I'm curious what it takes to wake up the mainstream?

[Michael Mozina]

I've been involved in the EU/PC community now for a llittle over a decade, mostly based on revelations from satellite imagery, and after reading Birkeland's work and Alfven's work.

I recall some conversations a decade ago about the future of LCDM theory, and upcoming 'dark matter' laboratory experimentation. CDM was really the only one of the four metaphysical claims of LCDM theory that could be tested here in labs on Earth. The "expanding space" claim, along with it's buddies inflation and "space acceleration", aren't even concepts that can be tested here on Earth, leaving CDM in the crosshairs of mainstream "tests" in the lab.

There was a lot of optimism in mainstream circles back in 2006, and for good reason. LHC was about to come online, and the search for WIMP and/or axion forms of invisible matter presumably could be tested in labs on Earth, and several proposed experiments were starting to get funded. There were "high hopes" in 2006 that the CDM side of LCDM theory would be verified, either at LHC, or in one of the other WIMP or axion lab experiments.

The 2006 galaxy cluster collision paper did seem to favor a "missing mass" explanation rather than a MOND solution to galaxy rotation patterns. Unfortunately in that landmark paper, that "missing mass" concept was turned into the term "dark matter" and it was then associated with all sorts of "properties" that the lensing data alone could not provide. The entire claim about how much baryonic mass was present in those clusters was highly dependent upon the accuracy of their "guestimations", methods and assumptions.

The past decade however has really been exceptionally unkind to LCDM theory. It was discovered in the last decade that the homogeneity of the microwave background signal does not extend to the largest scales as inflation theory "predicted". It has also been discovered that SN!A events come in *at least* two different flavors, not one as "dark energy" claims were originally based upon. These two bombshells however are almost "minor" problems compared to their problem with exotic matter claims, particuarly after the revelations of the past decade from LHC, LUX, PandaX, electron roundness tests, etc.

Every single popular "prediction" that was related to exotic forms of SUSY matter, or axions, or sterile neutrinos has gone spectacularly up in flames here on Earth. Not one SUSY "sparticle" has been observed, and not one significant variation from the standard pariticle physics model has been observed, even after *billions* of dollars worth of experimentation, and the completion of the standard particle physics model with the discovery of the Higgs.

Every other WIMP and axion experiment has come up empty too, not just LHC. It's been an *exceptionally* tough decade on exotic matter CDM proponents.

Most damning however, we've since learned that the mainstream was underestimating the stellar counts by between 3 and 20 times depending on the size of the star and the type of the galaxy, *and* they hadn't a clue where they might find the 'missing baryons" in 2006. Those "missing baryons" were found in 2012, and they were found *exactly* where their 'dark matter' models predicted them to be.

In short, there's absolutely no exotic matter necessary to explain those 2006 lensing studies, and all the lab results to date utterly disfavor the existence of exotic forms of matter.

The problem with the current LCDM paradigm in terms of coming to terms with all their problems with baryonic mass calculation errors in that 2006 paper are related to their big bang nucleosynthesis claims. If they try to simply replace exotic matter with ordinary baryons, those hydrogen/helium necleosynthesis numbers go flying out the window, and their theory doesn't work right anymore. They really are between a rock and a hard place in terms of coming to grips with their horrific baryonic mass estimates. Even the oversimplications of their model work against them in terms of even comprehending their own error. We do observe galaxies in micorwave and x-ray that are not visible in ordinary white light because of the elemental composition of the plasma between us and that galaxy as it selectively absorbs various wavelengths. In their overly-simplistic snow globe universe, the plasma content between us and any object is not even even considered in their calculations of baryonic mass!

Sooner or later the mainstream will have to embrace the realities of empirical physics, which can and does fully explain all of the lensing data, and all of the galaxy rotation curve data to date.

They seem so intent on hanging onto a supernatural creation mythology that they simply cannot and will not accept the bitersweet findings of the past decade with respect to their various claims, particularly their exotic matter claim. They've "tested" their claims, and every single one of them has been falsified by later data.

While LCDM theory might have made some sense in 2006, it looks tattered, torn and shredded to pieces in 2016, simply based on the outcome of the mainstream's own "tests" and their own lab experiments.

What's it going to take to kill that metaphysical beast in the minds of it's proponents anyway?

[BeAChooser]

Apparently THIS news:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/startswitha ... 91e0664c55

isn't going to be enough to wake them up, either. In all the articles I read on this, so far, I haven't seen electromagnetic effects on plasma or homopolar galactic motors, like Alfven postulated, mentioned even once. They're all still trying to revise the Dark Matter model in some clever way. Anything to keep the dollars flowing.

[saul]

The question is a trick one, because once you have "woken up" then you are no longer part of "the mainstream".

[Michael Mozina]

That is true I supposed.

I guess I'm just blown away at the giant ostrich with it's collective head buried in the sand routine that the mainstream has going with respect to exotic matter claims. It was bad enough that their 2006 baryonic stellar counts were off by 3-20 times depending on the size of star and type of galaxy. In 2012 they finally found all their "missing baryons" inside of a million degree plasma that surrounds the whole galaxy. Better yet, this year they finally figured out that it rotates with the stars, just like their dark matter models predict. When you add all those facts together, it's pretty much a death sentence for exotic matter claims, particularly after a decades worth of negative lab results as well

The other recent paper which demonstrates the correlation between baryonic matter layout, and stellar rotation rates in 153 unique galaxies also clearly favors and supports a "botched mass estimate" problem in that 2006 paper on "dark matter".

Whatever so called "evidence" of that may have existed in 2006 to support exotic matter hypotheses, that evidence has long since been eroded into oblivion. Those baryonic mass estimate they used in 2006 were a disaster, and they simply refuse to admit it. They will just make up some more excuses so they can continue the never ending dark snipe hunt, and they can pretend that all their falsified "tests" of their claims are irrelevant.

[Webbman]

They are gangsters.

they are awake but you are still asleep to their gangster ways.

[Michael Mozina]

They are gangsters.

they are awake but you are still asleep to their gangster ways.

It's more like a thug life.

I would agree that a few astronomers like Koberlein, Bridgman and Scoles come across as petty "thugs" by intentionally spewing disinformation, as well as a few online handles like RC and Nereid/Jean as well (assuming they are not one of those three to start with), but it seems to me like the vast majority of astronomers do not fall into the hater/thug/gangster category. Perhaps however there is a 'fear factor" when one's career and finanicial well being is at stake.

Perhaps the more reasonable among them feel threatened by mainstream thugs, but most of the astronomers I've personally talked to seemed like pretty reasonable people. I simply don't see the logic of the whole 'exotic dark matter did it" argument at this point, particularly if one is not emotionally attached to the idea.

They know for a fact that their 2006 baryonic mass estimates were flawed in numerous and serious ways, and they know for a fact that all their "popular" dark matter models bit the dust in the lab. There's nothing left standing to the exotic matter argument in 2016. Worse yet, the "discovery" this year that the million degree plasma cloud around every galaxy rotates just like their dark matter models predict, and the baryonic mass layout of the galaxy dictates the rotation speed of all galaxies, utterly blows their exotic matter claims out of the water. There's absolutely zero need for exotic forms of matter to explain lensing data or galaxy/cluster rotation speeds.

It's not really even possible to put their "space expansion/acceleration" claims to the test in the lab, but the CDM claim has certainly been put to the test in the lab, and it's been a complete disaster.

[Michael Mozina]

I took a gander over as ISF tonight to see if they'd discussed dark matter recently, and I noticed a MOND vs. dark matter thread that I thought was appropriate. I selected a few choice comments that seem to most aptly represent the mainstream party line:

Science doesn't work like that (or at least astrophysics and (high energy) particle physics doesn't).

For example, a perfectly valid assumption about a DM particle is that it is indeed sterile ... it interacts with other forms of mass via the "gravitational force" only. Such a particle is rather difficult to detect, in an Earth-bound lab, wouldn't you say?

It's noteworthy to Jean begins with a blatant case of special pleading. Rather than acknowledging that their baryonic mass estimates were worth taking a second look at, Jean immediately assumes the existence of exotic forms of matter that have supernatural properties unlike any other massive known particles. The entire exotic matter argument is based upon the *assumption* of correct baryonic mass estimates (where evidence actually refutes that assumption), and a special pleading fallacy.

When asked by the author of the thread how far the gaps have to shrink before honest reevaluation takes place, Jean's answer is quite telling:

Well, despite what's in popsci articles, DM was questioned from the very beginning (in the 1930s).

And what about the idea that the DM particle is sterile?

Jean went directly back to special pleading and trying to get the author to simply accept the premise. Typical. "We won't budge, so you'll have to, and oh, keep funding our failures anyway".

This was my favorite response however:

Argument from authority is generally considered a fallacy in many areas. It is a always a fallacy when someone relies on the opinion of an authority. Especially when they cherry pick that opinion to agree with their intuition.

That blew up the irony meter since the entire basis of the mainstream claim is based upon an argument from authority fallacy. Every lab test has falsified their mathematical models, and every study since 2006 demonstrated that their baryonic mass estimates have been a complete disaster!

We have strong evidence dark matter that exists so we will conclude that DM cannot be directly detected.

(RC's response as to how long one continues to look for the invisible snipe?)

As long as we are curious - a billion years?

In other words, they won't admit the blew the baryonic mass estimates to start with in spite of numerous studies that demonstrate they did blow the stellar counts, and didn't have a clue about the location of most of the plasma until 2012. They won't acknowledge any of the results from billions of dollars worth of failed lab tests, and they are quite content to take their supernatural dogma to the grave with them, lab results be damned.

[Sceptical lefty]

If the basic propositions of the Electric Universe model become generally accepted (i.e. that wonderful scientific word, "consensus"), then pretty well everything we 'know' about the way the universe works is wrong. A mighty corpus of scientific literature will be exposed as irrelevant. The acknowledged leaders of modern cosmology and theoretical physics will be exposed as unworthy of their prestigious positions. There will be a cascading effect through other branches of science, including (but not limited to): geophysics; palaeontology; geology and climatology.

Compared to the prestige, egos and incomes of those who stand to lose out, the truth is of virtually no consequence. I find it difficult to believe that anything short of massive interplanetary lightning strikes, or a visit by advanced aliens riding on Birkeland currents, will see the prevailing paradigm overturned in the next few decades.

I'll close with a few quotes from some people who may be familiar to the readers:

I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives.
Leo Tolstoy (I seem to recall that Wal Thornhill has used this one.)

It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.
Upton Sinclair

We’ve got to protect our phoney baloney jobs, gentlemen!
Governor William C. le Petomane (Mel Brooks in 'Blazing Saddles')

Still, I'll leave the last word to Edmund Burke:

Never despair; but if you do, work on in despair.

[JouniJokela]

Richard Feynman can answer you.

http://www.cornell.edu/video/richard-fe ... g-new-laws

You see, the problem is not to change or to say something might be wrong but to replace it by something. And that is not so easy. As soon as any real, definite idea is substituted, it becomes almost immediately apparent that it doesn't work.

It's there somewhere after the half,,, (at text)

I think most of the people allready agree, that the physics is not quite right. The only reason they accept it currently, (black holes, dark matter, etc) is that there is nothing which would explain it better.

Until today. (Actually I found the answer on wednesday, this week);
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... H_07102016

I found the way to describe the planck's constant through speed of light.
So everything really is just electromagnetic waves or photons.

[Phorce]

Yes. Maybe its just getting on with things and not worrying about "the mainstream" (whatever that is). Maybe when many stop worrying about when "the mainstream" will wake up more progress will be made. It's almost like some in EU world need to have EU "validated" by the mainstream to make it "legitimate". If one can be 100% sure of the science and stand behind it, then that offers a thousand times more than waiting for the mainstream to wakeup. Look at Cold Fusion. After "mainstream" science threw them out, Pon's and Fleischman and a thousand other researchers had yearly conferences for the last 25 years and now Cold Fusion/LENR is a promising field.

[Michael Mozina]

Yes. Maybe its just getting on with things and not worrying about "the mainstream" (whatever that is). Maybe when many stop worrying about when "the mainstream" will wake up more progress will be made. It's almost like some in EU world need to have EU "validated" by the mainstream to make it "legitimate".

From my perspective it's not about making it "legitimate" since empirical physics is *always* legitimate. It's really more about where the money is being spent. Instead of spending billions of dollars in search of invisible snipes, we should be replicating Birkeland's work using 21st century technologies.

It's like watching a bunch of drunks spend money on more alcohol while dreaming up ever more ridiculous stories and expecting me to be impressed. I'm getting tired of seeing my tax money being squandered on supernatural invisible nonsense, only to have them ignore the negative results of their own "tests" of their claims.

As Reality Check noted in that thread, many of them are happy to take their own willful ignorance with them to the grave.