The Insoluble and Illogical Dark Matter Paradox

Plasma and electricity in space. Failure of gravity-only cosmology. Exposing the myths of dark matter, dark energy, black holes, neutron stars, and other mathematical constructs. The electric model of stars. Predictions and confirmations of the electric comet.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

The Insoluble and Illogical Dark Matter Paradox

Unread postby Native » Sun Jun 22, 2014 4:42 am

Quote from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter

Astrophysicists hypothesized dark matter because of discrepancies between the mass of large astronomical objects determined from their gravitational effects and the mass calculated from the "luminous matter" they contain: stars, gas, and dust.

Dark matter was first postulated by Jan Oort in 1932 to account for the orbital velocities of stars in the Milky Way and by Fritz Zwicky in 1933 to account for evidence of "missing mass" in the orbital velocities of galaxies in clusters. Subsequently, many other observations have indicated the presence of dark matter in the universe, including the rotational speeds of galaxies by Vera Rubin.

My remarks:
Cosmological scientist assume that when finally finding and with any doubts proving “dark matter”, this will solve one of the biggest problems in modern cosmology.

When asking cosmologists and astrophysicists the obvious and logical question:

As objects in our Solar System orbits differently from the orbital objects in galaxies, how can this be gravitationally explained? The consensus answer is: “This is because “dark matter” rules the motion of the galactic objects”.

This “answer” and “explanation” is completely and utterly illogical nonsense.

Regardless of factual findings of “dark matter” with any doubts and with instrumental observations, scientists still have the obvious and logical standing question left: How is it then that objects orbits differently around an assumed center of gravity in our Solar System compared to the orbital motion in galaxies – of which our Solar System even is an integrated orbital part?

The question of different cosmic orbital motions in this case can and never will be solved since it is based on obvious incoherent and inconsistent assumptions and theories. This really also questions the very basics of gravitational motions and even of gravitational attraction at large!

The different orbital motions in our Solar System compared to the galactic orbital pattern will continue to stir cosmologists and astrophysicists right in their eyes forever. This important cosmological difference will subsequently also shake the very basical ideas of gravity and what kind of forces really governs the Universe.

If gravity doesn´t work equally all over the place, it maybe just work correct on one place or another - or not correct at all. I´ll hold my coins on the latter option.

The cosmological scientific society have for centuries and decades postulated an apple-law and a celestial law based on terrestrial and celestial motions in our Solar System. Laws which is prolonged into galactic and universal realms - and these laws should really have been judged lawless from their first day of birth.

Read my vixra paper on this matter - http://vixra.org/abs/1406.0134
Life makes senses and who could doubt it, if you have no doubt about it. - "Grooks" by Piet Hein - My fellow Danish countryman and also a Natural Philosopher
Native
 
Posts: 213
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 7:42 am

why orbits of planet differ from halo stars of galaxies

Unread postby quantauniverse » Mon Jun 23, 2014 5:48 am

This is an interesting paper, that asks an unanswered question, that I had partially explained in my research at
http://holographicgalaxy.blogspot.com/2012/10/our-solar-system-and-alien-planets.html
Over 85% of alien planets have inclinations less than 3 degrees with their star. Our planets are all less than 3 degrees except mercury. This flat pancake shaped geometry in relation to our motion and location inside the solar system viewing our planets, is flat 2 dimensional Newtonian gravity, that does well for predicting orbits in this case, because earth and planets MF's are aligned with the solar system magnetic field. The galaxy is also pancake shaped around the flat dusty disk where stars orbit inside spiral arm filaments pretty well by 2-d gravity. It's the outer halo stars that orbit at constant velocity causing the rotation curve paradigm requiring dark matter for a gravitational explanation. These outer halo stars, some are seen to hop galaxies, likely when currents move the same direction, and magnetic fields interact. From earth these halo stars have strange orbits if presumed to be orbiting the center of the galaxy they currently are drifting with. They call it a strange dance by our dwarf satellite galaxies. I hope you include this answer to the question or my link in your great paper for those who wonder why.
quantauniverse
 
Posts: 251
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 7:08 pm
Location: USA

Re: The Insoluble and Illogical Dark Matter Paradox

Unread postby robheus » Tue Jul 01, 2014 12:33 am

Native wrote:Quote from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter

Astrophysicists hypothesized dark matter because of discrepancies between the mass of large astronomical objects determined from their gravitational effects and the mass calculated from the "luminous matter" they contain: stars, gas, and dust.

