Author Topic: "The Case AGAINST Dark Matter"  (Read 115 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline shnozzola

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2753
  • Darwins +198/-2
"The Case AGAINST Dark Matter"
« on: December 03, 2016, 10:05:52 PM »
I can't say I understand it, but here is the latest......

Quote
Many experts have called Verlinde’s paper compelling but hard to follow. While it remains to be seen whether his arguments will hold up to scrutiny, the timing is fortuitous. In a new analysis of galaxies published on Nov. 9 in Physical Review Letters, three astrophysicists led by Stacy McGaugh of Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio, have strengthened MOND’s case against dark matter.

The researchers analyzed a diverse set of 153 galaxies, and for each one they compared the rotation speed of visible matter at any given distance from the galaxy’s center with the amount of visible matter contained within that galactic radius. Remarkably, these two variables were tightly linked in all the galaxies by a universal law, dubbed the “radial acceleration relation.” This makes perfect sense in the MOND paradigm, since visible matter is the exclusive source of the gravity driving the galaxy’s rotation (even if that gravity does not take the form prescribed by Newton or Einstein). With such a tight relationship between gravity felt by visible matter and gravity given by visible matter, there would seem to be no room, or need, for dark matter.

https://www.quantamagazine.org/20161129-verlinde-gravity-dark-matter/
We have guided missiles and misguided men.  ~ Martin Luther King, Jr.

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4111
  • Darwins +251/-32
  • Gender: Male
  • I find your lack of hate disturbing.
Re: "The Case AGAINST Dark Matter"
« Reply #1 on: December 04, 2016, 12:59:16 AM »
Dark matter is just the new aether

Eventually, maybe, scientists will discover that the observable universe is expanding in direct proportion to our conscious understanding of our observations of the universe expanding. The more we see the bigger it gets. How can you separate the observer from the experiment?
When I criticize political parties or candidates, I am not criticizing you. If I criticize you, there will be no doubt in your mind as to what I am saying.

Offline Add Homonym

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4213
  • Darwins +421/-5
  • Gender: Male
  • I can haz jeezusburger™
Re: "The Case AGAINST Dark Matter"
« Reply #2 on: December 04, 2016, 07:09:51 AM »
When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be bleedn obvious.

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4111
  • Darwins +251/-32
  • Gender: Male
  • I find your lack of hate disturbing.
Re: "The Case AGAINST Dark Matter"
« Reply #3 on: December 04, 2016, 11:24:39 AM »
Hmmm...perhaps humans are like the hapax legomenon of the universe.
When I criticize political parties or candidates, I am not criticizing you. If I criticize you, there will be no doubt in your mind as to what I am saying.

Offline none

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3305
  • Darwins +30/-11
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: "The Case AGAINST Dark Matter"
« Reply #4 on: December 04, 2016, 03:46:26 PM »
Dark matter is just the new aether

Eventually, maybe, scientists will discover that the observable universe is expanding in direct proportion to our conscious understanding of our observations of the universe expanding. The more we see the bigger it gets. How can you separate the observer from the experiment?
If there is some debate that the universe is expanding faster and faster I haven't seen it
It seems to be widely agreed that not only is the universe is expanding it's expansion is accelerating
It's the phenomenon of accelerated expansion that needs explaining, dark energy is an explanation
Fuck the Bible, you can't even eat in it.

First I told my imaginary friend about Jesus, then I told Jesus about my imaginary friend.

Sorry Allah, I pee with both hands.

If you are going to be a dick do it in a timely manner, ok?

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4111
  • Darwins +251/-32
  • Gender: Male
  • I find your lack of hate disturbing.
Re: "The Case AGAINST Dark Matter"
« Reply #5 on: December 04, 2016, 04:40:30 PM »
Dark matter is just the new aether

Eventually, maybe, scientists will discover that the observable universe is expanding in direct proportion to our conscious understanding of our observations of the universe expanding. The more we see the bigger it gets. How can you separate the observer from the experiment?
If there is some debate that the universe is expanding faster and faster I haven't seen it
It seems to be widely agreed that not only is the universe is expanding it's expansion is accelerating
It's the phenomenon of accelerated expansion that needs explaining, dark energy is an explanation

Stacy McGaugh just explained that there is no need and no room for dark matter as an explanation for how the universes expansion is accelerating. So, now they will need to look at some of the other explanations or try to debunk Stacy's observations.
When I criticize political parties or candidates, I am not criticizing you. If I criticize you, there will be no doubt in your mind as to what I am saying.

