Lambda-CDM - EU/PC Theory - Confirmation Bias

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 "spin" cycle is in overdrive.

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Sat Mar 04, 2017 10:30 am

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Subst ... r_999.html

Substantial leap forward in quest for dark matter


Hey look, they made a 'substantial leap forward' in DM research, by *utterly failing* in the lab yet again. :)

The spin related to DM research is simply unbelievable. Any additional "constraint" (another outright failure) is now a "substantial leap forward' in their research program. The mere "shrinking of the gap' is a giant snipe hunt victory! "Nope, we didn't find any dark matter snipes here. Whoo-hooo! Big leap forward in the dark matter snipe hunt! Now give me more money dad so I can keep looking for snipes."

The actual paper can be found here:

https://arxiv.org/abs/1702.07666

It's simply unbelievable to me how much money has now been *utterly wasted* on the dark matter snipe hunt. Not only is there *overwhelming* evidence that astronomers simply *botched* their mass estimates all along, there's also *billions of dollars* of laboratory "tests" of their model now, and they've all been *dismal* failures.

Does that make any of them stop and second guess themselves? Hell no:

"This bodes very well for the future as the collaboration is poised to launch a new tonne scale detector based on this technology. This new detector, dubbed PICO 500, will have an order of magnitude greater physics capability and will explore a vast swathe of the parameter space predicted by dark matter theories."


When they fail at LUX, they just increase the funding by a factor of 5 and they go snipe hunting again with another 50 million dollars of our tax money. When they fail at PICO 60, just double up again on the price and go for it again at PICO 500! Wheeeeee!

Nevermind those *failed* results from LHC and everywhere else on planet Earth. None of that incredibly expensive information matters to them one iota. They're stuck on their denial-go-round, so they keep spinning every failure as a great "leap forward" in closing the dark matter snipe hiding places. OMG! Test, fail, lather, rinse, repeat the supernatural dogma to the press.

Dark matter theory has to be the single worst case of confirmation bias in the entire history of physics. It's certainly been the *single most expensive* snipe hunt of all time, that's for sure.

What a complete waste of professional talent, and huge waste of human research. They just keep throwing good money after bad because they are too egotistical to admit their mistakes. Wow. How sad.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

We should make up our own headlines

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Sat Mar 04, 2017 11:19 am

I think we should have a little fun by making up our own headlines for such stories. How about:

"Pico de nada"
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Lambda-CDM - EU/PC Theory - Confirmation Bias

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Wed Mar 08, 2017 4:59 pm

http://www.interactions.org/cms/?pid=1034004

The link above lists 22 direct detection experiments for dark matter, and 15 more indirect detection projects underway or completed.

If we assume that at least few of these experiments have been upgraded at least once, that's probably in excess of a least 30 different lab experiments that have all come back with NULL results.

Each and every one of those experiments justifies their existence and their never-ending search for dark matter based upon cosmology claims that have been debunked repeatedly over the past decade. In fact, the first image on the website is the image from the now infamous and thoroughly debunked bullet cluster study. We now know that the authors of that debunked study botched the stellar mass estimates by a whopping factor of between 3 and 20 times, and they knew nothing about the location of most of the mass of those galaxies because it wasn't even 'discovered" that galaxies had a hot plasma halo until 2012.

Is it any wonder why the mainstream is so reluctant and so unwilling to accept reality and embrace empirical physics when so many of their financial livelihoods depend on them *not* embracing empirical physics? This is like watching a physics train wreck in painfully slow motion.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

No need for dark energy?

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Fri Mar 31, 2017 12:45 pm

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 115254.htm

Unlike conventional simulations with a smoothly expanding universe, taking the structure into account led to a model where different regions of the cosmos expand at different rate. The average expansion rate though is consistent with present observations, which suggest an overall acceleration.

Dr Dobos adds: "The theory of general relativity is fundamental in understanding the way the universe evolves. We do not question its validity; we question the validity of the approximate solutions. Our findings rely on a mathematical conjecture which permits the differential expansion of space, consistent with general relativity, and they show how the formation of complex structures of matter affects the expansion. These issues were previously swept under the rug but taking them into account can explain the acceleration without the need for dark energy."

If this finding is upheld, it could have a significant impact on models of the universe and the direction of research in physics. For the past 20 years, astronomers and theoretical physicists have speculated on the nature of dark energy, but it remains an unsolved mystery. With the new model, the team expect at the very least to start a lively debate.


Ya, we'll see if it starts a lively debate. :)

I simply cannot imagine how LCDM theory can hope to survive another decade. I know all the LCDM proponents had high hopes a decade ago over their upcoming "dark matter" experiments, but those experiments have been completed now, and they just falsified all their popular mathematical models of exotic matter.

Now we're seeing more and more evidence that "dark energy" is merely a figment of their overactive imagination too, even *if* we assume that all photon redshift is related *only* to expansion.

Both of their "dark" thingies have taken an empirical and/or theoretical beating over the past decade. I simply cannot imagine how they can continue to peddle their dark supernatural nonsense to unsuspecting children for another decade.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Two more nails in the LCDM coffin

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Sat Apr 15, 2017 7:12 pm

Apparently there really is no evidence whatsoever to support extensions to the standard particle physics model, or for "dark matter":

https://phys.org/news/2017-04-accurate- ... ysics.html
Now, as a result of the measurements, theorists dealing with supersymmetry have a reduced possibility of adapting their theory to reality. Instead of coming closer, the new physics is again receding," concludes Prof. Witek.


And of course we find "mature" galaxies for as far in time as we can current see:

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/mas ... g-universe
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/mat ... g-universe
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Nope, no dark matter snipes in the core of the galaxy.

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Thu May 04, 2017 1:06 pm

http://spaceref.com/astronomy/origin-of ... -dark.html

Another DM claim bites the dust.....
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Lambda-CDM - EU/PC Theory - Confirmation Bias

Unread postby comingfrom » Thu May 04, 2017 3:55 pm

They can't even see that their statements about Dark Matter are contradictory to the basic principals of physics.

"Dark matter is one of the biggest mysteries of modern physics. Researchers know that dark matter exists because it bends light from distant galaxies and affects how galaxies rotate. But they don't know what the substance is made of. Most scientists believe it's composed of yet-to-be-discovered particles that almost never interact with regular matter other than through gravity, making it very hard to detect them."

They teach that gravity is negligible at the quantum level, even at the atomic level.
Everything operates by electro and chromo dynamics at that size.
Yet they search there for a gravity solution.

Subatomic particles and photons are detectable by their energy, which is mass equivalence.
It is due to their mass that they interact, and interact with our detectors.
But Dark Matter is [as yet] undetectable "massive" particles.
They won't even interact in our bubble chamber, but supposedly can effect a galaxy's rotation speed.

Electrons and protons are way more massive than their proposed Dark Matter particles, and way more interactive.
These subatomic particles are known to exist throughout space. Have been detected in space.
Plasma is an omnipresent medium.
Should we expect it to have no effect on light?
Could it account for the missing mass?

I guess there is no money to made without a big mystery.

A good name for Dark Matter particles is, Wild Geese.
~Paul
User avatar
comingfrom
 
Posts: 759
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 9:11 pm
Location: NSW, Australia

They finally solved their missing baryon problem. :)

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Wed May 17, 2017 8:03 am

https://cosmosmagazine.com/space/galaxy ... ssing-mass

So in *addition* to the five major mass estimation errors that the mainstream made in that bullet cluster study which are listed in the OP, the mainstream finally found their 'missing baryons" in the form of ordinary uncharged hydrogen gas that surrounds the galaxy.

That's *six* major mass estimation errors that were made in that now infamous 2006 lensing study. They botched the brightness by a factor of two to start with, and they underestimated the number of stars between 3 and 20 times in that study. They didn't account for the neutral hydrogen atoms that would probably have "passed on through" that collision process too, and they had no idea that every galaxy contains a plasma halo that contains more mass than the rest of the stars combined. It's certainly no mystery as to why the baryonic mass estimates used in 2006 didn't come up with the right amount of mass in those clusters. The bullet cluster study has been a huge cluster-f*ck since day one! :)
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Making a list, checking it twice...

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Fri Jun 09, 2017 7:14 pm

We're going to find out if the mainstream has been naughty or nice:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 104335.htm

Based on the published work, which draws on data collected from 2012-2015, the team has found no evidence of solar axions.


Nope, no snipes on the sun. :)

http://now.space/posts/leading-theory-dark-matter-wimp/

“How many times do you have to repeat an experiment and see nothing before you start wondering that the particle doesn’t exist?” asks physicist Juan Collar of the University of Chicago.

Researchers don’t generally paint null results in such disappointing terms. According to press releases, the experiments above have all placed stricter and stricter limits on where WIMPs might be found. But the mysterious subatomic prey have almost run out of places to hide. Collar is not alone in foreseeing a time when they may have to be abandoned. While multiple astronomical observations point to dark matter’s existence, the experimental evidence is so far negligible, and the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) has yet to see any hint of supersymmetry. The picture that’s emerging is a sobering reminder that in science, as in anything else, the search for answers provides no guarantee that you will actually find them.


The obvious answer is as plain as the common gas and plasma that has been found in those various halos of ordinary matter. :)

https://www.space.com/36991-most-sensit ... nline.html

After three years of construction, the world's most sensitive dark matter experiment is online, and scientists report that the detector is operating as designed.

The XENON1T detector hasn't found any dark matter particles yet, but it has carried out a 30-day science run, and project scientists are optimistic about the future.

"The best result on dark matter so far! … and we have just started!"


I just love the irony of that comment about their finding of nothing being "the best results on dark matter so far!" :)

Nope, no snipes in the Xenon either.

It looks like they've mostly been naughty this year and they keep getting a bunch more lumps of coal. :)
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Lambda-CDM - EU/PC Theory - Confirmation Bias

Unread postby kell1990 » Fri Jun 09, 2017 8:59 pm

I hope that the EU/PC community isn't going to let a single person become their spokesperson. It has become abundantly clear to me that the EU/PC approach to the universe is the correct one and there shouldn't be anyone "throwing in the towel" on the argument.
kell1990
 
Posts: 70
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2016 10:54 am

Re: Lambda-CDM - EU/PC Theory - Confirmation Bias

Unread postby Cargo » Sun Jun 11, 2017 9:20 pm

While multiple astronomical observations point to

So we can begin to scapegoat the Astronomers for leading the Astrophysicists in the wrong direction. :)
Cargo
 
Posts: 124
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 7:02 pm

Re: Lambda-CDM - EU/PC Theory - Confirmation Bias

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Sun Jun 11, 2017 10:39 pm

Cargo wrote:
While multiple astronomical observations point to

So we can begin to scapegoat the Astronomers for leading the Astrophysicists in the wrong direction. :)


:)

There's been an interesting symbiotic relationship going on between astrophysics and "non standard" particle physics for the past couple of decades, but the LHC results and the various NULL results of other experiments have not been kind to that relationship. In fact they've strained that relationship to the breaking point. For many years, SUSY proponents publicly cited astrophysical evidence of "dark matter", as their "evidence/justification" to support the search for an extension to the standard particle physics model.

Thanks to the incredible and difficult work that has been done at LHC, the standard particle physics model is now complete, and there hasn't been any evidence found to date to support even a single 'sparticle" from SUSY theory. LHC hasn't produced any evidence that directly supports any extension to the standard particle physics model in fact.

This leaves the whole WIMP concept in a very precarious position, particularly after the recent negative XENON-IT results and the last negative LUX and PandaX results. The various XENON experiments have basically eliminated huge regions of "weakly" interacting particle space, so much so that they're reaching down to the neutrino level of "weak" particle interaction. Once they eliminate everything down to the neutrino level of weak particle interaction, the WIMP snipe hunt is pretty much over. I suppose Axion theory will grow in popularity among the last "flat earthers' of dark matter theory.

Anyone that has been paying attention to dark matter theory over the past decade knows that exotic matter theory is in real trouble in 2017. LHC results were not kind to any theories about various extensions to the standard particle physics model, whereas those very same results were wonderfully successful at demonstrating the mathematical elegance and the incredible prediction accuracy of the standard particle physics model.

The problem for particle physicists is that they've been *so* successful at demonstrating the accuracy of the standard particle physics model, they've effectively worked themselves right out of a job. With the discovery of the Higgs, and their demonstration of the incredible accuracy of the standard particle physics model, what is left to do? Now of course we definitely should explore every bit of the energy spectrum that we can with LHC, but what happens after that point in time if there is not even so much as a hint of any need to extend the standard particle physics model? Everyone would still like to remain employed I presume?

I think the handwriting is definitely on the wall today in terms of exotic matter theory. It's not looking very good. Not only did it fail billions of dollars worth of our highest technology laboratory 'tests', astronomers have been "discovering' that their galaxy mass estimation techniques are horrifically flawed, and woefully in need of an update. In just the last five years, they've found/discovered both a neutral gas "halo", as well as discovering a hot plasma (million degree plasma) halo around our own galaxy, just as their "dark matter" models 'predict". Their dark matter galaxy rotation models were evidently correct, but their assumption about any need for exotic matter was absolutely incorrect.

There's really no need at all to resort to exotic forms of matter to explain what's been wrong with astronomical estimates of galaxies prior to 2012, and prior to this year. We've been *seriously* underestimating the amount of ordinary baryonic matter in every galaxy since long before Fritz Zwicky noticed that problem. :)

The moral dilemma for astrophysicists is that they're like a drug addict with respect to exotic matter. Their current belief system cannot live without it. The LCDM theory completely falls apart without it, particularly the nucleosynthesis predictions, and the BAO claims to fame. It's curtain time for LCMD theory if there is no such thing as CDM, it's really that simple.

Dark energy theory took a pretty good hit recently in more recent SN1A studies of larger SN!A data sets, and revelations about SN!A not being 'standard candles", but that was nothing compared to the brutal and savage beating that cold dark matter theory has suffered in the lab over the past few years.

With respect to the whole "job displacement" thing that we all know is coming, I suggest that that both particle physicists and dark matter researchers consider spending some time, money and effort recreating Birkeland's entire range of solar plasma physics experiments. If they really want to learn how the universe works, a re-commitment to empirical physics is definitely in order. The LHC results were really impressive IMO. I"d love to see a similar such Herculean effort made to comprehend what's really going on in solar atmospheric physics. With all that plasma talent focused on solar physics, things could change virtually overnight with just a simple and logical change in direction which is completely consistent with the standard particle physics model, and empirical physics.

I suggest that both proponents of extensions to the standard particle physics model, and LCDM proponents just rip off the supernatural band-aids in one fell swoop. Ya, it's going to hurt at first, and it's going to be depressing for awhile, but once the lab results of electrical solar model experiments start coming in, the lab successes of the next few decades could makes us completely forget all about the past, while also giving the LHC results the full respect that they deserve.
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Lambda-CDM - EU/PC Theory - Confirmation Bias

Unread postby BeAChooser » Mon Jun 12, 2017 11:16 am

Michael Mozina wrote:With respect to the whole "job displacement" thing that we all know is coming, I suggest that that both particle physicists and dark matter researchers consider spending some time, money and effort recreating Birkeland's entire range of solar plasma physics experiments. If they really want to learn how the universe works, a re-commitment to empirical physics is definitely in order. The LHC results were really impressive IMO. I"d love to see a similar such Herculean effort made to comprehend what's really going on in solar atmospheric physics. With all that plasma talent focused on solar physics, things could change virtually overnight with just a simple and logical change in direction which is completely consistent with the standard particle physics model, and empirical physics.

I suggest that both proponents of extensions to the standard particle physics model, and LCDM proponents just rip off the supernatural band-aids in one fell swoop. Ya, it's going to hurt at first, and it's going to be depressing for awhile, but once the lab results of electrical solar model experiments start coming in, the lab successes of the next few decades could makes us completely forget all about the past, while also giving the LHC results the full respect that they deserve.


Good Advice. But I doubt they'll take it.
BeAChooser
 
Posts: 132
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 7:24 pm

Re: Lambda-CDM - EU/PC Theory - Confirmation Bias

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Mon Jun 12, 2017 4:05 pm

BeAChooser wrote:Good Advice. But I doubt they'll take it.


Hope springs eternal. :)
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

Re: Lambda-CDM - EU/PC Theory - Confirmation Bias

Unread postby Michael Mozina » Thu Jul 06, 2017 12:52 pm

Not that we really need to find a lot more missing mass to explain away 'dark matter', but it turns out that our own Milky Way galaxy could also contain perhaps a hundred billion brown dwarfs (or more) which are very difficult to spot, and we keep finding new satellite galaxies all the time.

https://phys.org/news/2017-07-milky-bil ... warfs.html
Michael Mozina
 
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:35 am
Location: Mt. Shasta, CA

PreviousNext

Return to Electric Universe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest