet another problem for the Expansionists.

Those reading this thread probably know about Halton Arp but in case not look him up. He demolishes Expansionism on observational grounds.

Perlmutter' s team not only has verified expansion, but accelerated expansion.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Dark Matter" is promoted by "Expansionists" -- people who think the universe is expanding. I don’t think Einstein’s theory of gravitation entails Expansionism. So instead of saying that this latest discovery is a problem for Einstein’s TOG, say it’s yet another problem for the Expansionists. Those reading this thread probably know about Halton Arp but in case not look him up. He demolishes Expansionism on observational grounds.
Perlmutter' s team not only has verified expansion, but accelerated expansion. Ba'al Chatzaf

Expansion and accelerated expansion theories both ignore angular size and luminonsity observations of galaxies which - by observation - do not support the BIg Bang expanding universe model - not even close. It has been my view for many years that the solution lies in a variable increasing rate of time - not a geometrical solution involving expanding space.

Dennis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120425094352.htm

Another set of research supporting the view that there is no dark matter.

What is more interesting is the observation that there is a great deal of matter between

galaxies. Like the stepping stones between stars with trillions of smaller bodies there

are billions of stars and and trillions more objects to act as stepping stones between

galaxies. Once space industrialization begins there is no end.

Dennis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Dark Matter" is promoted by "Expansionists" -- people who think the universe is expanding. I don’t think Einstein’s theory of gravitation entails Expansionism. So instead of saying that this latest discovery is a problem for Einstein’s TOG, say it’s yet another problem for the Expansionists. Those reading this thread probably know about Halton Arp but in case not look him up. He demolishes Expansionism on observational grounds.
Perlmutter' s team not only has verified expansion, but accelerated expansion. Ba'al Chatzaf

Expansion and accelerated expansion theories both ignore angular size and luminonsity observations of galaxies which - by observation - do not support the BIg Bang expanding universe model - not even close. It has been my view for many years that the solution lies in a variable increasing rate of time - not a geometrical solution involving expanding space.

Dennis

But what is your "space"? There is no such thing. There are only things, matter and energy. Something that doesn't exist can't do anything. Time is only a measurement of motion. When we think of space we imagine a void. But there is no such thing within this universe unless it is defined into existence, but that's an epistemological without a metaphysical. What is outside this universe we cannot now if ever know, but it is neither space nor a void; they are nothing at all. If the universe is "expanding," it is expanding into something. Expanding into nothing is a contradiction. What we actually have is variable densities. Reality is lumpy. What caused lumpiness? The way to think about the universe--reality--is to stay inside it.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now