I could as well believe some cosmological wizard formed and shaped the galaxies and stuff, that has the same truth value as your stories here.
I am looking for real scientific truth, not just stories....
Look for the truth in this:
This is the standing truth and the very basics of all ideas in modern cosmology and astrophysics onto which you can use your excellent critical skills as a door into alternative thinking.
Cosmologists were forced to assume "dark matter" by the discovery of "the galactic rotation anomaly" where objects in galaxies don´t obey the Newtonian laws of "celestial motions around a gravity center", a law made by the observations of planets orbiting the Sun and moons orbiting their mother planets.
Our Solar System is an orbiting part of the galactic rotation. When assuming "dark matter" in the galaxy, the scientists thought to repair the galactic rotation anomaly and thus "preventing the stars to fly away from the galaxy". The sincere implication of this is:
We now have a single law of celestial motion which has to describe 2 different kinds of celestial motions - and even this with a Solar System which is embedded in the "dark matter assumption" in galaxies. This is outright incoherent and highly contradictionary.
Completely regardless of scientists even finding solid proofs of ”dark matter” this double trouble problem will NEVER be solved. The scientists have to deal with and revise the “laws of celestial motions” and include electro-magneto dynamics as well as cosmic thermodynamics in order to get around this major double trouble.
Deal with this incoherant "thinking" and see what kind of "logics" modern cosmology are based on.
I´ll hold you onto this isue - just and alone because this is the very TOPIC here.
I don't see the illogic of dark matter hypothese.
Neptune and Pluto were also first hypothized to be "dark matter" that is : they were hypothized to exist because of the disturbances of other planets. So this gravitational thinking got us to look for those planets, and we found them.
Same for many extra-solar planets, we just see the star wobble and say: well there must be some planet there that causes this behaviour of the star.
So the "dark matter" hypothesis is a scientific idea and not something illogic. We just extended it from solar orbits to galactic orbits. GR is a universal law as far as we know, so this thinking is correct.
Not that it could be wrong, but the idea in itself is not illogic.
And please note that the problem with the stars orbiting the galaxy is not that they wouild fly away, but that their orbital velocities don't drop inverse proportionally to the distance from the galactic centre, but merely stay the same.
The "missing mass" has to account for the rotation of stars in galaxies and galaxies rotating in clusters.
Also mass causes gravitational lensing, and that is another indication there might me more mass then we see.
Can EU/PC explain all these phenomena (not only qualitatively but also quantitatively) ?
Is it not enough to say: well there must be some force from electrical currents of magnetic fields.
That is as good as saying there is missing mass. Which might be the case or might not be the case.
We need to observe it and need to be able to calculate it.
If the EU/PC paradigm is true, and makes a case for electric currents and magnetic fields causing this behavious of stars in galaxies, how can it explain that in our solar system, we don't see any anomalies. To explain the orbits of planets, all you need is the law of gravity. Even so, the sun emits giant masses of electrical particles, so why doesn't that have effects on orbits locally, but does have effects on the galactic scale? That seems illogical to me.
Also it could be that there is neither missing mass nor an anomaly of gravity, but something else. Like gravitaional dipoles in the vacuum that look like dark matter effect.
Fact is: we don't know yet, so all options are on the table.
To explain this behaviour of stars in galaxies and galaxies in clusters might be based on:
- missing mass ("dark matter")
- gravity behaving differently at large scales
- some vacuum effect (like gravitational dipoles)
- electric and/or magnetic effects
- something unknown yet
Does EU/PC make a testable theory?