Is dark matter real, or have we misunderstood gravity?

[BeAChooser]

https://phys.org/news/2021-06-dark-real ... avity.html

Is dark matter real, or have we misunderstood gravity?

by University of Amsterdam

These so-called *experts* can’t see the end of their nose. It’s *gravity gravity gravity*. Not once do they consider the possibility offered by plasma/electric universe proponents years ago ... with countless predictions that have since been born out by *surprising*, *unexplained* observations. And as a result, NEITHER of the two gravity groups can explain a wide variety of observations … the latest being those humongous helical wound, rotating plasma filaments that are connecting galaxies. In fact, not even once does this article mention the work plasma. It’s all *gas, gas, gas.*, which says it all.

[Harry]

Dark matter
Dark energy
Are terms used by people who cannot explain observations,

The more we understand who are the players in quantum mechanics the more we can predict observations,

[Michael Mozina]

https://phys.org/news/2021-06-dark-real ... avity.html

Is dark matter real, or have we misunderstood gravity?

by University of Amsterdam

These so-called *experts* can’t see the end of their nose. It’s *gravity gravity gravity*. Not once do they consider the possibility offered by plasma/electric universe proponents years ago ... with countless predictions that have since been born out by *surprising*, *unexplained* observations. And as a result, NEITHER of the two gravity groups can explain a wide variety of observations … the latest being those humongous helical wound, rotating plasma filaments that are connecting galaxies. In fact, not even once does this article mention the work plasma. It’s all *gas, gas, gas.*, which says it all.

I think it's actually a bit more complicated by the fact that astronomers keep irrationally asserting that they've already "found" all the normal matter in our galaxy/universe when in fact they're "discovering" massive amounts of new mass all the time. Case in point:

https://www.wowktv.com/weather/massive- ... Nvw5J5TJ5A

In 2012, astronomer Ron Allen, a professor with the Physics and Astronomy Department of Johns Hopkins University, unexpectedly found OH emission without corresponding CO emission while working on an unrelated project. As OH is also a gas molecule that occurs in clouds of molecular H2, this finding hinted that there might be an abundant portion of H2 not traced by CO, also referred to as “CO-dark” molecular gas.

[nick c]

I think it's actually a bit more complicated by the fact that astronomers keep irrationally asserting that they've already "found" all the normal matter in our galaxy/universe when in fact they're "discovering" massive amounts of new mass all the time.

The amount of matter necessary needs to be very large and located in positions which can explain the observations. The answer to these anomalous observations does not lie in finding "hidden" matter in order to preserve the 'gravity only' paradigm.
Discovering new mass does not solve the problem. If there was enough normal (non dark) matter than it would form into nebular clouds and stars. Mainstream would love to find "hidden" matter. Galactic spiral form, rotation, and motion has been a thorn in their sides for decades.

https://www.plasmauniverse.info/downloa ... ctures.pdf
http://www.ptep-online.com/2018/PP-53-01.PDF
https://www.holoscience.com/wp/grey-mat ... rk-matter/
https://www.haltonarp.com/articles

[BeAChooser]

The answer to these anomalous observations does not lie in finding "hidden" matter in order to preserve the 'gravity only' paradigm.
Discovering new mass does not solve the problem. If there was enough normal (non dark) matter than it would form into nebular clouds and stars. Mainstream would love to find "hidden" matter. Galactic spiral form, rotation, and motion has been a thorn in their sides for decades.

I agree. While I'm sure that Michael is right about there being much unaccounted for matter, finding even double the amount of mass that we know exists does not eliminate the problem the mainstream has ... they would still be calling on their gnomes to fix their gravity only model's inconsistency with observations. The only way to do that will be to introduce the electromagnetic effects on plasma promoted by the PC/EU community.

[Michael Mozina]

I think it's actually a bit more complicated by the fact that astronomers keep irrationally asserting that they've already "found" all the normal matter in our galaxy/universe when in fact they're "discovering" massive amounts of new mass all the time.

The amount of matter necessary needs to be very large and located in positions which can explain the observations. The answer to these anomalous observations does not lie in finding "hidden" matter in order to preserve the 'gravity only' paradigm.
Discovering new mass does not solve the problem. If there was enough normal (non dark) matter than it would form into nebular clouds and stars. Mainstream would love to find "hidden" matter. Galactic spiral form, rotation, and motion has been a thorn in their sides for decades.

https://www.plasmauniverse.info/downloa ... ctures.pdf
http://www.ptep-online.com/2018/PP-53-01.PDF
https://www.holoscience.com/wp/grey-mat ... rk-matter/
https://www.haltonarp.com/articles

Well, let me be clear, I'm not suggesting it's "wise" to try to *fully* explain galaxy rotation patterns/speeds based on gravity alone. In fact I think that's just silly. Scott has demonstrated that it may very well be that different "rings" of mass in a galaxy rotate in different directions at different speeds. It's pretty clear however from mainstream papers that they've found *a lot* of new mass in the form of hot oxygen atoms, hot and warm hydrogen atoms, etc. For instance, since 2012, we've found at least three different 'halos' of mass surrounding our own galaxy which evidently contain more mass than all the stars combined.

In 2012 they found more mass in a hot oxygen halo than all the mass in the stars combined:

https://chandra.harvard.edu/photo/2012/halo/

In 2017 they then found a bunch more mass in the form of hot hydrogen:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 111504.htm

And recently they found even more hydrogen:

https://www.wowktv.com/weather/massive- ... Nvw5J5TJ5A

Previous lensing studies (2006 bullet cluster) also suggested that astronomers had been seriously underestimating the amount of mass in galaxies and numerous studies since then have shown that not only did they miss all that mass in those halos, they also underestimated the number of stars in in those galaxies by somewhere between 3 and 20 times depending on the type of galaxy and the size of the star.

http://www.galex.caltech.edu/newsroom/glx2009-04r.html

https://www.foxnews.com/science/scienti ... in-the-sky

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way ... ly-thought

https://www.space.com/27682-rogue-stars ... axies.html

It's pretty clear that mainstream galaxy mass estimates in 2006 weren't worth the paper they were printed on, but by then their "baryonic component" supposedly "well understood" and highly accurate. The reality however is that it wasn't well understood at all, and they were not even *close* to accurate.

BeAChooser: Take a look at some of those links in this post. The mainstream didn't just underestimate the number by a factor of 2, they botched it *completely*. That now infamous bullet cluster study from 2006 was a completely FUBAR from start to finish. It was literally at total cluster f*ck in terms of their mass estimates. They underestimated stars by between 3 and 20 times and missed at *least* three different types of halos that all contain more mass than the stars themselves. They even underestimated the number of star *between* galaxies in those clusters.

The problem the mainstream has however is that they *cannot* change the percentages of dark matter to ordinary matter without messing up all their nucleosynthesis "predictions" and BA0 figures related to Planck data. Those models simply blow up entirely if you try to modify the percentage of ordinary baryons to the percentage of magic matter. They therefore just sweep all their baryonic mass estimate problems right under the rug.