# Dark matter exists: Observations disprove alternate explanations

As fascinating as it is mysterious, dark matter is one of the greatest enigmas of astrophysics and cosmology. It is thought to account for 90 percent of the matter in the universe, but its existence has been demonstrated only indirectly, and has recently been called into question. New research conducted by SISSA removes the recent doubts on the presence of dark matter within galaxies, disproving the empirical relations in support of alternative theories. The study, published in the Astrophysical Journal, also offers new insights into understanding the nature of dark matter and its relationship with ordinary matter.

From the expansion of the universe to the movement of stars in the galaxies, there are many phenomena that cannot be explained by the presence of baryonic alone. The generated by matter is insufficient to explain observable gravitational effects. This had led to the theory of the existence of undetectable dark matter, and the idea that galaxies are embedded in its spherical halo.

"Three years ago, a few colleagues at Case Western Reserve University strongly questioned our understanding of the universe and the in-depth work of many researchers, casting doubt on the existence of dark matter in the galaxies," explains Chiara Di Paolo, a doctoral student of astrophysics at SISSA. "Analysing the rotation curves of 153 galaxies, principally the 'classical' spiral kind, they obtained an empirical between total gravitational acceleration of the stars (observed) and the component which we would observe in the presence of only in the classical Newtonian theory. This empirical relationship, which seemed valid in all the galaxies they analysed and at any galactic radius, motivated the explanation of gravitational acceleration without necessarily calling into question dark matter, but involving, for example, theories of modified gravity such as modified Newtonian dynamics (MOND)."

Di Paolo and her collaborators wanted to verify this relationship, analysing the rotation curves of galaxies other than the classical spiral kind—72 galaxies with low surface brightness (LSB) and 34 dwarf disc galaxies. They produced more extended results, finding a relationship, which, besides total gravitational acceleration and its ordinary component, also involves the galactic radius and the morphology of the galaxies.

"We have studied the relationship between total acceleration and its ordinary component in 106 galaxies, obtaining different results from those that had been previously observed," explains Paolo Salucci, professor of astrophysics at SISSA and one of the research authors. "This not only demonstrates the inexactness of the empirical relationship previously described but removes doubts on the existence of in the . Furthermore, the new relationship found could provide crucial information on the understanding of the nature of this indefinite component."

Explore further

A galactic test to clarify the existence of dark matter

More information: C. Di Paolo et al. The Radial Acceleration Relation (RAR): Crucial Cases of Dwarf Disks and Low-surface-brightness Galaxies, The Astrophysical Journal (2019). DOI: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaffd6
Journal information: Astrophysical Journal

Feedback to editors

Apr 30, 2019
The psycho-babble mentality of Pop-Cosmology on display.

Apr 30, 2019
Difficult to find an appropriate reply to such an insightful comment.
Something is certainly on display.

Apr 30, 2019

"Benni

The psycho-babble mentality of Pop-Cosmology on display."

Mr. (I don't understand or believe in Science so I'll ignore the facts) Trump is that you chiming in? And on phys.org and not Twitter?

Perhaps a better refutation of the research would be an explanation of its results apart from more mindless and unhelpful commentary, Mr. President.

Apr 30, 2019
Turn the equation inside out and look at multidimensional quantum theory and superimpose that vectoral integrative energy relationship upon baryonic matter.

If it is a multidimensional sytem with spooky action at a distance.... then..

and..if it is all essentially quantum (which it is) and baryonic/newtonian is an after effect, where barayonic/Newtonian is a vectored sympathetic resonance 'bubble - echo'...then..

Basically, the problem is an ego one, not a reality one. The idea that barayonic/newtonian reality and theory is 'king' and is a fundamental reality.

When by it's own rules and acts of observation....it is not. Newtonian reality can't explain itself, therefore the answer is at least one layer deeper.

Apr 30, 2019
They only rely on gravity based "alternatives" to determine faerie dust must exist, which is likely true given it is the weakest of the natural forces. Plasma based cosmology however has no problem explaining flat rotation curves. The homopolar motor action and flat rotation curves of galaxies is actually expected outcome of galactic plasma.
http://www.ptep-o...3-01.PDF
No faerie dust required.

Apr 30, 2019
If spacetime itself is circulating to a degree, that would mean the stars are less accelerated / more stationary. Just a thought that huge mass in motion could drag spacetime with it. Wouldn't explain cluster/galaxy collisions though. Curious if someone ever considered this possibility?