Dark matter was first postulated by Jan Oort in 1932 to account for the orbital velocities of stars in the Milky Way and by Fritz Zwicky in 1933 to account for evidence of "missing mass" in the orbital velocities of galaxies in clusters. Subsequently, many other observations have indicated the presence of dark matter in the universe, including the rotational speeds of galaxies by Vera Rubin.

My remarks:
Cosmological scientist assume that when finally finding and with any doubts proving “dark matter”, this will solve one of the biggest problems in modern cosmology.

When asking cosmologists and astrophysicists the obvious and logical question:

As objects in our Solar System orbits differently from the orbital objects in galaxies, how can this be gravitationally explained? The consensus answer is: “This is because “dark matter” rules the motion of the galactic objects”.

This “answer” and “explanation” is completely and utterly illogical nonsense.

Regardless of factual findings of “dark matter” with any doubts and with instrumental observations, scientists still have the obvious and logical standing question left: How is it then that objects orbits differently around an assumed center of gravity in our Solar System compared to the orbital motion in galaxies – of which our Solar System even is an integrated orbital part?

The question of different cosmic orbital motions in this case can and never will be solved since it is based on obvious incoherent and inconsistent assumptions and theories. This really also questions the very basics of gravitational motions and even of gravitational attraction at large!

The different orbital motions in our Solar System compared to the galactic orbital pattern will continue to stir cosmologists and astrophysicists right in their eyes forever. This important cosmological difference will subsequently also shake the very basical ideas of gravity and what kind of forces really governs the Universe.

If gravity doesn´t work equally all over the place, it maybe just work correct on one place or another - or not correct at all. I´ll hold my coins on the latter option.

The cosmological scientific society have for centuries and decades postulated an apple-law and a celestial law based on terrestrial and celestial motions in our Solar System. Laws which is prolonged into galactic and universal realms - and these laws should really have been judged lawless from their first day of birth.

Read my vixra paper on this matter - http://vixra.org/abs/1406.0134


Your paper does not add much to the understanding of the dark matter issue, all you do is raise objections against the existence of dark matter, and you also call into question the very laws of gravity. Then you go on to express your opinion on how electrodynamic and thermodynamic effects shape the galaxies, and cause the anonomolous motions of stars around the galactic centre.

You didn't do any calculations to backup your claims.

Why would those forces cause the orbital velocity of stars to be more-or-less equal independend of the distance to the galactic centre (instead of decreasing orbital velocity, like in the solar system)?

Although I don't dismiss the role of electromagnetical effects in the universe, I don't think that there is currently any valid theory about that, that could solve the puzzle.

Instead I guess that we may find some new vision on dark matter/dark energy and some reformulation of Einstein equations, like for instance in this article is explained.

See the paper here.
robheus
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 7:21 am

Re: The Insoluble and Illogical Dark Matter Paradox

Unread postby Native » Tue Jul 01, 2014 2:32 am

@ robheus,

Thanks for your reply.

- It seems immediately to me that you have to pay more attention to the very concept of Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology, which are the very basics in this forum.

Forwarding me to theories which tries to include "dark this and that" really isn´t relevant at all.

If you cannot see the cosmological implications of having an "Universal law of celestial motion around a gravitational object/center", which shows up 2 different kinds of orbital patterns in our galaxy compared to the Solar System, which is an integrated and interacting part of the whole galactic scenario, you have to think all over again.

The "laws of celestial motions" was based on the orbital motion in our Solar System, but they don´t fit the galactic orbital motion in which our Solar System is a connected and formational part. That´s the whole point.

The conventional scientists assumed "dark matter" in order "to hold and prevent the stars from flying away from our galaxy" (the galaxies et all). Now, what does this really suggest?

This suggests and clearly indicates and really proves that the overall and actual formational motion in our galaxy has an outgoing flowing pattern, quite opposite the suggested attractive motion incorporated in the gravity assumptions.

The Electric Universe is based on "electric currents which create perpendicular magnetic fields with circuital motions". Imagine the galactic disk as the result of this magnetic circuital motion. Then add the Solar System with its about 60 degree different orbital plane in respect to the galactic plane.

Then we have an outgoing motion from the galactic center. We have a Solar System, which once was created in the galactic center and actually moving outwards. We have a Solar System orbital pattern as a result of the perpendicularly magnetic field and thus:

We have the rotational and orbiting motions in our Solar System as the specific result of the perpendicular magnetic helix motion (circular polarization), going out from the galactic center and out in the galactic bars and further out in the magnetic circuit in the galactic arms.

