|
Post by Progenitor A on Nov 6, 2010 9:24:08 GMT 1
Some physicists hold that the Universe is composed of over 80% Dark Matter and Dark Energy. Yet we do not have a clue what it is! To me this highlights the absurdity of Dawkin's claim that 'we know 99% about the origin of the Universe and we will soon know the missing 1%'
Not only do we not know what it is, we haven't even seen any of it!
Sometimes the arrogance of some scientists is appropriately puctured.
It would be nice if we had a physicist on this board to answer for this!
|
|
|
Post by abacus9900 on Nov 6, 2010 10:12:54 GMT 1
Some physicists hold that the Universe is composed of over 80% Dark Matter and Dark Energy. Yet we do not have a clue what it is! To me this highlights the absurdity of Dawkin's claim that 'we know 99% about the origin of the Universe and we will soon know the missing 1%' Not only do we not know what it is, we haven't even seen any of it! Sometimes the arrogance of some scientists is appropriately puctured. It would be nice if we had a physicist on this board to answer for this! It seems to me that some physicists are loathed to admit they 'just don't know' and try to pretend that because they have given something a label they understand it. Like you, I sometimes wish physicists would come clean and just say 'we don't know.'
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Nov 6, 2010 10:16:30 GMT 1
Some physicists hold that the Universe is composed of over 80% Dark Matter and Dark Energy. Yet we do not have a clue what it is! To me this highlights the absurdity of Dawkin's claim that 'we know 99% about the origin of the Universe and we will soon know the missing 1%' Not only do we not know what it is, we haven't even seen any of it! Sometimes the arrogance of some scientists is appropriately puctured. It would be nice if we had a physicist on this board to answer for this! It seems to me that some physicists are loathed to admit they 'just don't know' and try to pretend that because they have given something a label they understand it. Like you, I sometimes wish physicists would come clean and just say 'we don't know.' But they often do so! Penrose does Einstein did Feynamn did Ross does It is only thos physicists that feel insecure that cannot admit ignorance
|
|
|
Post by abacus9900 on Nov 6, 2010 10:34:12 GMT 1
It's the same situation as QM in that they tell you QM has been mathematically tested to the nth. decimal point and that it explains so much yet they still aren't in a position to really understand it. To simply say something is 'non-intuitive' does not, in my view, mean you can simply stop there and not bother to consider deeper considerations. Basically, with some people they seem to just want to cover their ass. (Excuse the language).
I bet if you were to ask STA about dark matter she would waffle on about this or that theory without having the courage to admit that they just do not know.
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on Jun 17, 2011 0:44:33 GMT 1
Closing in on dark matter Jun 16, 2011 Within the text are imbedded two interviews with "the prolific Fermilab theorist Dan Hooper" who in the first explains what 'Dark-matter' is and its detection. In the second the results of detection attempts. physicsworld.com/cws/article/indepth/46286StuartG
|
|
|
Post by skeptic on Dec 31, 2011 15:32:10 GMT 1
72% dark energy which is based on an idea that was used to explain why the maths and observations of expansion did not add up. The idea is that DE suddenly became more powerful several billion years ago.
24% dark matter in that scientists believed they knew every single thing about galaxies and that with the BELIEVED rotation speed of stars in said galaxies, they should head out of the galaxies unless some invisible matter or force were holding them in place.
Like the christian god, DM does whatever is required of it without anyone having a clue as to what it is or where it is.
Look at any picture of a spiral galaxy and tell me that it is not conventional "light matter" alone that is in control of it.
|
|
|
Post by striker16 on Dec 31, 2011 22:55:20 GMT 1
Some physicists hold that the Universe is composed of over 80% Dark Matter and Dark Energy. Yet we do not have a clue what it is! To me this highlights the absurdity of Dawkin's claim that 'we know 99% about the origin of the Universe and we will soon know the missing 1%' Not only do we not know what it is, we haven't even seen any of it! Sometimes the arrogance of some scientists is appropriately puctured. It would be nice if we had a physicist on this board to answer for this! Dark matter has been 'deduced' to exist based on the fact that the rotational speed of stars at the periphery of galaxies are travelling too fast to be held in place by the known gravitational force of conventional matter. Therefore, there has to exist extra mass in universe that cannot be directly observed - this is why it is called 'dark matter.'
|
|
|
Post by skeptic on Jan 1, 2012 11:20:39 GMT 1
If DM exists, it outmasses Light Matter by six times. Galaxies surely must be where LM is rather than just randomly scattered throughout the universe so we should see evidence of it, as in misshapen galaxies whose shapes cannot be accounted for by the matter we see.
Some claim DM is in the halo of a galaxy, so with DM far outmassing LM, conventional matter will go where the DM is so we would see many, even most galaxies as doughnut shapes rather than spiral galaxies.
In reality, DM should be in every mass in the universe, being incorporated when matter first started forming into larger pieces and moons and planets and even stars since it reacts gravitationally. And yet we can find no evidence of this.
In fact there is no evidence of DM anywhere. Just some things we cannot yet explain which are just waved away as it must be DM. Now go away. This is not science.
|
|