Apr 30, 2019
well boys, the physics you refuse to believe in?
Are the physics producing the technology you are preaching with.

Unless of course you are communicating to us
across the ouiijabored web?

So? Whatta yah got that didn't get you laughed out of last year's Fourth Grade Science Fair?

Apr 30, 2019
If spacetime itself is circulating to a degree, that would mean the stars are less accelerated / more stationary. Just a thought that huge mass in motion could drag spacetime with it. Wouldn't explain cluster/galaxy collisions though. Curious if someone ever considered this possibility?
This is the very sort of MOND-oriented hypothesis that the authors have been trying to blanket-falsify, apparently successfully. Under your scheme, there should exist absolutely   z e r o   galaxies that do not depart from basic Keplerian orbital mechanics. But there are. A few. It only takes one.

Apr 30, 2019
Plasma based cosmology however has no problem explaining flat rotation curves.
No faerie dust required.
In order to gauge the credibility of a proponent's claim, it's often useful to find out how  m u c h  the claimant believes his/her theory can parsimoniously explain. With a few examples, what phenomena does the electric universe have  t r o u b l e  explaining? I don't mean rock erosion, political conservatism, or toenail fungi, of course. Things in the solar system, or galaxy, or universe that appear inexplicable. Velikovsky himself conceded that nuclear fusion was a satisfactory engine for driving the sun's energy output.

Apr 30, 2019
They only rely on gravity based "alternatives" to determine faerie dust must exist, which is likely true given it is the weakest of the natural forces. Plasma based cosmology however has no problem explaining flat rotation curves. The homopolar motor action and flat rotation curves of galaxies is actually expected outcome of galactic plasma.
http://www.ptep-o...3-01.PDF
No faerie dust required.

Which is a total nonsense where the author murders the maths, and a bunch of physics besides. It is a piece of junk in a predatory journal. And the idiot still can't tell us how his woo could move stars around. Neither could Peratt, nor anybody else who has attempted to use magnetic fields as the cause. All ruled out decades ago.

Apr 30, 2019
Aaaahh The desperation to PROVE that Dark Matter is the sneaky felon that is responsible for the "extraordinary effects" of ordinary Gravity on ordinary Matter. NOTICE that they never describe exactly WHAT these EFFECTS are that purport to provide the proof positive that the sneaky felon called DM has been, and is capable of interaction with ordinary Matter. You know, the Matter that you can actually SEE and TOUCH.
How odd it is that these scientists believe in the existence of the unseeable Dark Matter, and yet don't believe in the unseeable Creator God whose effects have been felt for billions of years.

"The attractive force generated by matter is insufficient to explain observable gravitational effects. This had led to the theory of the existence of undetectable dark matter, and the idea that galaxies are embedded in its spherical halo."

Apr 30, 2019
How odd it is that these scientists believe in the existence of the unseeable Dark Matter, and yet don't believe in the unseeable Creator God whose effects have been felt for billions of years.

Because we see no evidence for the existence of any gods. We do, however, see the effects of dark matter.

Apr 30, 2019
How odd it is that these scientists believe in the existence of the unseeable Dark Matter, and yet don't believe in the unseeable Creator God whose effects have been felt for billions of years.

Because we see no evidence for the existence of any gods. We do, however, see the effects of dark matter.
says Castrovagina

Do describe in detail what effects you see of DM. Halo doesn't count except as dusty particles scattered from exploding Mass.

The nonexistence of gods (plural) I must agree with. There is/was only ONE Creator, just one. So your speaking of many gods is based on human false religions. You are incapable of seeing the Creator because your eyes and your brain don't want to see. But that's fine. We don't expect more from you and others like you.

Apr 30, 2019
Plasma based cosmology however has no problem explaining flat rotation curves.
No faerie dust required.
In order to gauge the credibility of a proponent's claim, it's often useful to find out how  m u c h  the claimant believes his/her theory can parsimoniously explain. With a few examples, what phenomena does the electric universe have  t r o u b l e  explaining? I don't mean rock erosion, political conservatism, or toenail fungi, of course. Things in the solar system, or galaxy, or universe that appear inexplicable. Velikovsky himself conceded that nuclear fusion was a satisfactory engine for driving the sun's energy output.