All these explanations fits very well and correctly the observed galactic rotation pattern as well as the rotational and orbiting pattern in the Solar System.

That is really: "Gravity" works both ways and in circuits - if interpreted as electromagnetic forces and qualities. Which funny and logical enough have the very same properties as the assumed fundamental force of gravity, but much stronger.

Get rid of the assumed "laws of gravity" and then you don´t need any kind of "dark this or that".

Last: I fully admit the modern need of putting all these explanations into mathematical equations, but my prime skills are intuitive and not mathematical – so feel free yourself to join me with such a job if you have the skills.

This invitaton goes for anyone else who whishes to join in.
Last edited by Native on Tue Jul 01, 2014 3:17 am, edited 3 times in total.
Life makes senses and who could doubt it, if you have no doubt about it. - "Grooks" by Piet Hein - My fellow Danish countryman and also a Natural Philosopher
Native
 
Posts: 213
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 7:42 am

Re: The Insoluble and Illogical Dark Matter Paradox

Unread postby Native » Tue Jul 01, 2014 3:12 am

@quantauniverse,

Thanks for your reply - and sorry for this delay.

Before answering you, can you use the content in my reply to @robheus?

Otherwise, let me know if you have additional questions.
Life makes senses and who could doubt it, if you have no doubt about it. - "Grooks" by Piet Hein - My fellow Danish countryman and also a Natural Philosopher
Native
 
Posts: 213
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 7:42 am

Re: The Insoluble and Illogical Dark Matter Paradox

Unread postby robheus » Tue Jul 01, 2014 3:39 am

Native wrote:@ robheus,

Thanks for your reply.

- It seems immediately to me that you have to pay more attention to the very concept of Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology, which are the very basics in this forum.

Forwarding me to theories which tries to include "dark this and that" really isn´t relevant at all.

If you cannot see the cosmological implications of having an "Universal law of celestial motion around a gravitational object/center", which shows up 2 different kinds of orbital patterns in our galaxy compared to the Solar System, which is an integrated and interacting part of the whole galactic scenario, you have to think all over again.

The "laws of celestial motions" was based on the orbital motion in our Solar System, but they don´t fit the galactic orbital motion in which our Solar System is a connected and formational part. That´s the whole point.

The conventional scientists assumed "dark matter" in order "to hold and prevent the stars from flying away from our galaxy" (the galaxies et all). Now, what does this really suggest?

This suggests and clearly indicates and really proves that the overall and actual formational motion in our galaxy has an outgoing flowing pattern, quite opposite the suggested attractive motion incorporated in the gravity assumptions.

The Electric Universe is based on "electric currents which create perpendicular magnetic fields with circuital motions". Imagine the galactic disk as the result of this magnetic circuital motion. Then add the Solar System with its about 60 degree different orbital plane in respect to the galactic plane.

Then we have an outgoing motion from the galactic center. We have a Solar System, which once was created in the galactic center and actually moving outwards. We have a Solar System orbital pattern as a result of the perpendicularly magnetic field and thus:

We have the rotational and orbiting motions in our Solar System as the specific result of the perpendicular magnetic helix motion (circular polarization), going out from the galactic center and out in the galactic bars and further out in the magnetic circuit in the galactic arms.

All these explanations fits very well and correctly the observed galactic rotation pattern as well as the rotational and orbiting pattern in the Solar System.

That is really: "Gravity" works both ways and in circuits - if interpreted as electromagnetic forces and qualities. Which funny and logical enough have the very same properties as the assumed fundamental force of gravity, but much stronger.

Get rid of the assumed "laws of gravity" and then you don´t need any kind of "dark this or that".

Last: I fully admit the modern need of putting all these explanations into mathematical equations, but my prime skills are intuitive and not mathematical – so feel free yourself to join me with such a job if you have the skills.

This invitaton goes for anyone else who whishes to join in.


The galaxy is a different configuration then the solar system, because the solar system has allmost all matter concentrated in one spot: the Sun. The galaxy has more mass spread out over the spirals. That is one difference.

As to the "dark matter hypothesis" - you cannot rule that out so easily, even when you have contributions of electric/magnetic forces and due to the different mass distribution of the galaxy to explain the orbital velocities in galaxies - since a different effect of dark matter is gravitational lensing. So there is really "gravitating stuff" out there. At least if the law of gravity (general relativity) holds universally.