Online jaimehlers

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 7953
  • Darwins +1038/-25
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: "The Case AGAINST Dark Matter"
« Reply #6 on: December 04, 2016, 04:53:54 PM »
Dark matter doesn't have anything to do with the observed expansion of the universe, though.  That's dark energy - the innate energy of space-time which has a repulsive effect on itself, causing the universe to expand at an ever-increasing rate.  Dark matter is used to explain why the gravitational force on the outskirts of galaxies falls off at a slower rate than the inverse-square rule.  If this paper is correct, the actual reason is because of dark energy pushing inwards against normal matter - creating a 'pressure' effect which still falls off with distance, but at a much slower rate.
Nullus In Verba, aka "Take nobody's word for it!"  If you can't show it, then you don't know it.

Offline Mr. Blackwell

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4111
  • Darwins +251/-32
  • Gender: Male
  • I find your lack of hate disturbing.
Re: "The Case AGAINST Dark Matter"
« Reply #7 on: December 04, 2016, 07:01:58 PM »
Dark matter doesn't have anything to do with the observed expansion of the universe, though.  That's dark energy - the innate energy of space-time which has a repulsive effect on itself, causing the universe to expand at an ever-increasing rate.  Dark matter is used to explain why the gravitational force on the outskirts of galaxies falls off at a slower rate than the inverse-square rule.  If this paper is correct, the actual reason is because of dark energy pushing inwards against normal matter - creating a 'pressure' effect which still falls off with distance, but at a much slower rate.

Ah, yes...okay I see what I did there. In my first post I was simply trying to be pithy and in my haste conflated dark energy with dark matter. My bad. Anyway, the article does remind me of a question that popped into my head a few weeks ago but never found the time to go looking for an answer so I forgot about till now.

It seems to me that the expansion isn't uniform in the sense that we have a few galaxies on collision courses with each other. Our own being one of them. My rudimentary understanding of the expanding universe is that everything is expanding away from everything like in the balloon demonstration. So how can it be that some celestial bodies on the scale of galaxies are moving towards each other and actually colliding? To be clear, this is not a "gotcha" question that I think disproves the expanding universe. It's a serious question for which I'm sure there is a good explanation. I just haven't read the information yet so if someone can either explain it or point me into the right direction I would appreciate it.
When I criticize political parties or candidates, I am not criticizing you. If I criticize you, there will be no doubt in your mind as to what I am saying.

Online jaimehlers

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 7953
  • Darwins +1038/-25
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: "The Case AGAINST Dark Matter"
« Reply #8 on: December 04, 2016, 07:41:46 PM »
Some galaxies are close enough together for their own gravity to be more powerful than the dark energy repulsion effect.
Nullus In Verba, aka "Take nobody's word for it!"  If you can't show it, then you don't know it.

Offline velkyn

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 16208
  • Darwins +258/-9
  • Gender: Female
  • You're wearing the juice, aren't you?"
Re: "The Case AGAINST Dark Matter"
« Reply #9 on: December 04, 2016, 08:03:49 PM »
Some galaxies are close enough together for their own gravity to be more powerful than the dark energy repulsion effect.

that does seem to be the case, but wouldn't the action of space with everything supposedly moving from everything else be enough to have prevented this? I remember Carl Sagan's raisin bread analogy and it never quite made sense to me that anything could have ever coalesced if that analogy was accurate. 
"There is no use in arguing with a man who can multiply anything by the square root of minus 1" - Pirates of Venus, ERB

http://clubschadenfreude.wordpress.com/

Online jaimehlers

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 7953
  • Darwins +1038/-25
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: "The Case AGAINST Dark Matter"
« Reply #10 on: December 04, 2016, 08:31:38 PM »
Assuming that the inward pressure of dark energy on matter was fairly constant from all directions, and that gravity had not fallen off to (essentially) zero, then gravity would be enough to tip the balance and pull the matter towards each other.
Nullus In Verba, aka "Take nobody's word for it!"  If you can't show it, then you don't know it.