The Electric Universe doesn't experience too much of the inexplicable, it is why it is a superior cosmology. It enlightens with answers, not more darkness and mysteries like the standard guesswork.

Apr 30, 2019
How odd it is that these scientists believe in the existence of the unseeable Dark Matter, and yet don't believe in the unseeable Creator God whose effects have been felt for billions of years.

Because we see no evidence for the existence of any gods. We do, however, see the effects of dark matter.
says Castrovagina

Do describe in detail what effects you see of DM. Halo doesn't count except as dusty particles scattered from exploding Mass.

The nonexistence of gods (plural) I must agree with. There is/was only ONE Creator, just one. So your speaking of many gods is based on human false religions. You are incapable of seeing the Creator because your eyes and your brain don't want to see. But that's fine. We don't expect more from you and others like you.

Reported. Religious BS. Take a look at numerous galaxy cluster data, including the Bullet Cluster. Greatest lensing does not come from where the visible matter is.

Apr 30, 2019
Dark Energy and Dark Matter are difficult to understand in just 3 spacial dimensions. Simplistically, as the predominant condition of the universe is a medium of dark energy, then the existence of baryonic matter (i.e., positive mass density) imposed a displacement effect in the form of dark matter (i.e., massless matter or negative mass density) upon the inertial condition of the space-time continuum. This alternative theory was previously approached in the book, 'The Evolutioning of Creation: Volume 2', copyrighted in 2011. The concepts of this theory were later expounded upon in the science fiction novel, 'Shadow-Forge Revelations'.

Apr 30, 2019
They only rely on gravity based "alternatives" to determine faerie dust must exist, which is likely true given it is the weakest of the natural forces. Plasma based cosmology however has no problem explaining flat rotation curves. The homopolar motor action and flat rotation curves of galaxies is actually expected outcome of galactic plasma.
http://www.ptep-o...3-01.PDF
No faerie dust required.

Which is a total nonsense where the author murders the maths, and a bunch of physics besides. It is a piece of junk in a predatory journal. And the idiot still can't tell us how his woo could move stars around. Neither could Peratt, nor anybody else who has attempted to use magnetic fields as the cause. All ruled out decades ago.

jonesdumb has to lie to support his beliefs, and he has questionable character so this is no surprise.

Apr 30, 2019
If spacetime itself is circulating to a degree, that would mean the stars are less accelerated / more stationary. Just a thought that huge mass in motion could drag spacetime with it. Wouldn't explain cluster/galaxy collisions though. Curious if someone ever considered this possibility?

Spacetime is but a fictional maths construct which doesn't exist in reality, as such there is nothing to circulate.

Apr 30, 2019
Paper here: https://arxiv.org...8472.pdf

From the abstract: "We show that the new far from trivial g versus $({g}_{b},r/{R}_{\mathrm{opt}})$ relationship is a direct consequence of the complex coordinated mass distributions of the baryons and the dark matter (DM) in disk systems. Our analysis shows that the McGaugh et al. relation is a limiting case of a new universal relation that can be very well framed in the standard "DM halo in the Newtonian Gravity" paradigm."

I figured as much at the time they presented their data from only one type of galaxy. The reason seems to be that the galaxy mass distributions are set by stars embedded in DM (well, duh) and the luminosity measurements are biased. From the conclusion: "This implies that, when considering different galaxies, a same value of g_b can be found at very different radii r and can correspond to very different values of g. ... it does not pose issues to the ΛCDM + baryonic feedback scenario."

Apr 30, 2019
So, good, there is no tension but a passed test of current theory and added understanding. The paper points out that there will not be much learned about DM from these observations however.

Turn the equation inside out and look at multidimensional quantum theory

Let's not indulge in meaningless verbiage, as the paper notes anything else than classic gravity and cosmology would go against the new finds.

Apr 30, 2019
Plasma based cosmology however has no problem explaining flat rotation curves.
No faerie dust required.
In order to gauge the credibility of a proponent's claim, it's often useful to find out how  m u c h  the claimant believes his/her theory can parsimoniously explain.

Good point, a theory that explains everything - fit all observations - explains nothing - no constraint can be tested. But specifically here, the article illustration is of a *non-flat* rotation curve. So either the idea - which is not a cosmology mind, no cosmologist accepts it - cannot explain this curve - so is wrong. Or it can explain any curve - so is not scientific. Which is it?