If not, then we are really sitting literally "in the dark".
robheus
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 7:21 am

Re: The Insoluble and Illogical Dark Matter Paradox

Unread postby Native » Tue Jul 01, 2014 4:05 am

@ robheus
As to the "dark matter hypothesis" - you cannot rule that out so easily, even when you have contributions of electric/magnetic forces and due to the different mass distribution of the galaxy to explain the orbital velocities in galaxies - since a different effect of dark matter is gravitational lensing. So there is really "gravitating stuff" out there. At least if the law of gravity (general relativity) holds universally.

If not, then we are really sitting literally "in the dark".


:) When and if you still are holding onto "dark this and that" when not obvious necessary if using the electromagnetic qualities, this leaves only you (not WE or I) really sitting scientifically and literally in the dark. :)

General Relativity cannot explain or describe what happends in a galactic circuit of electromagnetic formation. The scientists here goes completely speculative trying to describe natural electromagnetic circuits with poles (=holes) with "singularities of no return" and all kind of speculations of multi-universes; curved space; space-time and all that connected and highly speculative jazz. Ensteins ideas of gravity is even worse than Newton´s.

Have you really pondered deep into my explanations above?
Life makes senses and who could doubt it, if you have no doubt about it. - "Grooks" by Piet Hein - My fellow Danish countryman and also a Natural Philosopher
Native
 
Posts: 213
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 7:42 am

Re: The Insoluble and Illogical Dark Matter Paradox

Unread postby robheus » Tue Jul 01, 2014 4:22 am

Native wrote: :) When and if you still are holding onto "dark this and that" when not obvious necessary if using the electromagnetic qualities, this leaves only you (not WE or I) really sitting scientifically and literally in the dark. :)

General Relativity cannot explain or describe what happends in a galactic circuit of electromagnetic formation. The scientists here goes completely speculative trying to describe natural electromagnetic circuits with poles (=holes) with "singularities of no return" and all kind of speculations of multi-universes; curved space; space-time and all that connected and highly speculative jazz. Ensteins ideas of gravity is even worse than Newton´s.

Have you really pondered deep into my explanations above?


I have.

This suggests and clearly indicates and really proves that the overall and actual formational motion in our galaxy has an outgoing flowing pattern, quite opposite the suggested attractive motion incorporated in the gravity assumptions.


But this above quote makes me doubt if you even comprehend the idea of gravity.
Without gravity, celeasteal object would follow straight lines. When they are moving in orbits, as we happen to observe, that is due to gravity. Simle Newtonian mechanics. Not anything electrical of sorts.
robheus
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 7:21 am

Re: The Insoluble and Illogical Dark Matter Paradox

Unread postby Native » Tue Jul 01, 2014 5:03 am

@robheus,
Me:
This suggests and clearly indicates and really proves that the overall and actual formational motion in our galaxy has an outgoing flowing pattern, quite opposite the suggested attractive motion incorporated in the gravity assumptions.


But this above quote makes me doubt if you even comprehend the idea of gravity.
Without gravity, celeasteal object would follow straight lines. When they are moving in orbits, as we happen to observe, that is due to gravity. Simle Newtonian mechanics. Not anything electrical of sorts

First: Objects and everything else following electromagnetic circuits, never follows straight lines - only the electric current seemingly does this in a minor space perspective. (This illustrates the Einsteinian "curvation of space")

As mentioned above:
We have the rotational and orbiting motions in our Solar System as the specific result of the perpendicular magnetic helix motion (circular polarization), going out from the galactic center and out in the galactic bars and further out in the magnetic circuit in the galactic arms.

Tis is really the dymnamics which gives the orbital motons in our Solar System as well at the rotatons to all objects in the Solar System. (And by some causes I can´t explain for the time being, the elliptical orbits also derives from this formational dynamics in our galaxy)

Of course I otherwise also consider how "weight" is created and how come we can feel weight on the Earth, but so far, I´ve just come to the conclusion that bio-magnetisme also plays the prime role here, binding atoms and molecules etc. together and not just by "lumping together via an unexplained dymanics of gravitational accreation method".

Just as the electromagnetic fundamental force = the qualities of "gravity" (which really is the electromagnetic), the qualities of atmospheric pressures also follows the same rules on the Earth. This means in my opinion that pressure is a very important issue to include in the overall perspective, also the orbital speed pressure from the Earth orbiting the Sun.

