Wheel Falls Off Dark Matter Wagon

[Dotini]

http://www.eso.org/public/news/eso1217/
The most accurate study so far of the motions of stars in the Milky Way has found no evidence for dark matter in a large volume around the Sun. According to widely accepted theories, the solar neighbourhood was expected to be filled with dark matter, a mysterious invisible substance that can only be detected indirectly by the gravitational force it exerts. But a new study by a team of astronomers in Chile has found that these theories just do not fit the observational facts. This may mean that attempts to directly detect dark matter particles on Earth are unlikely to be successful.

Respectfully submitted,
Steve

[Michael Mozina]

Ya know.....

The one thing I've learned over the last thirty years is that the mainstream is absolutely and completely disinterested in the FAILED PREDICTIONS of their own model. They sweep this kind of news right under the carpet and they go right back to peddling their metaphysical nonsense to unsuspecting freshman, year after year, after relentless year. The religious dogma always seems to survive ALL attempts at any sort of falsification. I suspect that the mainstream won't even bat an eye at that news. They aren't even remotely interested in falsifying their own current beliefs. That would make their funding and their prestige go up in smoke. They have a financial and professional investment in protecting their current beliefs at all costs. Nothing is capable of falsifying such a powerful "faith in the unseen" (in the lab).

[quantauniverse]

There's some great quotes from ESO's Biden, who said they searched where predictions of dark matter were expected and "found a quantity of mass that exactly matches the coinciding observable mass of stars, dust, and gas." "Our results contradict the currently accepted dark matter models." "Leaving no room (space) for the extra dark matter material expected." dark matter gravity cannot exist when there is no missing mass. With no missing mass dark matter should not be invented postulated. This story will be swept under their dusty rug. Dusty plasmas, ionized gas, plasma stars, are 99.9% of the composition shaping the universe as it is known here as plasma cosmology and the electric universe.

http://holographicgalaxy.blogspot.com/2 ... quals.html

[Michael Mozina]

http://www.space.com/5348-view-universe ... right.html
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/features.cfm?feature=2287
http://www.space.com/6807-real-whopper- ... ssive.html

Including that recent study, that's at least 4 new studies in the past 4 years that demonstrate CONCLUSIVELY that the mass estimation techniques used by the mainstream were FUBAR from the start and remain FUBAR to this very day. Not that they'll deal with this information honestly and openly mind you.....

[dusthurricane]

As i have stated before - the mainstream is mathematic - the cosmos is emotion - pure emotion from a trillion lifeforms - from stars to trees. One can only begin to understand the cosmos via observation filtered using emotion not mathematics. And maths was invented when ? and now its 2012!!!!

[Corona]

great find! slowly, very slowly astronomers will start believing their eyes again...

[Michael Mozina]

great find! slowly, very slowly astronomers will start believing their eyes again...

One certainly would hope so. I still can't help but question the integrity of an entire industry that literally hasn't budged one single percentage point in terms of their strong emotional and professional attachment to mythical forms of "dark matter" in spite of all the recent findings over the past 5 years.

Unfortunately, the mainstream has a proven track record of denial of the data that falsifies their beliefs. Their dark dogma hasn't changed one single bit due to this rash of revelations about the errors in their mass estimation techniques, so it's hard to imagine that these recent revelations will spark serious debate. They have made absolutely no honest professional effort to MINIMIZE their need for mythical forms of exotic matter. The indoctrination of students in the mythical dark matter arts will continue as usual this Spring in spite of all these findings that demonstrate conclusively that the the mainstream mass estimation techniques are PITIFULLY and WOEFULLY inadequate. They'll continue to write about WIMPS and inflation fairies in the sky and they'll continue to ignore every observation that falsifies their dogma.

[Dotini]

http://arxiv.org/abs/1204.2546
The dark matter crisis: falsification of the current standard model of cosmology
Pavel Kroupa (AIfA, Bonn)
(Submitted on 11 Apr 2012)

The current standard model of cosmology (SMoC) requires The Dual Dwarf Galaxy Theorem to be true. According to this theorem two types of dwarf galaxies must exist: primordial dark-matter (DM) dominated (type A) dwarf galaxies, and tidal-dwarf and ram-pressure-dwarf (type B) galaxies void of DM. In the model, type A dwarfs are distributed approximately spherically following the shape of the host galaxy DM halo, while type B dwarfs are typically correlated in phase-space. Type B dwarfs must exist in any cosmological theory in which galaxies interact. Only one type of dwarf galaxy is observed to exist on the baryonic Tully-Fisher plot and in the radius-mass plane. The Milky Way satellite system forms a vast phase-space-correlated structure that includes globular clusters and stellar and gaseous streams. Similar arguments apply to Andromeda. Other galaxies also have phase-space correlated satellite systems. Therefore, The Dual Galaxy Theorem is falsified by observation and dynamically relevant cold or warm DM on galactic scales cannot exist. It is shown that the SMoC is incompatible with a large set of other extragalactic observations. Other theoretical solutions to cosmological observations exist, which yield an excellent description of astronomical observations. In particular, alone the empirical mass-discrepancy-acceleration correlation constitutes convincing evidence that galactic-scale dynamics cannot be Einsteinian/Newtonian. Major problems with inflationary big bang cosmologies remain unresolved.

Comments: Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia (CSIRO Publishing), in press, LaTeX, 50 pages, 16 figures
Subjects: Cosmology and Extragalactic Astrophysics (astro-ph.CO); Galaxy Astrophysics (astro-ph.GA); General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology (gr-qc)
Cite as: arXiv:1204.2546v1 [astro-ph.CO]

Respectfully submitted,
Steve

[David Talbott]

A good reference for folks on the issue raised here is Steve Smith's latest TPOD
http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2012/04 ... -and-dead/

Also, two effective TPODs on the larger issue by Tom Wilson:
Part one: http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2009/ ... ations.htm
Part two: http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2009/ ... ations.htm

[quantauniverse]

I like how the mass measurements are found to equal the stars, gas, and dust. All of these are plasmas, and interacting to shape the galaxy. The DUST found in the equal mass measurement region, lacks an electromagnetic phenomena explanation on how stars form, and why the galaxy is shaped as it is without dark matter. A 10 light year long dusty plasma filament containing new forming stars, is anchored to the Taurus molecular cloud, and is only 450 light years away from earth. Dusty filaments with stars forming only glow in 1 mm light, so many smaller ones are undetectable. Plasma forces are neglected by gravity dark matter theorists who deceive the world with wasted funds on a dead dark matter science.
http://holographicgalaxy.blogspot.com/2 ... quals.html

[MGmirkin]

I'll add a few more to the burgeoning list...

Most recent report:

(Do Milky Way's Companions Spell Trouble for Dark Matter?)
http://www.ras.org.uk/news-and-press/21 ... ark-matter

(The VPOS: a vast polar structure of satellite galaxies, globular clusters and streams around the Milky Way)
http://arxiv.org/abs/1204.5176

(The Vast Polar Structure around the Milky Way )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUwxv-WGfHM

From this press release:

"Our model appears to rule out the presence of dark matter in the universe, threatening a central pillar of current cosmological theory. We see this as the beginning of a paradigm shift, one that will ultimately lead us to a new understanding of the universe we inhabit."

----------

As Steve points out, there's also this recent paper related to the one above:

(The dark matter crisis: falsification of the current standard model of cosmology)
http://arxiv.org/abs/1204.2546

"The current standard model of cosmology (SMoC) requires The Dual Dwarf Galaxy Theorem to be true ... The Dual Galaxy Theorem is falsified by observation and dynamically relevant cold or warm DM on galactic scales cannot exist. It is shown that the SMoC is incompatible with a large set of other extragalactic observations."

----------

Report from a week or so prior:

(Serious Blow to Dark Matter Theories? -- New study finds mysterious lack of dark matter in Sun’s neighbourhood)
http://www.eso.org/public/news/eso1217/

(Kinematical and chemical vertical structure of the Galactic thick disk.
II. A lack of dark matter in the solar neighborhood)
http://arxiv.org/abs/1204.3924
http://www.eso.org/public/archives/rele ... so1217.pdf

From that week's press release:

“The amount of mass that we derive matches very well with what we see — stars, dust and gas — in the region around the Sun,” says team leader Christian Moni Bidin (Departamento de Astronomía, Universidad de Concepción, Chile). “But this leaves no room for the extra material — dark matter — that we were expecting. Our calculations show that it should have shown up very clearly in our measurements. But it was just not there!”

“Despite the new results, the Milky Way certainly rotates much faster than the visible matter alone can account for. So, if dark matter is not present where we expected it, a new solution for the missing mass problem must be found. Our results contradict the currently accepted models. The mystery of dark matter has just become even more mysterious."

----------

And then there's this from back in the day (2010):

(Dark matter claims thrown into doubt by new data)
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18839

(First Dark Matter Results from the XENON100 Experiment)
http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v105/i13/e131302
http://arxiv.org/abs/1005.0380

Xenon 100 observations find no candidate DM detections, despite being more sensitive than DAMA & CDMS-II.

Though fellow researchers got their knickers in a twist about it...

(Dark matter 'no result' comes under fire)
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/42554

Sure, the Xenon 100 report was after only an initial 11 day run. But still, 0 detection candidates is 0 detection candidates.

And then about 90+ days later:

(Dark Matter Results from 100 Live Days of XENON100 Data)
http://arxiv.org/abs/1104.2549

"In 100.9 live days of data, acquired between January and June 2010, no evidence for dark matter is found."

So, basically the same result in 100 days as in the 11-day trial run... No evidence of dark matter.

----------

All signs point to "Mister, when you're from Skid Row, ain't no such thing!"
(Bonus points if you know what movie that's from, without looking... )

As far as I'm concerned, Dark Matter is seeming pretty well falsified.

Time to revisit Peratt's work on fully electrodynamic PIC simulations. Rotation curves of galaxies come naturally therefrom, no CDM required. Newer, bigger, better simulations required. I'd love to see them re-run with greater spatial and temporal resolution... Still, very suggestive. And that was back in the mid-80's. The Standard Model has a few decades of playing catch-up to do...

http://plasmauniverse.info/papers.html

(Evolution of the Plasma Universe: I. Double Radio Galaxies, Quasars, and Extragalactic Jets)
http://plasmauniverse.info/downloadsCos ... 6TPS-I.pdf

(Evolution of the Plasma Universe: II. The Formation of Systems of Galaxies)
http://plasmauniverse.info/downloadsCos ... TPS-II.pdf

Just my 2c worth...

Best,
~Michael Gmirkin

[MGmirkin]

This story will be swept under their dusty rug.

There's no room left, there's already a literal mountain of "dust" under it. Some of it very ruddy, if you know what I mean. Heh.

Best,
~Michael Gmirkin

[quantauniverse]

Pawlowski at Univ. of Bonn has discovered that the milky way's disk is bipolar aligned with satellite galaxies, globular clusters, star clusters, and loose gases and dust. This forms a complex bipolar structure that begins about 33,000 light years from the galactic center, and extends out beyond 1 million light years. Pawlowski says "the milky way's satellite galaxies do not track a dark matter pattern, and our very understanding of space-time and matter are now at stake." Gravity fails to explain this, but what we know at the Electric Universe, is enough to solve the galactic rotation curve paradigm that plaques the gravity big-bang theory and dark matter. The universe is electromagnetic.
http://holographicgalaxy.blogspot.com/2 ... -with.html

[Dotini]

(The Vast Polar Structure around the Milky Way )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUwxv-WGfHM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUwxv-WGfHM
This video appears to depict a very distinctive pattern of motion. Would it be accurate to say that it shows a vast column or cylinder of space in which all the galaxies, clusters and plasma streams are rotating in a fixed relationship about an axis which is orthogonal to the plane of the Milky Way, and everything is moving together as one?

Could someone else take a crack at describing this video in the most succinct and conservative terms, please?

Respectfully submitted,
Steve

[jjohnson]

Note that in the video, the observer's viewpoint is what is moving, not the star streams or satellite galaxies, etc. All the image parts are a snapshot in time; i.e., motionless, and we are simply afforded a rotating viewpoint, sort of like one of those scenes pioneered in The Matrix. The viewer is like our moon, rotating in a plane around the earth and always facing radially inward toward the center of its orbital revolution.

From this video, then, we do not see the motions of any of its parts relative to one another or to a selected axis or frame of reference. Extended objects like galaxies and star streams move very slowly in humans' time scale, so sufficient observation of the parts' motions would have had to have been gathered to project the snapshot forward or back in time and create a sense of the net relative motions. If the video-simulation had included both types of motion (viewer plus contents) it likely would have been confusing. I'd have preferred the viewer's position and viewing angle remaining fixed, and watching the time-lapse motion of the stars and galaxy parts unfold over time, personally.

Jim