Apr 30, 2019
@Castrovagina

Do describe in detail what effects you see of DM. Halo doesn't count except as dusty particles scattered from exploding Mass.

Reported. Religious BS. Take a look at numerous galaxy cluster data, including the Bullet Cluster. Greatest lensing does not come from where the visible matter is.
says CV

Report all you want. But you should also explain WHICH RELIGION as there are many. And I don't subscribe to any manmade religion, as I've often said.
Numerous galaxy cluster data, even the BC means nothing. None of it is proof that Dark Matter exists.
Gravitational lensing is the result of photons (light) glancing off certain types of NORMAL MATTER that forces the light into a different trajectory - much like Light reflecting off a mirror and the Albedo of sunlight off beach sand. That new trajectory offers the images that we see in our 'scopes. Dark Matter is the brainstorm of weak-minded humans who insist that there HAS T0 BE something else. Without proof.

Apr 30, 2019
Dark Energy and Dark Matter are difficult to understand in just 3 spacial dimensions.

That would be news to the paper authors. They showed that DM halos can be understood precisely that way. And they point out that they have tested the LCDM cosmology which understands DE expansion and does so based on the 3D spatial geometry of general relativity.

And the book title you refer to sounds positively creationist (so is likely not peer reviewed. ADDED AFTER POSTING: A search tells me it does not even exist!? May be a confusion with the creationist Adnan Oktar's crackpot publications with a similar title. But I see someone commented with this 'book title' before ...)

I am repeating myself, but let's not indulge in meaningless verbiage. The paper notes anything else than classic gravity and cosmology would go against the new finds.

Apr 30, 2019
Paper here: https://arxiv.org...8472.pdf

From the abstract: "We show... Our analysis shows that the McGaugh et al. relation is a limiting case of a new universal relation that can be very well framed in the standard "DM halo in the Newtonian Gravity" paradigm."

I figured as much at the time they presented their data from only one type of galaxy. The reason seems to be that the galaxy mass distributions are set by stars embedded in DM (well, duh) and the luminosity measurements are biased. From the conclusion: "This implies that, when considering different galaxies, a same value of g_b can be found at very different radii r and can correspond to very different values of g. ... it does not pose issues to the ΛCDM + baryonic feedback scenario."
says tbgl

Could you provide evidence and explain how Stars are embedded in Dark Matter. Also, HOW is it KNOWN that Stars are embedded in the invisible Dark Matter. Photo links would also be helpful. Thanks.

Apr 30, 2019
"... Could you provide evidence and explain how Stars are embedded in Dark Matter.... "

No.

"... Could you provide evidence and explain how Stars ARE NOT embedded in Dark Matter...."

No.

Unless you've adopted that weirdo "super solid" woomongering of a jello universe?
With all the stars jiggling around "embedded" like cubed fruit in an aspic pudding?

Apr 30, 2019
Paper here: https://arxiv.org...8472.pdf

From the abstract: "We show... Our analysis shows that the McGaugh et al. relation is a limiting case of a new universal relation that can be very well framed in the standard "DM halo in the Newtonian Gravity" paradigm."

I figured as much at the time they presented their data from only one type of galaxy. The reason seems to be that the galaxy mass distributions are set by stars embedded in DM (well, duh) and the luminosity measurements are biased. From the conclusion: "This implies that, when considering different galaxies, a same value of g_b can be found at very different radii r and can correspond to very different values of g. ... it does not pose issues to the ΛCDM + baryonic feedback scenario."
says tbgl

Could you provide evidence and explain how Stars are embedded in Dark Matter. Also, HOW is it KNOWN that Stars are embedded in the invisible Dark Matter. Photo links would also be helpful. Thanks.

Apr 30, 2019
In search of black holes and dark matter astrophysicists are relying on indirect observations. It would seem that the measurement of the event horizon of a black hole directly would be a direct evidence. However, by the nature of a horizon, any real measurement of the event horizon will be indirect. The Event Horizon Telescope will get picture of the silhouette of the Sgr A* which is due to optical effects of spacetime outside of the event horizon. The result will be determined by the simple quality of the resulting image that does not depend on the properties of the spacetime within the image. So, it will be also indirect and an existence of BH is a hypothesis.

Apr 30, 2019
1900 data points. That pretty much puts McGaugh et al to bed; they used a biased sample (without, BTW, knowing it, so nobody start accusing McGaugh et al of misfeasance, please).

Now the interesting thing is to show how the McG data were biased. Because that could tell us a lot about galaxy dynamics and morphology.

Apr 30, 2019
From author:
"We have studied the relationship between total acceleration and its ordinary component in 106 galaxies, obtaining different results from those that had been previously observed," explains Paolo Salucci,.... "This not only demonstrates the inexactness of the empirical relationship previously described but removes doubts on the existence of dark matter in the galaxies. Furthermore, the new relationship found could provide crucial information on the understanding of the nature of this indefinite component."
So, they claim that previous observations indicating 'exotic' DM is absent from within galaxies were wrong?

If they claim that 'exotic' DM **does exist** within galaxies after all, then why haven't (at least one of) our many DM-detection experiments found any trace of it?

Also, if they are right, why isn't gravitational strength/dynamics of our solar system not much stronger/faster than is observed according to **NO 'exotic' DM** gravity calculations?

Apr 30, 2019
So, they claim that previous observations indicating 'exotic' DM is absent from within galaxies were wrong?
There has only been one set of observations that appeared to show it and those have now been controverted by their observations. They set out to test the McG hypothesis and proved it wrong.

If they claim that exotic' DM **does exist** within galaxies after all, then why haven't (at least one of) our many DM-detection experiments found any trace of it?
Nobody knows, but their data set looks much more comprehensive than any before.

Also, if they are right, why isn't gravitational strength/dynamics of our solar system not much stronger/faster than is observed according to **NO 'exotic' DM** gravity calculations?
Because there's not enough DM in a single solar system to affect the dynamics. You've been told this time and again and you keep ignoring it. It's not gonna go away.

Apr 30, 2019
@ Really-Skippy. How you are Cher? I am good, thanks for asking.

"We have studied the relationship between total acceleration and its ordinary component in 106 galaxies, obtaining different results from those that had been previously observed," explains Paolo Salucci,.... "This not only demonstrates the inexactness of the empirical relationship previously described but removes doubts on the existence of dark matter in the galaxies. Furthermore, the new relationship found could provide crucial information on the understanding of the nature of this indefinite component."

So I guess this means you have been INcorrect all along, eh?

Apr 30, 2019
The graph in the image pretty well says it all. The null hypothesis, "no dark matter," contradicts observation; the stars are moving too fast over the entire field. The "alternative" hypotheses all contradict observation as well; the stars are moving too slow at the center, and too fast at the edges.

This is pretty damn good evidence of dark matter.

Apr 30, 2019
@Da Schneib.
There has only been one set of observations that appeared to show it and those have now been controverted by their observations. They set out to test the McG hypothesis and proved it wrong.
That assumes the new observations are not also biased in some way, as the earlier ones were?
If they claim that exotic' DM **does exist** within galaxies after all, then why haven't (at least one of) our many DM-detection experiments found any trace of it?
Nobody knows,....
But that lack of detection would indicate these new claims are also erroneous?
if they are right, why isn't gravitational strength/dynamics of our solar system not much stronger/faster than is observed according to **NO 'exotic' DM** gravity calculations?
Because there's not enough DM in a single solar system to affect the dynamics....
But that bald assumption does not explain WHY there isn't 'enough'; especially IF 'exotic' DM existed within our galaxy at 4x normal matter?

Apr 30, 2019
That assumes the new observations are not also biased in some way, as the earlier ones were?
The larger the sample, the less likely systematic bias is. This is 1900 observations, a couple orders of magnitude better than any previous data set.

But that lack of detection would indicate these new claims are also erroneous?
Why? And how could they both be wrong?

But that bald assumption does not explain WHY there isn't 'enough'; especially IF 'exotic' DM existed within our galaxy at 4x normal matter?
We've already been over this. The concentration of DM needed to explain galaxy and cluster dynamics is insufficient to alter solar system dynamics detectably.

Why do you keep this up? This is the second data set this year to deny both "no dark matter" and "alternatives." Both of them are more comprehensive than any previous data sets. Hypothesis proposed, hypothesis demolished by data. This is how science is supposed to work.

Apr 30, 2019
But that lack of detection would indicate these new claims are also erroneous?
And BTW, this is a logical fallacy. You are assuming the consequent. What's lacking for you is evidence, which you are now denying. Typical luser liar denier.

There's the evidence, right there in the image posted with this article. Observation rules out both "no dark matter" and "alternatives." DM FTW.