I´m pondering over these overall and interacting pressure influences on the Earth and the interacion of the Moon and planets, but so far I haven´t a model which I can explain other than what I´ve mentined here. The most important issues is that the Earth and the Moon still confirms the outwards moving momentum, originally given from the galactic center, by still moving slowly and furter away from the Sun and the Moon moving away from the Earth. The Solar System is still moving slowly outwards in the galactic electromagnetic circuit.
Life makes senses and who could doubt it, if you have no doubt about it. - "Grooks" by Piet Hein - My fellow Danish countryman and also a Natural Philosopher
Native
 
Posts: 213
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 7:42 am

Re: The Insoluble and Illogical Dark Matter Paradox

Unread postby robheus » Tue Jul 01, 2014 5:34 am

Native wrote:@robheus,
Me:
This suggests and clearly indicates and really proves that the overall and actual formational motion in our galaxy has an outgoing flowing pattern, quite opposite the suggested attractive motion incorporated in the gravity assumptions.


But this above quote makes me doubt if you even comprehend the idea of gravity.
Without gravity, celeasteal object would follow straight lines. When they are moving in orbits, as we happen to observe, that is due to gravity. Simle Newtonian mechanics. Not anything electrical of sorts

First: Objects and everything else following electromagnetic circuits, never follows straight lines - only the electric current seemingly does this in a minor space perspective. (This illustrates the Einsteinian "curvation of space")

As mentioned above:
We have the rotational and orbiting motions in our Solar System as the specific result of the perpendicular magnetic helix motion (circular polarization), going out from the galactic center and out in the galactic bars and further out in the magnetic circuit in the galactic arms.

Tis is really the dymnamics which gives the orbital motons in our Solar System as well at the rotatons to all objects in the Solar System. (And by some causes I can´t explain for the time being, the elliptical orbits also derives from this formational dynamics in our galaxy)

Of course I otherwise also consider how "weight" is created and how come we can feel weight on the Earth, but so far, I´ve just come to the conclusion that bio-magnetisme also plays the prime role here, binding atoms and molecules etc. together and not just by "lumping together via an unexplained dymanics of gravitational accreation method".

Just as the electromagnetic fundamental force = the qualities of "gravity" (which really is the electromagnetic), the qualities of atmospheric pressures also follows the same rules on the Earth. This means in my opinion that pressure is a very important issue to include in the overall perspective, also the orbital speed pressure from the Earth orbiting the Sun.

I´m pondering over these overall and interacting pressure influences on the Earth and the interacion of the Moon and planets, but so far I haven´t a model which I can explain other than what I´ve mentined here. The most important issues is that the Earth and the Moon still confirms the outwards moving momentum, originally given from the galactic center, by still moving slowly and furter away from the Sun and the Moon moving away from the Earth. The Solar System is still moving slowly outwards in the galactic electromagnetic circuit.


I think you don't understand the basic physics things. Are you trying to deny gravity, and think only electrical forces play a role? Clearly there is gravity, else the stars wouldn't have formed. They formed from electrical neutral hydrogen, and only after contracting, the density and pressure and temperature increases untill thermo-nuclear reactions can start and cause a counterforce to gravity. Stars also emit electrical particles as we know, which find their ways in space, but that is a secondary phenomena. Electrical forces don't explain why stars and galaxies form!

And objects in space, outside of gravity field, do follow straight curves as does light. Only due to gravity they behave differently. Electrical forces can also accelerate matter, if it is electricaly charged. But apart from that the basic orbital mechanics is that objects follow straight lines.
robheus
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 7:21 am

Re: The Insoluble and Illogical Dark Matter Paradox

Unread postby Native » Tue Jul 01, 2014 5:43 am

@robheus,
I think you don't understand the basic physics things. Are you trying to deny gravity, and think only electrical forces play a role? Clearly there is gravity, else the stars wouldn't have formed. They formed from electrical neutral hydrogen, and only after contracting, the density and pressure and temperature increases untill thermo-nuclear reactions can start and cause a counterforce to gravity. Stars also emit electrical particles as we know, which find their ways in space, but that is a secondary phenomena. Electrical forces don't explain why stars and galaxies form!
I think you don't understand the basic physics things

Everytime I meet such an unpolite statement, I just give up arguing further on.

Edited: Change your attitudes if you want to continue this debate.
Life makes senses and who could doubt it, if you have no doubt about it. - "Grooks" by Piet Hein - My fellow Danish countryman and also a Natural Philosopher
Native
 
Posts: 213
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 7:42 am

Re: The Insoluble and Illogical Dark Matter Paradox

Unread postby Native » Tue Jul 01, 2014 6:52 am

@robheus
Clearly there is gravity, else the stars wouldn't have formed. They formed from electrical neutral hydrogen, and only after contracting, the density and pressure and temperature increases untill thermo-nuclear reactions can start and cause a counterforce to gravity. Stars also emit electrical particles as we know, which find their ways in space, but that is a secondary phenomena. Electrical forces don't explain why stars and galaxies form!

Clearly you can´t be familiar with the very purpose of the forum, and then I really don´t know what you are doing here.

Read these guidelines – and “get back in the debate-business” when done.

https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/eu-guides/beginners-guide/
https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/eu-guides/eg-contents/
https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/eu-guides/misconceptions/
Life makes senses and who could doubt it, if you have no doubt about it. - "Grooks" by Piet Hein - My fellow Danish countryman and also a Natural Philosopher
Native
 
Posts: 213
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 7:42 am

Re: The Insoluble and Illogical Dark Matter Paradox

Unread postby Rossim » Tue Jul 01, 2014 8:51 am

I had a good conversation yesterday with a physics professor at my university about dark matter and the failure of GR. He claimed that he's been unhappy for years about the dark matter explanation, and instead he is under the impression that a modified gravity is needed. He thinks that when you have a quantity of large objects gravity behaves differently. My response is why rely on gravity alone? Why modify gravity when you can modify the theory? The answer lies in finding undeniable data that can prove one theory over another without any doubt... that's what takes a genius. GR is unfalsifiable and therefore has no value. However, GR is often identified as concrete science that has made many true predictions. As I've stated before, I believe the Rosetta mission will yield the undeniable data we're looking for.
Rossim
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2013 8:46 am

Re: The Insoluble and Illogical Dark Matter Paradox

Unread postby robheus » Tue Jul 01, 2014 12:08 pm

Native wrote:@robheus,
I think you don't understand the basic physics things. Are you trying to deny gravity, and think only electrical forces play a role? Clearly there is gravity, else the stars wouldn't have formed. They formed from electrical neutral hydrogen, and only after contracting, the density and pressure and temperature increases untill thermo-nuclear reactions can start and cause a counterforce to gravity. Stars also emit electrical particles as we know, which find their ways in space, but that is a secondary phenomena. Electrical forces don't explain why stars and galaxies form!
I think you don't understand the basic physics things

Everytime I meet such an unpolite statement, I just give up arguing further on.

Edited: Change your attitudes if you want to continue this debate.


There is no point in having a discussion about physics, if there is no understandig of the basic physics principles. Like the principle that bodies are moving in straight lines, if there is no force (gravity / el;ectricity) working on them.
All I read is a basic denying of underlying physics principles, so there is no basis for any further discussion then.
robheus
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 7:21 am

Re: The Insoluble and Illogical Dark Matter Paradox

Unread postby robheus » Tue Jul 01, 2014 12:18 pm

Rossim wrote:I had a good conversation yesterday with a physics professor at my university about dark matter and the failure of GR. He claimed that he's been unhappy for years about the dark matter explanation, and instead he is under the impression that a modified gravity is needed. He thinks that when you have a quantity of large objects gravity behaves differently. My response is why rely on gravity alone? Why modify gravity when you can modify the theory? The answer lies in finding undeniable data that can prove one theory over another without any doubt... that's what takes a genius. GR is unfalsifiable and therefore has no value. However, GR is often identified as concrete science that has made many true predictions. As I've stated before, I believe the Rosetta mission will yield the undeniable data we're looking for.


Some physicists are trying to do that. See for example this paper.

Or this paper [Is dark matter an illusion created by the gravitational polarization of the quantum vacuum?] that tries to solve the dark matter problem by proposing gravitational dipoles.

GR is falsifiable. It predicted the perihelion of Mercury for example. GR has been tested on numerous occasions.

I wonder how EU/PC could solve the dark matter problem, is thery any theory out that is worth considering? I have no problem accepting that electric/magnetic phenomena play a role in the universe at large enough scales, but I don't think that all current cosmological problems can be solved with assuming them being effects of plasma/currents.
robheus
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2014 7:21 am

Next

Return to Electric Universe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest