/sci/ - Science & Math

>b-b-but... the experts... they said dark matter is real...
>it's like muh pokemon dark types you can't say it's a lie nooooooooooooo

We know that neutrinos are real, so dark matter is a very real possibility. The most likely candidates are either sterile neutrinos that don't reac even with the weak force or a axions that interact with the strong force.

>>14536834
>Veritasium

I'm no physicist, some someone correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't relativity say time moves slower the stronger the gravity/mass/momentum something is?
So the reason the middle of a galaxy moves at the same speed as the edges might be because the gravity in the centre is dilating our observations, the centre of the galaxy should be experiencing less time than the edges and moving slower?

>>14536834
This guy reads this board doesnt he

>>14536870
>it’s not because of [magic made up material] it’s [fairy tale of relativity]
By the way these are the same people that laughed at the idea that electromagnetism spreading through ether, a substance we cannot measure or perceive, but believe that dark matter transmits gravity

>>14536843
honestly an entire neutrino star or galaxy could exist in the dark regions of space, and there would literally never be any way we could detect it or know

I think dark matter is really neutrinos, and the actual cosmological problem is the big bang and the asymmetry of the universe.

>>14536834
Throughout the video it's so blatantly clear the whole dark matter stuff is bullshit coming from miscalculations and yet he doesn't have the balls to call it out. He didn't have an issue exposing "engineers" with his previous series. What went wrong?

>>14537413
He did shoutout MOND

>>14536834
>He actually went looking for what was never proven in the first place

This is like his electricity video where he points out the obvious and "disproves" what was a psychosis in the first place according to every electrical engineer responsible for the system he used to "disprove" it.
Professional shadow chaser.

>>14537413
>Throughout the video it's so blatantly clear the whole dark matter stuff is bullshit coming from miscalculations and yet he doesn't have the balls to call it out.
Mathematicians are more insufferable in the youtube comment section is why. Still has to collect google dollars afterall, can't piss of too many morons.

>He didn't have an issue exposing "engineers" with his previous series.
Because ultimately engineers just do what the math says lol. You can ask what you want done or tell them how to do it. Not both.

>>14537446
>engineers do what the math says
More like engineers invent something then mathematicians build a “system” around it that’s “correct” in n goes to infinity dimensions

>>14537413
>it's so blatantly clear the whole dark matter stuff is bullshit coming from miscalculations
This, it's the biggest cope in human history.

Maybe it's the ether? Maybe it's "space-time"? Maybe the superstructures that make up the arms produce a lot of unexpected stability. That last part is Kinda obvious and could be caused by dark matter, otherwise the arms would just mix up into a sort of mush rather quickly wouldn't they.

Maybe an ether-like substance that causes space-time phenomenon as well as conduct electromagnetic rather than explicitly interact with it

>>14536870
the curve is pretty steep, you'd need to plug some numbers in but I think there's not even close to enough gravity to do what you're suggesting. I know the half-time mark is achieved at about 90% the speed of light, so for the middle of a galaxy to be spinning half as fast as it should, the gravity in the region would need to average 90% of what you'd experience at a black hole's event horizon.

>be patient bro we just need a bigger chamber some more detectors and another £50 million

>>14537459
This. The math in engineering is to optimize something you know already works and to keep you from getting sued. Steam engines and electrical motors were being built long before the formal mathematical models were built.

Slapping shit together on a gut feeling is %90 of engineering

>>14536834
>popsci youtuber did more research than your average academia scientist pseud
many such cases

>>14536888
>electromagnetism spreading through ether, a substance we cannot measure or perceive, but believe that dark matter transmits gravity
And know we have quantum fields too. It's getting pretty stale with physics.

>>14537413
It doesn't matter if 'dark matter' is something entirely fictional as long as the calculations with it work better than anything else.

>>14538285
I also heard they make wooden doors air tight

>>14536834
This detector isn't going to find anything, is it?

>>14536845
Did you lose the $10,000 bet?

Fuck all of you pig ignorant retarded cunts.
Dark matter is simply a name given to a theoretical construct which MIGHT explain the observational discrepancies. Everyone with half a brain knows that. Its a placeholder being used until further research identifies the real cause. Nothing more.

Jesus fuck. You morons are like some primitive tribe who can not grasp the concept of using an unknown variable in an equation.

>>14538124
based

>>14538387
The real cause is the equations being wrong and no search for imaginary particles will yield results.

>>14538168
>erm, okay, they're called WEAKLY interacting massive particles, not INSTANTLY interacting massive particles. We never said we'd find them overnight. Seems like you have a lot of growing up to do Mr. Veritasium. Also, we need another grant, just take it out of Sabine Hossenfelder's super-determinism workshop fund.

>>14538464
Offer a working solution and I'll believe you

The amount of salty people ITT hating on anything pop-sci.. You do understand that the world is filled with people
who need/benefit from a TLDR explanation to have some feel for areas in which they're not active themselves.

Someone knowing even tangentially what particle physics says about the world inoculates them to a lot of nonsense
even if they're not educated/bright enough to be involved in such fields themselves.

You really want science to be this absolute 'blackbox' to the general population where you have to go to university if you wanna be clued in what's it about?
Doesn't that seem dangerous to you lot pissing on these popular science educators?
They're clearly serving an important function furthering overall understanding and build popular consensus behind securing funds for research.
All you basedfaced demons need to stop sucking your own dicks and pry open your eyes too see more clearly what's at stake here.

>>14536834
>muh pop sci youtuber
DM theorizing is really the domain of a small, elite group of researchers, it's not a "public" issue.

>>14536834
WIMP miracle is all but dead
Axions are dead
Neutrino DM is dead
Primordial black hole DM is dying.
MACHOs are dead.
MOND was dead before it began.

The only theories left, are SIMPs and extra "rolled up" dimensions, SIMPs will likely be falsifiable within a few years, and the last is copium.

It would be hilarious if dark matter turned out to be cold baryonic gas, behaving in a way that just eludes telescopic detection.

>>14538496
there's some magical equation y that gives the correct results without hidden variables
we can call them dark functions

>>14538611
Just curious, but why do you think axions are dead? An Italian lab reported a possible detection of a axions in 2020, unfortunately all the Covid nonsense has delayed the upgrades to their detection equipment. If there is more recent news I would love to hear it.

>>14538584
>The amount of salty people ITT hating on anything pop-sci

I hate pop-sci because it's based on modern day science. Imagine deluding yourself into an even deeper psychosis by talking more and more about it and reifying the delusions even further into the metaphysical realm. Plus it gets really really old seeing the same S0I faced clone talking about the same shit over and over and over again.

>You really want science to be this absolute 'blackbox' to the general population where you have to go to university if you wanna be clued in what's it about?
>Doesn't that seem dangerous to you lot pissing on these popular science educators?
>They're clearly serving an important function furthering overall understanding and build popular consensus behind securing funds for research.
>All you basedfaced demons need to stop sucking your own dicks and pry open your eyes too see more clearly what's at stake here.

You don't get it anon, they're too smart to care about any of that

>>14538611
They're so elite that they keep defining dark matter with every else but whatever the fuck dark matter is supposed to be. Such is the case with circlejerks.

>>14538496
>solution
Solution to what? Shadow chasing? Stop chasing the shadow you silly cat.

>>14536888
>>14538269
>"Quantum"
>"Ether"
Same shit different name, but different philosophical "explanations" behind it:

>the atomist
>"Nooo it's not the same shit it's (adds another distinction/piece/part/description because materialism), the more pieces we find the more unified it becomes...in some incomprehensible way we could never reconcile.
>the monist
>"bro it's already unified and the more names you call it the more confusing it's going to get (usually offers no further understanding)"
It's "the medium"..or whatever the fuck you want to call it in ignorance of its non-specific nature. Even the quack Einstein said it would be undetectable.

>>14538611
>>14538648
2/2
>It would be hilarious if dark matter turned out to be cold baryonic gas, behaving in a way that just eludes telescopic detection.

It would also be hilarious if said medium acted like a polarizing lens and was literally filtering the light coming into the telescope, making it a shadow that they're chasing. I think it would be so embarrassing if that were the case that they would never actually admit it and try to hide it with another cope/excuse.

>>14538584
>You really want science to be this absolute 'blackbox' to the general population
it's the opposite really. popsci is representing a field of experimentation as a field of TROOTH. popsci goes: 'this is how it is, tldr'
and worse, most popsci gives people the impression that things are KNOWN. they are DONE. this is awful for 2 reasons.
1) it means anyone even starting to toy with the idea of wanting to discover something new, or question the status quo, is immediately closed out. sure there are still alpha chads who disregard everything and question what they want to question, but we're a colony of statistics. we want more people running more tests asking more questions, forever. reducing this by any measure is bad.
2) it means that people begin to have the impression (or are reinforced in the idea they already had) that WE KNOW EVERYTHING.
dumb niggers.
we think today since we have a better idea why birds can fly, and how to manipulate electrons, that we have almost answered every question. in prehistory it was the same, except the line of what we didn't know started before understanding basic avionics. we still have that line, and popsci doesn't do what science should; approach that line. instead it sits safely within what has already been guessed at, and REINFORCES GUESSWORK.

>All you basedfaced demons need to stop sucking your own dicks and pry open your eyes too see more clearly what's at stake here.
yeah, i agree

>>14538657
I asked my teacher once what dark matter is; and he said it's just a big nothing. I have always had that feeling that it's just hyped up, I don't get why a change in fundamentals is a scared option, society has changed it's interpretation from miasma to germ, from geocentric to now, from plum pudding to nuclear model. Just accept that there's gonna be a new different interpretation or suffer like those who failed to change.

>>14538632
>>14538611
Yeah, axion DM still very much alive. I don't think it can be ruled out at all, or even in the near future, unlike WIMPs and MACHOs

>>14538584
So basically we have to put up with lies because daddy is scared of losing his power?

>we have to lie because we can't trust anyone else to stop people from killing each other even though everyone is killing each other and we are just in denial

>>14538584
Popsci is a religion

>>14538584
>the world is filled with people who need/benefit from a TLDR explanation
why does tl;dr the explanation always consistent of >my science work is important tl;dr thats why you have to give me all your money

>>14536843
Or you know, gravity
All of these theories of dark matter existing lie on the assumption that it exists, when there is no correlation or a single shred of proof that dark matter exists or does anything, probably most things in the universe could be explained with things we already know, but scientists don't have anything to do nowadays so they have to try and invent something that doesn't exist

>It's just shadows
Says the person who definitely knows for sure how the universe really works, god must have told him. It is incredible how delusional people are while being completely ignorant of cosmology.

>>14538611
>It would be hilarious if dark matter turned out to be cold baryonic gas, behaving in a way that just eludes telescopic detection.
That doesn't fit the data. The primary arguments against baryonic dark matter is not the lack of detections from telescopes, it's cosmology. Both the abundances of light elements from primordial nucleosynthesis and the powerspectrum of the Cosmic Microwave Background are sensitive to the baryon density. Both give a consistent value, which is nowhere near high enough to explain all of dark matter with baryons. The CMB constrains both the baryon density and the total matter density, they cannot be forced to be equal without rewriting cosmology and possibly gravitation. Many have tried to do that and have failed. The Cold Dark Matter model doesn't just fit the CMB powerspectrum, it predicted it years in advance of measurements.

>>14537413
the entire point of building the new detector is to try and rule out miscalculations

he specifically mentions it and interviews some italian scientist that is clearly accepting of the possibility

why are you expecting him to stake his reputation on calling out an experiment that is under construction...instead of just waiting for the results?

Guise, I know this is probably wrong, but what if gravity depends not just on mass but also on density? As in the diffuse cloud of gas would create less gravitational lensing despite its high mass due to lacking density. That would imply that a star collapsing into a dwarf would increase its gravitational strength. It seems wrong, but do we know it's wrong?

>>14539372
probably from observing gravitational lensing on different density objects

>>14539372
This.

>>14539383
Maybe that doesn't work if we estimate the mass of objects solely based on their gravitational influence.

>>14536834
What is to stop these giving false positives with neutrinos?

>>14539390
spectroscopy informs you what things are made of, and what their density should be

also, you can measure the difference in gravity on earth across different elevations, i think it would be possible to see the difference between two things with identical weight but different densities

>>14539404
Earth things are still infinitely more dense than interstellar stuff where it's one atom per meter cube or less

>>14539394
It's quite easy to calculate the event rate from neutrinos, since Solar neutrinos are well measured. You can also potentially use the annual modulation. If there are detections from a Galactic dark matter halo then the event rate will be higher when the Earth is moving into the DM "wind" Vs against.

>>14539372
Trying to rewrite gravity without fucking up all the solar system tests of General Relativity is quite hard. The fact that there is no evidence of a discrepancy between Solar System densities and neutron stars in plusar systems would point to no.

>>14536834

Hi Derrick.

How's it feel to know that no matter how rich you are you will never do anything that lasts?

You and the other science influencers are glorified wikipedia summarizers

>>14539418
Do we know there is no seasonal variation in neutrino detection rate?

>>14539424

To be clear Derrick, you don't have the heart for true innovation.

You, the Greenes, NDT, you are slaves. You summarize Wikipedia based on the work of soveigns. Congrats!

>>14539424
>>14539429

hes rich, has a family and travels the world doing something he loves

you sound incredibly jealous and need to take your meds

>>14539424
>>14539429

To be clear, Derrick, you COULD do real optimization but being a fucking stooge you won't. Have fun with Wikipedia summarizing, fag.

>>14539432
He travels the world repeating "facts" that other people designed. He doesn't enjoy doing it.

>>14539432
>you sound incredibly jealous

Not at all. Just a soveign who can differentiate real optimization from those who simply summarize. The cutest are the Greenes who summarize with curse words. "Here's a summarized Wikipedia article with the f word every few lines!"

I'm glad they are making money. Mayne their kids can truly optimize our species using that wealth.

>>14539436
>>14539442

i think your mental illness is preventing you from seeing the genuine positive emotions he shows in his videos

what have you been diagnosed with by the way?

>>14539442
>sovereign
Obvs.


Still true.

Where's Derricks unified theory? Too much of a pushy to present one of course, not like it would matter.

He's too late.

>>14539448
>what have you been diagnosed with by the way?

Immortality

U=E/S

>>14539442
>soveign
what

>>14538285
what if the calculations worked better in a flat earth?

>>14539461
They don't.

>>14539461
the arguments for dark matter are stronger than the arguments for a flat earth

>>14536834
Dark matter is a fact. What causes dark matter is an unknown question

>>14539423
Solar neutrinos are pretty stable. There is a small oscillation due to the distance between the Sun and the Earth varying over a year, but the amplitude and phase of this is very well known. A dark matter signal could have any phase (depending on the wind direction) and so is unlikely to conincide. The amplitude should also be bigger.

I don't know why some guys are aghast at the thought of something strange that we don't understand existing in the universe.
I'm sure you guys are only knee jerking at the name "dark" and you're the same morons that go off half cocked in anti-matter threads

>>14539534
its schizos/autists

>>14539534
>I don't know why some guys are aghast at the thought of something strange that we don't understand existing in the universe.
The only people who are aghast at that thought are the same ones using dark matter and other mentally retarded concepts to cope with what is obviously evidence that physics is wrong.

>>14539563
What do you mean by this? How far do you want to rewind physics and try again? What do we do with the technology that relies on physics you've decided can't be used any more?

>>14539563
what mental illnesses have you been diagnosed with?

>>14539583
>How far do you want to rewind physics and try again?
Until you correct whatever fundamental misunderstanding leads to having to invent ad hoc corrective factors.

>What do we do with the technology that relies on physics you've decided can't be used any more?
There is no techology that relies on your pseudoscientific wank.

>>14539588
GPS relies on general relativity to correct for time dilation, but general relativity cannot predict the rotation of a galaxy without unknown variables.

>>14538269
we need a new Einstein, somebody uneducated but charismatic, who will give momentum to this very important branch of science and points in a direction it needs to go

>>14539588
quantum computing, quantum tunneling, double slit experiment, time dilation of objects in space

>>14539604
>GPS relies on general relativity to correct for time dilation
And what of it? Most of the technology you interact with in daily life relies on Newtonian physics, which cannot predict the motion of planets without unknown variables. I feel like I'm talking to an actual retard...

>>14539607
None of these rely on "dark matter". Try again.

>>14539608
So we're allowed to use general relativity, but we're not allowed to speculate on why it doesn't work in all cases?

>>14539615
You're allowed to use GR the same way you're allowed to use Newtonian physics. What you're not allowed to do is invent fairytale magic concepts to avoid facing the sheer terror you feel over the realization that we live in a scientific dark age.

>>14539588
>invent ad hoc corrective factors.
i like to all that "adding epicycles" because doing so also points out that "the experts" have been resorting to same cringey tricks to maintain their transparently inaccurate theories since the dawn of recorded human history. pointing this out highlights the fact that if a theoretician was genuinely advanced over previous generations, then he would be able to concoct novel new and more powerful ways to defend his transparently incorrect theories instead of being stuck using the same rhetorical machinery that the greeks were relying on thousands of years ago.

>>14539623
The electron neutrino was proposed as an unseen product of beta decay that accounted for missing energy and wasn't observed until 16 years later. Should this not have been allowed because it's adding an unknown variable to make the numbers work out?

>>14539612
>and other mentally retarded concepts to cope with what is obviously evidence that physics is wrong.

>>14539623
>the sheer terror you feel over the realization that we live in a scientific dark age.

pure projection

no one here is in sheer terror but you, because you are autistic and autistic people have a hard time dealing with change

>>14539646
It was a dodgy bet that worked out, but at least they weren't inventing something this vague, grandiose and without precedent.

>>14539659
>It was a dodgy bet that worked out

And the higgs boson?

>>14539659
are you ok with the idea that the neutrino is hard to detect because it interacts very rarely with other matter in our universe?

if so, why does the concept of dark matter make you seethe in an autistic fit of rage?

>>14539671
>>14539667
>all this pathetic deflection
So how and when are you planning to detect this "dark matter"?

>>14539684
Watch the video.

>>14539691
Nah. Don't feel like it.

>>14539684
how about you watch the video this thread is about

>>14539694
How about nope? I don't care what soitasium has to say on any topic. I'm talking to (You). Are you telling me you have nothing to say on it besides what you just heard in a soitasium video?

>>14539684
what mental illness were you diagnosed with as a child

>what mental illness were you diagnosed with as a child
It seethes.

>>14539696
why do you have nothing to say on it besides what veritasium didnt say about it?

>>14539702
So how and when are you planning to detect this "dark matter"? Notice how you're forced to deflect. :^)

>>14539704
Well, if I had to, I guess I would construct a machine that was deep underground, that contained a very dense crystal (not sure on the material at the moment) that emits light when struck by weakly interacting particles.

Then I would add as much shielding as possible to block out all but the most unlucky of cosmic rays/neutrinos. Then i would add detectors for those too, thus being able to remove false positives. To be extra sure, I would probably build at least two of these, in wildly different locations on earth, to further weed out false positives.

Sound like a good plan to you?

*crickets*

>>14539693
There's a detector in Italy that produces a sine wave of detected collisions corresponding to the Earth's velocity relative to the galactic plane. They're building another one in Australia to see if it produces the same pattern.

>>14538290
Kek

>>14539715
>Sound like a good plan to you?
I don't have the expertise to judge the soundness of this plan. Call me back when it's done.

>>14539773
>im a retard with zero understanding
>but im going to seethe at random youtubers and anons who are merely watching with interest
>then im going to cuck out and say im just going to sit back and see how it pans out

so much for your opinion that everything is fake and gay

>>14539588
You fail time and time again to understand that nobody claims to know what dark matter is. It's an observable gravitational effect that behaves exactly like mass. It goes deeper than galactic rotation. It lenses space. Like it or not, people smarter than you have reasons to believe something is there or something not understood is happening.
Unless you can prove GR is wrong you need to stfu

>>14538632
I've heard that the kind of axions they're detecting are different from the kind hypothesized to constitute dark matter.

>>14538584
Youre talking to societal detritus, these people only have no interest in the betterment of humanity

>>14538584
>the world is filled with people who need/benefit from a TLDR explanation to have some feel for areas in which they're not active themselves.
Most of the problems in the world are caused by teaching midwits like you how to read and write. Pop-soi is just an advanced stage of the midwit weaponization program.

>>14540225
projecting, you've accomplished nothing of note and are a bigger failure than all these midwits youre seething about

>>14539873
We both know you don't have the expertise to judge the soundness of that plan, either. The difference between us is that you're a vile, cowardly little Dunning-Kruger pseud, while I'm being honest.

>>14540186
>nobody claims to know what dark matter is
Then why claim that it's anything more than an artifact of a broken model?

>People smarter than you have reasons
Not an argument, authority-worshipper.

>>14540228
Most of the problems in the world are caused by teaching midwits like you how to read and write. Pop-soi is just an advanced stage of the midwit weaponization program. You're a good example. :^)

>>14540241
and yet here you are, a mentally ill schizo in america who is nothing but a massive drain on society, with no education of his own, unemployed and overweight, living with his parents, complaining about midwits and 'pop-soi' on 4chan

>>14540246
Most of the problems in the world are caused by teaching midwits like you how to read and write. Pop-soi is just an advanced stage of the midwit weaponization program. You're a good example. :^)

>>14540255
i accept your concession

>>14540260
See >>14540255
Also, I accept your full concession, incel. You're a sad product of American education. :^)

>>14540238
Because we do not know if the model is actually broken and needs to be replaced, or if it just needs a patch job (i.e. adding in a particle(s) that are a bitch to detect). And various lines of evidence are pointing more towards the patch job being the correct solution. Lots of very smart people have proposed new models to replace relativity, but all of them so far have failed to fit the data as well as the cold dark matter hypothesis. And as others have mentioned, there have been plenty of times in the past where the patch solution (like neutrinos patching up beta decay & conservation of momentum) has been the correct solution.

>>14540309
>Because we do not know if the model is actually broken
You should assume it's broken.

>>14540238
what did you think about the higgs boson before it was discovered?

>>14540311
Nothing. All evidence points to the standard model also being somehow incomplete or broken.

>>14540255
>>14540273
>Argument ends up as two retards trying to make each other mad by yelling I accept your concession and emoticons at each other
Why is this so often the case on this board? Do you faggots really have egos this fragile?

>>14536872
definitely lol

>>14540322
Your concession. I accept it, incel. Thanks.

>>14540325
That isn't me. Why can't you guys just have an honest argument?

>>14540329
>Why can't you guys just have an honest argument?
It's impossible to have a honest discussion in a place crawling with morons and shills.

>>14540314
so how does postulating dark matter as a possible solution to a missing piece of the puzzle make you go into an uncontrollable autistic rage, but the exact same situation with the higgs didn't?

>>14540322
the resident schizo who shits up every single thread with 'space is fake and gay therefore stop talking about it', always ends his arguments with it, and other anons use it back on him as irony/trolling

you can identify him with the smileys he uses
>>14540241
>>14540267
>>14540049

>>14540334
There's no need to be impolite and annoying to your opponent. They'll do it back and you'll end up mad yourself. And when both of you become mad the argument becomes dishonest and filled with fallacies and deflections.

>>14540336
>so how does postulating dark matter as a possible solution to a missing piece of the puzzle make you go into an uncontrollable autistic rage, but the exact same situation with the higgs didn't?
I don't know, your psychosis just lacks internal consistency, as psychotic episodes tend to be. I just think physics is broken.

>>14540337
>There's no need to be impolite and annoying to your opponent
He's not "my opponent" and there's no need to post on this dumpster-tier board at all.

>he argument becomes dishonest and filled with fallacies and deflections.
There is nothing else going on in this board. I come here for this. I just like to shit on the "people" who come here and make their day unpleasant.

>>14540339
seems unlikely that most of the scientific community suffers from psychosis but the brave 4chan /sci/ warrior that thinks everything is fake and gay and made up and unquantifiable is the rational one

>>14540336
You lost the argument, incel. I'm in every thread, beating you at everything. Look out for me. You will know me by my trademark smiley. :^)

>>14540346
No, I mean your psychotic episode where I'm supposedly exploding with rage and threatening to commit terrorism over dark matter but not other other physics cope. Your fantasy world lacks basic consistency.

>>14540336
Oh yes, maybe it is just one guy after all.

>>14540343
So you come here for the purpose of making this board insufferable to use?

>>14540354
>So you come here for the purpose of making this board insufferable to use?
Pretty much, yeah. I feel a lot of disdain for people like you and I want to make your stay unpleasant. Talking to dishonest, cowardly, pseudointellectual retards online for this long has taught me that there is no value in trying to have rational discussions.

>>14540310
Why? Yes, sometimes the model is broken, and needs to be replaced by a better one (See Newtonian gravity having issues predicting Mercury's orbit). Sometimes the model is mostly fine, and some currently invisible shit is throwing your observations off (look at how Neptune was discovered when astronomers noticed that Uranus's orbit was not matching their models, or the previously mentioned neutrino discovery).

You have to consider both possibilities when you get new observations that seem to violate previously well tested theories. You can't just assume one or the other. The cold dark matter theory is in favor now due to a host of other circumstantial evidence that has come up since the galactic rotational curve issue was noticed. So far, no one has managed to create a modified gravity model that fits the available data. Give it try if you think that is the correct answer. Plenty of modified proposals have been published, their is no science inquisition stopping people in this subject.

>>14540376
>Why?
Because if you have to invent new forms of matter out of whole cloth, your motive is cope rather than science, and I don't care whether or not you happen to hit the jackpot by pure coincidence.

>>14540365
>I feel a lot of disdain for people like you
Why? You don't know anything about me

>>14540388
What do you propose as an alternative?

>>14540388
And why is a new form of matter worse than arbitrarily modifying gravity or inventing new fields?
>I don't care whether or not you happen to hit the jackpot by pure coincidence.
And how do you know for sure that that it is purely coincidence?

>>14540394
>You don't know anything about me
Well, I know you don't share my sentiment, which either means you're some spiritually-advanced life form that finds understanding and compassion for all beings, including the low-IQ intellectual swamp pseuds who post here, or that you are one of the swamp creatures. If it's the former, than I guess you should be able to extend your understanding and compassion to my case, because I think you're far more likely to be the latter.

>>14540399
>What do you propose as an alternative?
To admit that something just isn't adding up, and keep looking for a solution. I'm not even saying you're not allowed to use the duct tape solution of introducing ad hoc corrective factors until you have something better, or that you're not allowed to consider the possibility of some magical fairydust matter for which there is little evidence, but this theory should be regarded as inferior and unsatisfactory until it's better- substantiated.

>>14540409
So you assume that everyone who disagrees with you is an idiot pseud? What if you're wrong?

>>14540406
>arbitrarily modifying gravity or inventing new fields
Show me who arbitrarily modifies gravity. I will kill them.

>And how do you know for sure that that it is purely coincidence?
Because it wasn't based on any compelling evidence.

>>14540388
how is spending years of your life logically and mathematically developing a theory, having other people look over your work and discuss it, designing an experiment, constructing said experiment, and publishing the results, 'coincidence'?

i think we know who the real midwit is

>>14540422
>So you assume that everyone who disagrees with you is an idiot pseud?
No.

>What if you're wrong?
Then there should be observable differences from the possibility where I'm right.

>>14540427
>how is spending years of your life logically and mathematically developing a theory, having other people look over your work and discuss it, designing an experiment, constructing said experiment, and publishing the results, 'coincidence'?
Because if you spend years of your life literally pulling things out of your ass to salvage your preconceived notions, and it ends up paying off, this is clearly not by virtue of your competence.

>>14540388
Lots of subatomic particles were predicted to exist before they were actually discovered, sometimes decades before. Neutrons, positrons, pions, charm quarks, W&Z bosons, and more would all be examples. There is nothing wrong with saying "Well the math says we should have a new particle with these properties, or our model is busted; lets try to find the particle".

>>14540424
why do things have to pass your subjective standard of compelling to be worthy of scientific investigation?

>>14540431
the only person with preconcieved notions here are you, claiming that this experiment is pointless because it can't produce a result

>>14540424
>Show me who arbitrarily modifies gravity.
MOND and the whole field of modified gravity (see pic >>14540309).

>Because it wasn't based on any compelling evidence.
And that somehow means it cannot possibly be correct?

>>14540432
>Lots of subatomic particles were predicted to exist before they were actually discovered
We've already covered this. Have you ever SEEN the standard model? One glance and you can tell something has gone awry there, too.

>There is nothing wrong with saying "Well the math says we should have a new particle with these properties, or our model is busted; lets try to find the particle".
On some level, there is something wrong with that, too, but at least they're inventing new variations of things that exist. Dark matter is gigacope in comparison. It's a differene of degree rather than kind, in any case.

>>14540433
They have to pass my subjective standard of 'compelling' for ME to consider them plausible. You're the one who seemingly has a problem with that.

>>14540434
>claiming that this experiment is pointless because it can't produce a result
Show me where I said this experiment is pointless. Any experiment has more point to it than endless theoretical wankery and patch jobs.

>>14540436
>somehow means it cannot possibly be correct?
Some how pulling things out of your ass means they cannot possibly be correct? You have a strange notion.

>>14540445
your posts don't pass my subjective standard for 'compelling' for ME to consider them plausible

>>14540458
>your posts don't pass my subjective standard
Okay. You don't pass my subjective standard of what counts as a person. No one said you need to have high standards. Your parents clearly did not.

>>14540456
A speculative hypothesis isn't necessarily wrong because it wasn't well supported at the time. Is that so difficult to understand?

>>14540470
>A speculative hypothesis isn't necessarily wrong
Yes. That's what I said. Pulling things out of your ass doesn't guarantee that you'll be wrong. You could be right by coincidence.

>>14540474
its not a coincidence if you come up with a theory, devise a test for it's existence, and find that existence as predicted.

>>14540441
Yes the standard model is a complicated mess. It would be nice if someone could replace it with a simpler, more elegant model. But the universe has no obligation to be simple or elegant; for all we know the standard model is actually over simplifying things, and end up being replaced by an even more complex model of reality that provides better predictions.

And I have to disagree with you on that second point; how the hell could it be wrong at any level to predict something might exist, and then go look for it? You may be wrong, or not find it, but it is often worth trying.

>>14539498
You're retarded

>>14540482
It is if your theory is literally just a patch job and not based on any concrete evidence.

>>14539684

holy shit you're retarded

>>14540518
the theory is there's more kinds of particles that barely react with matter than we have already identified, so they created an experiment to find more, while also ruling out false positives from the previously discovered particles.

there's nothing coincidental about that.

>>14540518
>not based on any concrete evidence.
If we had concrete evidence already why would we would be running experiments?

>>14540502
>for all we know the standard model is actually over simplifying things, and end up being replaced by an even more complex model of reality that provides better predictions.
You can always construct an overcomplicated model that fits your data and patch it up with extra terms as more data comes in that doesn't fit. The whole point of physics is to collect enough data until you see the bigger picture so that all of your sporadic data points coalesce into a simple form.

>>14540537
True, you should always try to go as simple as possible; and then no further. I am just pointing out that we do not currently know what the simplest possible way to accurately model the universe is, and that it is perfectly possible that the simplest working model will still be an extremely complicated mess. The universe is under no obligation to provide simple answers.

>>14540555
>The universe is under no obligation to provide simple answers.
Okay, how far are you willing to go with this excuse? How much of an ad hoc patch job should be standard model become before you admit that you're just overfitting data?

>>14540558
why does change bother you so much? this is really getting under your skin

>>14540565
Why did you stop taking your medication, kiddo, and why do you have no sense of irony? I'm the one saying that maybe something needs to change if you're inventing new forms of matter just to patch holes in your formulas, and your models look like a dog ate a textbook and vomited out your result.

>>14537413
Ok, you do the calculations.

>>14540558
Until someone comes up with a better, simpler model, that make predictions at least as well, of course. People should always strive to come up with easier to understand answers and more accurate models, they should just keep in mind that they might not be successful in doing so.

We simply do not know what the minimal level complexity that is required to accurately describe the universe. It is pretty arrogant to just assume that it will be simpler than what we have now.

>>14540570
>something needs to change
>if you're inventing new forms of matter just to patch holes in your formulas

Something needs to change, but then also, you can't suggest something new because change is...le bad

you can't even stay logically consistent across a single post.

>>14540580
>Until someone comes up with a better, simpler model
Why should anyone look for a better, simpler model? The 5,000 page long model Just Werks, and when it doesn't, we just invent 50 shades of matter. In any case, I'm sure there is no better model because I spent the weekend trying to think of one and came up empty-handed, and it's not like anyone's about to give me a grant to research it further. I even heard Becky and Jenna refer to me as the "faculty schizo" once over it. You know what? Never mind, I guess the universe is under no obligation to provide simple answers. I any case, I don't feel driven to pursue the matter further, because I never believed there was a better model in the first place -- that'd be super arrogant. Who am I to tell the universe that it must be more elegant than it is?

>>14540616
how many subatomic particles have you discovered with your clearly superior scientific method that you apparently can never explain to anyone

going by past performance, all these people coming up with 'patch up jobs' as you call them, have found all of them, and you have found none.

>>14540587
>>14540622
As usual, redditspacers display their low IQ and opt to spam and derail a legitimate discussion.

>>14540626
My university professors required double spacing for marking purposes.

>>14540632
>t. university of r/science

>>14540634
I don't know about that place as I've never been there. But I will defer to your experience.

>>14540644
Don't care. My point still stands that your "universe is under no obligation" attitude is cancerous, because all it really says is "physicists are under no obligation to fix their retarded models".

>>14540671
>Don't care. My point still stands that your "universe is under no obligation" attitude is cancerous, because all it really says is "physicists are under no obligation to fix their retarded models".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandiosity

>>14540694
>i have no arguments
Okay, then.

>>14540701
It's sad that you cannot comprehend what my argument is, when it's quite obvious from a quick glance at that wikipedia page.

>>14540703
Baseless personal attacks are not arguments, reddit spacer.

>>14540616
>Who am I to tell the universe that it must be more elegant than it is?
And how exactly do you define the how "elegant" a true cosmological model should be?

>>14540707
It's not baseless. That's why it's just sad.

>>14540616
How many parameters do you think dark matter makes up in standard concordance cosmology?

>>14540708
Who said anyone needs to define it? I'm just illustrating to you the only possible outcome of your attitude.

everyone ITT talking about neutrinos is a brainlet

micro black holes. digits confirm

>>14540720
>cant define it
>cant come up with any concrete alternatives
>confidently claims to know 'the only possible outcome'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandiosity

>>14540718
A stupid and irrelevant question. Like I said here (>>14540720), I'm talking to you about approach, not imposing some preconceptions on reality.

>>14540718
>How many parameters do you think dark matter makes up in standard concordance cosmology?
That's not what the post is about.

>>14540726
Completely incongruent response. Your impotence and frustration are palpable. Get laid, incel. :^)

>>14540671
How do you know their models are retarded though? Complex does not equal bad or stupid. Hell, for all we know the models are retarded, retardely simplified that is. Maybe the actual model of reality will make the standard model look like a children's book. Or maybe there will be some neat and easy explanation that cleans it all up. We simply don't know yet, and it is arrogant to assume either way.

>>14540720
So you have no way to objectively say when something is too complicated? You stepped over that point.

>>14540741
>So you have no way to objectively say when something is too complicated?
Of course not. How is that even relevant?

>>14540732
Don't care. How many parameters? I want to know if you are even understand the model you say is "too complicated".

>>14540740
>We simply don't know yet, and it is arrogant to assume either way.
It's best to be as "arrogant" as possible about this one, just like the oldschool folks who founded this field before fags like you started to ruin it.

>>14540743
Because you're criticising the idea that nature doesn't have to be simple. If you cannot define simple then you have no argument.

>>14540745
Which model do you think that post is even about, you slimy brainlet?

>>14540752
>Because you're criticising the idea that nature doesn't have to be simple
Yes, and my criticism stands unchallenged regardless of your pathetic semantics arguments. What is the matter with you people?

>>14540753
You're criticising dark matter so it must be conordance cosmology. There is no DM in standard model of particle physics.

>>14540758
But as you admit that is completely meaningless. It cannot be defined. It boils down to "I don't like it". You're entitled to your opinion but it's not an argument or scientific.

>>14540766
Try actually reading what lead up to that post. I only vaguely mention DM in it as a tongue-in-cheek reference to the approach of ad hoc patches.

>>14540773
>that is completely meaningless
Yeah, it must be meaningless to NPCs like you. What can I say? Sorry about the void that inhabits your sack of meat.

>>14536834
Veritasium started getting red pilled every since he figured out that the greats of the early 1900s were right about electricity being apparent outside the wire not within, I wonder how long before he'll be red pilled on Aether

>>14541088
It honestly seems like he's inching closer.

>>14541088
Not gonna lie the 'virtual photon' shit feels like complete cope.

>>14536888
>dark matter transmits gravity
>t. no idea what I'm talking about but it's le bad

>>14540718
>cosmology
this is a board for science, not conjecture

>>14541172
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observational_cosmology

>>14540573
i'd rather do your mom

>>14541328
mmmmmmm necrophiliac

>>14541262
>observational
>just a single doctored image
fucking lol. is this the best you dark-universe morons have to offer?

>>14541333
If you could read the text you would find many references to observations (Hubble's Law, BAO, weak lensing, standard candles, light elements...). But you just looked for pictures.

>>14538657
>that they would never actually admit it and try to hide it with another cope/excuse.
Not just out of pride, but a lot of grants and industry contracts depend on this delusion. It's like everything vaxx related or how orthodontistry will not admit the Mews and mewing are right due to vested interest. We need some reset of science. Who wants to raid the Wuhan institute for an actually potent virus?

>>14541424
>you just looked for pictures.
well, yes. the page is called OBSERVATIONAL cosmology. do you know what observational means?

A few years back I actually met Derek. It was at some conference out in California. We struck up a conversation. He was an easy going likeable guy. Anyway he invited me to visit him and his wife at their home. I took up his invitation. When I arrived at his place I was greeted warmly and made to feel at home. His wife acted a bit strangely, her eyes constantly darting around in a rather nervous manner, as if she expected something to suddenly appear from out of a corner. But I didn't think much of it at the time. Anyway, Derek surprised me by taking me aside and whispering
"Hey, do you want to see something really cool?"
I agreed, thinking that no doubt he was going to share some interesting scientific insight with me. Or perhaps show me his latest experiment for an upcoming video.
He led me out of house and down a narrow path towards the back of his yard. I saw an array of what looked like market garden plots, in which appeared to be growing vegetables. At this point he stopped, smiled broadly, gestured to one plot and said
"Just look at this!"
Then his demeanor changed. He became very intense, agitated, he dropped to his knees and began digging into ground around one of the plants growing in a plot.
'Just wait until you see this!" he exclaimed, digging ever more frantically.
Suddenly he wrenched at the top of the plant and pulled out a carrot.
"JUST FUCKING LOOK AT THIS!" he yelled, holding the carrot right up to my face and staring intensely at me. I noticed he was sweating profusely. His eyes were bright, the pupils dilated. His hands were caked with dirt, as was the carrot.
Then suddenly, without even brushing the dirt off, he thrust the carrot into his mouth and began chewing it furiously. In between gulps I could hear him muttering
"Oh God...oh fuck, yes! Yes...fuck...yes...fuck!"
Then once he had completely consumed the carrot he suddenly became all very calm and professional. Just like you see him on his videos.
"Carrots are very good for you," he said.

>>14541466
You think "observational" means "pictures on Wikipedia"?.

>>14541474
no, i don't. what do you think observational means?

>>14536870
Except some galaxies lack the gravity excess phenomenon.

Isn't DAMA/LIBRA fake and gay?
Their data, pipeline, and analyses were never made fully public, they are doing a type of error correction that can produce periodic data out of noise, and they failed to replicate twice.
Why would a second fake and gay detector in Australia change anything?

>>14541472
Continued.
Then Derek led me back inside his house. His wife was in the kitchen, busy, presumably making dinner.. We sat at the table. It was then I noticed the the table cloth was decorated with pictures of carrots. I looked up and saw Derek was staring at me with small, intent, beady eyes. He was perspiring lightly.
"Would you like a drink?" he asked
Without waiting for my answer he leaped up from the table with a sort of a hop and went into the kitchen.
I took the opportunity to look around the room. What immediately struck me was the decor. The wall paper had pictures of carrots on it, exactly the same as the table cloth. There were a few framed pictures hanging up. They were pictures of carrots. On the bookshelf there were not books but instead a collection of small objects. Small sculptures of carrots. Every single one.
I was going to get up to take a closer look but was interrupted by Derek coming back. He passed me a tall frosted glass with an orange liquid inside.
"Carrot juice!" he said by way of explanation, "Its very good. For you." He said it exactly like that, and then gave a rather shrill laugh. I took a sip. It was indeed carrot juice. I quietly hoped that the carrots had at least been thoroughly washed before being juiced.
Derek consumed all his juice in one straight gulp. A small dribble of the juice ran down the side of his mouth. He stood there, breathing heavily, staring at me intently and beaming with apparent joy.
"Oh look, dinner is ready!" he said, as his wife came over in very slow nervous steps carrying a large steaming platter covered with a silver lid. "Let's sit and eat!"
We took our places. As his wife began to lay the platter on the table, she stumbled slightly. Derek shot her what is the probably the most vile look of pure hatred I have ever seen on a man's face. His wife corrected her balance, twittered her apologies quickly, and managed to set the food down without incident.

>>14540231
Did someone forget to take their meds?

>>14542442
Probably you, since you're objectively delusional.

>>14541424
If you read the text, you'd find no references to observations of redshift quantization even though redshift quantization is an observed fact of cosmology.
all references to redshift quantization are avoided because redshift quantization is inconsistent with the most popular cosmological ideas. when observations of reality are neglected in order to preserve a theory, its no longer science, its mental illness.

>>14542412
At this point Derek's wife moved back from the table. I assumed she was going to fetch some plates and cutlery, for there were none on the table. To my surprise she now hurriedly exited through the entrance door, and began running down the drive.
"She will not be joining us for dinner," said Derek.
Then he suddenly reared up and reached across the table, bringing his hand swinging violently across to smack off the lid on the dinner platter. There lay a pile of hot steaming carrots. Derek now threw himself onto the table with his full weight and shoved his face directly into the pile of carrots. He began feeding furiously. He moved his hands around to either side of the carrots, cupping them, and then pushing them towards his face, channeling them straight into his mouth. It was frenzied gorging. He moved his head back and forth rapidly, his jaws working at a frantic pace, his sharp white teeth flashing. His spittle and small pieces of carrots flew everywhere, scattering across the table and onto the floor. One piece of carrot hit me on the face. All the time he kept up a sort of moaning sound which was occasionally punctuated with the odd gasp for air and small exclamations of delight.
"GOD!"
"FUCK!"
Very soon the pile of cooked carrots had been whittled down until only a few mushy fragments remained.
"Waste not, want not!' yelled Derek, and he then immediately began hovering up the scattered food with his mouth. First off the table and then off the floor. I hurriedly flicked the piece of carrot which had landed on my face into the air. Derek saw this and immediately leapt up and caught the piece deftly in his mouth. He smiled broadly and gave me a wink. Derek then resumed his hovering and finally finished by giving the whole area a through sniff down, ensuring that not one scrap of carrot had escaped his attention. He went so far as to ask me to move so he could sniff under my seat. At last he seemed satisfied there was no more carrot to be had.

>>14542454
Prediodic redshifts are quite dead as a field. They are absolutely not a fact. They were "detected" in the 70's when spectroscopic samples of quasars were measured in hundreds. Now the samples are hundreds of thousands and yet this periodicity has vanished.

Funnily enough now that the data are of sufficient quality it is possible to see spurious "periodicity" caused by the selection and completeness. Quasars have to be selected with their photometric colors, because they look just like normal stars. This introduces a bias. There is also a bias caused by the redshifts at which strong emission lines are in the visible, where it's much easier to measure a redshift. When these selection effects are accounted for with there is no periodicity.

https://arxiv.org/abs/0712.3833
https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2007AJ....134..102S/abstract

Furthermore there is no evidence of any kind of intrinsic redshift as suggested by Arp, as an explanation periodic redshift.

https://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0506366

Redshift periodicity is the effect of people doing shitty statistics.

>>14538387
>observational discrepancies

Renounce ideological formulas and said discrepancies disappear.

>>14539424
>never do anything that lasts?

Like what, find dark matter?

>>14536870
>but doesn't relativity say time moves slower the stronger the gravity/mass/momentum something is
according to general relativity, the effect is only noticeable in the proximity of dense bodies, such as neutron stars or black holes.
Galaxies themselves are way too rarefied for the effect being the cause of discrepancies between the observed mass and the inferred mass from rotation curves

>>14542466
That's really interesting. I had no idea he liked carrots so much.

I will die before anyone convinces me dark matter and dark energy are real.

>>14542773
I don't know why you don't choose part of physics that is actually controversial.

>>14542789
It just doesn't add up, simple as.

>>14542797
People probably thought curvature in 4 dimensions probably didn't 'add up' as an explanation for the orbit of Mercury, either.

>>14542762
Dude, next time you watch one of his videos pay careful attention to his front teeth.

>>14536843
>>14536899
neutrino bros... i don't feel so good... i can't create an stable massive structure because i keep changing...

>>14537446
>his electricity video
That was pure clickbaity obfuscation. He's a youtuber, not a scientist.

>>14538387
>Dark matter is simply a name given to a theoretical construct
Yeah, a much more honest and decent youtuber explains it here,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yX3oklDguyU

>>14538673
Holy shit print this post on a t shirt for me

>>14542683
what is it about black holes that makes them the number one most popular popsci topic of discussion amongst the brainlet soience fangoys?
is it the comic bookish aspects of the spectacular, unrealistic and completely non disprovable conjectures which go along with the topic that make black holes so popular amongst the scientist posers and wannabes?

>>14542867
>That was pure clickbaity obfuscation.
To a degree, it was more so a filmed version of an average Joe finally putting the pieces together and denying the currently understood mechanics of how "electricity the hertzian waveform" functions. Without the conditions for it to function "already being there", the electric current doesn't occur. Anyone could have come to this conclusion had they understood how a generator/motor works and why the lines are already there on the side of the road. There really is nothing at all "traveling" in the conventional sense through a solid copper/aluminum line. The magnets really aren't connected to the wires and *somehow* that energy is still being transmitted from point A to B. Somehow these magnets sill have an "ab-extra" magnitude that isn't actually physical.
The wires, the dielectrics are just basically just a conductor of those fields that are synchronized to perturb at a rate that induces "electricity". Generators even have to be synchronized hundreds of miles apart for this waveform to maintain coherency so that it doesn't destroy wires down the line with resistance due to changes in the field.

>>14543449
>what is it about black holes that makes them the number one most popular popsci topic of discussion amongst the brainlet soience fangoys?
probably because they're one of the most extreme manifestations of physics, and for some reason they're still regarded as "mysterious", which props up their popularity even if it isn't true anymore. We know more of them than we know of several kinds of neutron stars
>is it the comic bookish aspects of the spectacular, unrealistic and completely non disprovable conjectures which go along with the topic
such as? I'm curious what you're referring to

>>14538387
Just like /lit/ doesn't read, /sci/ doesn't care about, study, or understand science.

>>14543621
You are replying to a retarded copy pasta. Some person (or perhaps bot) likes to post it whenever someone mentions black holes.

>>14543621
>such as?
"yes"
>I'm curious what you're referring to
"yes". Just use you imagination when discussing things that don't exist.

>>14543967
It is possibly the best copy pasta ever conjured on /sci/. Props to whoever made it

Veritasium continues to btfo /sci/
he keeps winning. you guys are pathetic

>>14543967
that makes sense, it was barely related to my post anyway

>>14536834
I actually enjoy his videos but you basedfucks shilling his shit every week automatically triggers my memories of every retarded thing he's done or stated and flaws in his persona.

>>14544055
you WILL cringe when he makes a shot of himself staring at nothing for cinematic effect and you WILL hate it

>>14536843
>>14536845
Is the dark matter in the room with us right now?

>>14537446
>Mathematicians
Physishits aren't mathematicians sweaty

>>14544113
>Physishits aren't mathematicians sweaty
Explain the difference if you wouldn't mind?

>>14544109
>Is the dark matter in the room with us right now?
most likely, yes

veritaseum is a fucking clown

>>14544208
He's a rich and popular clown, while you are posting on 4chan, which makes you a bigger clown, along with me and everyone else here.

>>14539291
>why are you expecting him to stake his reputation on calling out an experiment that is under construction...instead of just waiting for the results?
good take

>>14544142
>dark matter is 95% of all matter
>also there is no dark matter in our solar system, all planetary orbits are predicted only based on their tangible, normal matter masses
>also the universe is isotropic and the anthropic principle, etc

>>14544109

Yes, there is a plank-sized primordial black hole in the room right now.

>>14544387
Most of the cold dark matter hypothesis propose that dark matter is thinly but fairly evenly spread throughout our galaxy (and most other galaxies). The total amount of dark matter within our solar system under these proposals would only amount to the mass of a small asteroid, explaining why we can accurately predict the movement of objects within our solar system using the just the visible mass. Now remember that the volume of space between the stars is gigantic compared to the size of a star system, so if all that space is filled with even very low density dark matter, the total mass ends up being much greater than the visible mass.

>>14544272
it's clowns all the way down, huh?

the only reason they're prolonging this charade is that it would ruin people's careers if dark matter were proven to not exist

>>14544576

>>14544563
How does that make any sense? If dark matter only interacts via gravity, wouldn't you expect it to accumulate in gravity wells, like solar systems?

>>14544614
what a nice quote from author Alan Moore, huh?
he was warning about the risks disenfranchising people from society causes, especially their leaning into far-right terrorism, remember this was the historical period that culminated with the oklahoma city bombing, the most deadly rorschach-y thing to be perpetrated irl
but you people looked at rorschach and went "wow so kewl, just like me", completely missing the point, go figure
the clown woeld exist and it's being brought about by you people, you're the clowns
>b-but muh bigger clowns!!
doesn't make you less than a clown, you still fully are

>>14544619
Same reason the dark matter halos seem to be much more spread out than the galaxies at their centers
Baryonic matter is able to lose kinetic energy and be trapped by shallow gravity wells, whereas almost all dark matter maintains escape velocity for stellar gravity wells

>>14544629
no one cares about comics lole

>>14541677

>>14544619
>wouldn't you expect it to accumulate in gravity wells, like solar systems
it effectively interacts only through gravity, so it's like a pressureless gas: it doesn't feel friction so it doesn't really infall in gravity wells in the same way that hydrogen clouds do

>>14538584
>You really want science to be this absolute 'blackbox' to the general population where you have to go to university if you wanna be clued in what's it about?
Unironically yes.

>>14544399
I don't know how to tell you that all particles are black holes. Density increases with fundamental particles, ensuring that quantum gravity is nonsense

>>14537513
The cop out is that the mutual attraction in the arms and the difference in orbital speeds makes stable meta structures without pulling the matter into a ball. There's no end to problems with uniformitarian cosmological models.

>>14544576
No. Plenty of intelligent people go through life being decent, honest and productive. While such a person might have visited 4chan, perhaps out of curiosity, they certainly wouldn't have stayed for long. The signal to noise ratio is far too low to hold their attention. The draw back is that these people tend be stunningly boring.
We may all be clowns here, laughing at clowns like Musk, but in our defense I wouldn't say we were boring. Nor is Musk.

>>14542849
it takes energy to change a neutrino, they don't magically do it by themselves.

this entire thread has the collective IQ of 60

>>14540580
Years ago I provided a better model, I have done so much since then I have purged the irrelevant info regarding dark matter, can you refresh my memory and tell me why Dark Matter is theorized to be a nessecary idea? If I recall at all it is partially due to the difference in ways in which the spiral arms of the milky way are theorized to move and observed to move.

>>14541088
Isn't electricity inside and on the surface of the wire, because those areas are both forcibly moving electrons, if there is electrical activity just beyond the surface of the wire it is because air is touching the surface of the wire and that air has electrons that are forcibly moved, if you put your hand near enough the wire, your hand also has electrons that can forcibly be moved

>>14545211
Oh Duh!! A misunderstanding of the fundamental mechanics of the Full Scope of what Gravity is and does, and how it works.

The forces of Gravity is not simply M = G.
The forces of Gravity are also relavantized or relavantiated, or initiated, by particular linear velocities and angular momentum;

The Galaxy (may have some relative linear velocity, and) has Massive Massive angular momentum;

This means the Galaxy as a whole is not simply a gravity well!!! It is a massively strongly relatively quickly rotating gravity well.

Combine that idea, with the possibility that intergalactic space has (...dark energy...meh...better to be careful and cautious than headfirst diving into flimsy theoretical conjectures stacked on flimsier ones) some pressure density that is pushing back in on the Galaxy from the galaxies surroundings.

I just remembered I solved dark matter years ago!

>>14546661
It was 80 until you posted.

>>14547135
You are referring to the galactic rotational curve problem; the stars in the outer portions of most galaxies (including the milky way) are rotating around the center much faster than you would predict from the amount of visible mass. It is also seen in the motions of galaxies themselves, among galactic super clusters. This has lead to two lines of hypothesis to explain the results; modified gravity theories, which proposes that gravity works differently at very large scales, and dark matter, which proposes that there is a very large amount of matter we can not readily see causing the odd observations. Later observations have largely ruled out dark matter being some sort of ordinary, just dimly lit, matter, while other observations have thrown a giant monkey wrench at the modified gravity theories - particularly areas where gravitation lensing does not match the visible matter, and a handful of dwarf galaxies whose orbits and motions do match what standard gravity models predict for their amount of visible matter. That is why the cold dark matter hypothesis, that there is some sort of particle(s) like neutrinos, only more of a bitch to detect, causing the odd observations, is in favor.

>>14547355
Ok how about this; >>14547197
Plus:

Intergalactic space is a material medium composed of some substsnce and it is elastic; just as the gravity medium stars and planets make wells in is substantial medium that is elastic.

When a star moves through intersteller space, that is to say, the gravity medium, it displaces the gravity medium (this is the meaning of the term gravity well, or warping); there is no reason to assume after the star passes point D in space and Is now located a million miles away at point Z; that the geometry of spacetime/gravity medium is equal at point D now as it was when the star was at point D; in fact there is better reason to suppose precisely otherwise;

Now that gravity field geometry at point D at the time the star that made such, is at point Z; likely returns to equilibrium state it was in when that star was at point A before it got to point D. (Like a boat makes wakes and waves in a locale of water, which then after time the boat leaves, that area returns to equilibrium).

There is a forceful pressure involved with the medium sealing its well to equilibrium;

Possibly it is the material of the gravity medium forcefully pressurefully sealing the well in the intergalactic gravity medium made by the Galaxy itself, seeking to close the Galaxy sized hole, toward equilibrium, that is an inward pushing force into the Galaxy, that as the spiral arms are compelled to fling outward, intergalactic equilibrium seeking gravity medium is pushing them back inward. Possibly also contributing torque to the central supermassive black hole.

>>14536838
criminally underrated post

>>14547197
>>14547424
Respond to these, if you will

>>14547771
I will in a little bit, from what I see they look promising

>>14547771
Holy shit I think this is actually it, shouldn't be that surprising but I should be able to feel a little jolt of pride yes, some people are happy solving jigsaw puzzles, I can only be happy solving the largest (and smallest) most mysterious possible natural jigsaw puzzles made of the universes fundamental essences

>>14549222
>Gravity
>Force
Stopped reading there

>tfw I recognize at least three separate schizos ITT
Touch grass, get bitches etc

>>14541119
It really will be funny to see if he gets that point

>>14541128
They're working on an erroneous model so they'll have to keep coming up with more and more things to fit their equations.

>>14547144
Electricity isn't Electrons moving, look up Charles Proteus Steinmetz and his works on the matter. It isn't moving electrons or moving anything for that matter more so the summation of the magnetic and dielectric (something that is rarely covered in modern curriculum) fields.

>>14543532
See modern "science" would tell you its "virtual photons" moving causing so called electrons to slip and slide down the wire while blinking in and out of existence

>>14549989
But magnetism moves electrons; a magnet will drag another magnet to it.

That is magnetism moving electrons.

I thought alternating current was taking s magnet and moving it back and forth st one end of a wire; which makes the electrons at that end move back and forth, which makes the electrons next to them move back and forth, so on down the line?

Do bosons have anti-particles?

>>14550542
There's no such thing as anti particles, it's phsycists way of bashfully trolling due to the fear that infact biology and chemistry is much more complicated than fundamental physics

>>14549406
The sun moving through the gravity field forces the earth to orbit it. If the Sun's existence and motions did not force the earth to follow it, the earth would not be forced to follow the sun, this is called gravity

>>14550637
its not a matter of which disciple is more complicated, only which is more worthwhile. by that measure physics is nowhere near biology and chemistry, never has been and never will be.
that being said, i sure would like to meet an anti-moron one day. unfortunately particle accelerators can't seem to generate anything other than it's anti-particles, in quantity.

>>14550660
Um.. ok...?

The idea of anti particles seems so unnessecary. Seems psychotic, rediculous. You smash a bunch of electrons at near light speed, and some of them turn left instead of right? You can detect the continumn of activity of their secondary colliision, and there is a point you can no longer detect them; so you put these ideas together and say; particles exist that are the same but opposite of all particles, and if they touch they both disapear.

>>14550818
Just because something seems "unnecessary" does not mean it is not real. While you can use a particle accelerator to create antimatter, it is fully possibly to slow it down and store it for short periods using magnetic fields.

Also, certain radioactive materials emit positrons as part of their decay; this is used for medical imaging with PET (Positron Emissions Topography) scans.

>>14550818
they don't even understand how ordinary, everyday regular magnets work, yet they somehow or other leap to the conclusion that they are going to unlock the secrets of the universe somehow or other.
learn to walk before you try running.

>>14550922
Ok so, the nucleus is decaying, a proton and neutron come apart, and a positron is emitted?

What if the positron is just a proton?
Or a proton forced to have a particular spin due to its ejection from the nucleus?
Or a proton or neutron that lost one of it's quarks?

Come on we gotta think of more logical ideas than; every single place in the universe is prepared such that if a nucleus was located there and undergoing positive beta decay, a particle that is pretty much only seen in this example, which was deffinitly not existing in the nucleus prior to this moment of decay occurance, yes I refuse to not use the word; magically appears and is tossed out of the nucleus it was not located in;

Because the EM field is deffinitly not made of anything, but under conditions it can deffinitly turn into anything (the baloon animal of fields).

>>14549999
>>14550000

>>14550922
>>14550985
There is a field besides the EM field and gravity field, just called the quantum field? Or vacuum fluctuation field?

Imagine taking a cross section of volumes of space, how do all these different fields exist next to, on top, intertwined with one another?

Anyway. So maybe EM field is not the field, (what is EM field besides photons?) that you can bombard a certain way a create particles; like if you were to throw rocks into water, and when the water splashed up all sorts of non water objects came into existence (but for the most part quickly decayed? Back into water? Is this like seeing shapes in clouds?). So things are smashed into photons and the photons for microseconds or whatever turn into opposite electrons?

God damnit.

If anything about this is true, forget positron, just the idea of an all encompassing quicksilvery materia medium pervading the entire universe wherein if you slam into it quick and hard and certain way it breaks a part from itself and that broken piece has characteristics xyz, interesting if true.

>>14536843

>>14536834
Entering his reputation era

>>14536843
you sound like a fucking 9 year old making shit up

>>14538611
>WIMPs
>SIMPs
>MACHOs
Theoretical physicists are worse than geneticists.

>>14536834
Right guys?

>>14551538
>i read pop science books and work in a lab
>that makes me a heckin valid scientist

>>14536870
the edges of the galaxy appear like a spiral because more matter = slower time

Why isn’t it just the uncalculated kinetic energy to mass that would be explained by these objects thrashing through the universe at fractions of the speed of light

It seems so simple, it accounts for the tighter spirals without distorting anything else

No?

>>14552008
Yeah I said that here, plus the intergalactic gravity medium collapsing back in on the well/displacement the galaxy is making in the intergalactic gravity field/medium
>>14547197
>>14547424

>>14552008
>kinetic energy to mas
Thats called relativistic mass, why do you presume it is not used in calculations?

>>14550964
>they don't even understand how ordinary, everyday regular magnets work, yet they somehow or other leap to the conclusion that they are going to unlock the secrets of the universe somehow or other.

I'll do you one even better they don't even fully know what the sun is, I'm talking about explanations not just descriptions like "its a start etc. etc." Yet we're supposd to their word and model as gospel

>>14550147
Everything you said is completely erroneous and is once again due to the erroneous model physics seem insistent on pushing. There are no little electron particles moving down a wire, in fact even the notion of electrons existing as their presented (as little particles moving to and fro) is wrong.

Even J.J. Thompson (the founder of the electron) didn't ascribe to it being some floating particle but instead the end point of a dielectric field line.

Also your first statement about a magnet dragging another magnet having to do anything with electrons is also erroneous, I don't think its even supported in the erroneous model General Relativity Quantum nonsense either, last I heard they were saying its due to "virtual particles" I don't know where you're getting the electron thing from.

The last claim about Alternate Current being electrons moving back and forth either. Alternating Current is nothing more than a manifestation of a transverse wave from once again the magnetic and dielectric field (to put it simply). Your model of electrons moving down a wire like water in a pipe wouldn't even remotely explain things like oscillating currents and impulse currents.

You really should check out C.P Steinmetz's works along with checking out what J.J Thomson wrote (prior before his electron finding became bastardized as some sort of particle)

>>14544664
>whereas almost all dark matter maintains escape velocity for stellar gravity wells
Hey Gran-gran-gran-pa, your definition of dark matter looks a lot like 19's def of aether ...

>>14552132
Your link is outdated. The "solar abundance problem" is resolved. Note that saying there is a 20-30% systematic uncertainty in the relative abundance of heavy elements in the Sun is not equivalent to staying "you know nuffin". Of course you get your science from clickbait headlines instead instead of keeping up with the actual literature.

https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/#abs/2022A%26A...661A.140M
https://www.mpia.de/5857710/news_publication_18652392_transferred

>>14552338
Yawn can't wait until next year when they say its all just virtual photons

>>14552439
>>Scientists baffled my mystery.
>See! They know nothing!
>>Mystery solved.
>They just make it up anyway!

But sure, keep posting your intellectual diarrhoea. Obviously the true nature of the universe should vibe with you personally. This whole thread is infected with meaningless techno-babble wiriten by delusional autists who think they are too smart for dark matter.

>>14552224
I never said electrons flow like water through a pipe;

I thought they were shaken back and forth like a newton's craddle shaking the electrons back and forth down the line so the end of the wire imparts a shake onto a shake reciever

>>14552510
So what is the sun

>>14552552
>I thought they were shaken back and forth like a newton's craddle shaking the electrons back and forth down the line so the end of the wire imparts a shake onto a shake reciever

Thats still operating on the basis that there are little electron particles moving.

>>14552974
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star