Apr 30, 2019
My expectation is that @111LiarRC will try to lie about the evidence again in its next post.

Typically, "Teh siensetis is teh faking teh datumz. Tehey is teh lying about teh datumz and using teh algerithms to manipoolateumate it."

Just like @Benni does.

Apr 30, 2019
@Da Schneib.
The larger the sample, the less likely systematic bias is. This is 1900 observations, a couple orders of magnitude better than any previous data set.
All remote data/analyses involve much assumption/interpretation according to models used?
And how could they both be wrong?
Continuing lack of detection would indicate these new claims are also erroneous...IF, as they now claim, that 'exotic' DM **does exist* within galaxies after all?
But that bald assumption does not explain WHY there isn't 'enough'; especially IF 'exotic' DM existed within our galaxy at 4x normal matter?
The concentration of DM needed to explain galaxy and cluster dynamics is insufficient to alter solar system dynamics detectably.
But FOUR TIMES the matter (and associated gravitational acceleration effects/strength) should be readily apparent anywhere within our galactic star-planets and stellar-binary systems...IF that amount of extra (exotic) matter WAS present?

Apr 30, 2019
No models, except the "no dark matter" and "alternative." The observations are what they are; this is data from telescopes, not models.

As predicted you are now denying the data. What you do you think, they faked it?

Really?

Really?

You are so predictable. Like the rest of the denier liar trolls. FUD is your main strategery, and you always fall back on it.

Apr 30, 2019
@Da Schneib?
No models, except the "no dark matter" and "alternative." The observations are what they are; this is data from telescopes, not models.
Perhaps you misunderstood me. All analyses of data from such remote observations inescapably involve interpretation and assumption based on some sort of models for that interpretation/analysis. Hence the risk of systemic biases which afflicted the previous observations/analysis/interpretations which these new observations were meant to 'correct' for by way of using more examples/observations. It remains that lack of 'exotic' DM detection (where they now claim it is present within galaxies) is indication that something is also amiss with these latest interpretations/claims re 'exotic' DM 'existence'. As predicted you are now denying the data. What you do you think, they faked it? Neither 'denying' not claiming 'faking'. Merely raising legitimate scientific/logical questions re claims/methodology etc. Thanks.

Apr 30, 2019
EDIT:
@Da Schneib.
No models, except the "no dark matter" and "alternative." The observations are what they are; this is data from telescopes, not models.
Perhaps you misunderstood me. All analyses of data from such remote observations inescapably involve interpretation and assumption based on some sort of models for that interpretation/analysis. Hence the risk of systemic biases which afflicted the previous observations/analysis/interpretations which these new observations were meant to 'correct' for by way of using more examples/observations. It remains that lack of 'exotic' DM detection (where they now claim it is present within galaxies) is indication that something is also amiss with these latest interpretations/claims re 'exotic' DM 'existence'.
As predicted you are now denying the data. What you do you think, they faked it?
Neither 'denying' not claiming 'faking'. Merely raising legitimate scientific/logical questions re claims/methodology etc. Thanks.

Apr 30, 2019
@RealityCheck
Earlier in this phorum I had asked tbglarsson to 'Could you provide evidence and explain how Stars are embedded in Dark Matter. Also, HOW is it KNOWN that Stars are embedded in the invisible Dark Matter. Photo links would also be helpful. Thanks.'
Somehow, tbglarsson has not given me any evidence for Dark Matter existing ANYWHERE. I can only assume that either he doesn't know, or he doesn't want to commit himself even to a yes or no reply. Instead, rrwillsj decided to get in on the act and blew some chunks of her own.

Perhaps YOU, RC, would be willing to either deny the existence of Dark Matter and say why, OR say why you believe it exists in the Universe.
Personally, I don't believe there is any such thing.

Apr 30, 2019
From the abstract: "We show... Our analysis shows that the McGaugh et al. relation is a limiting case of a new universal relation that can be very well framed in the standard "DM halo in the Newtonian Gravity" paradigm."

I figured as much at the time they presented their data from only one type of galaxy. The reason seems to be that the galaxy mass distributions are set by stars embedded in DM (well, duh) and the luminosity measurements are biased. From the conclusion: "This implies that, when considering different galaxies, a same value of g_b can be found at very different radii r and can correspond to very different values of g. ... it does not pose issues to the ΛCDM + baryonic feedback scenario."
says tbgl

Could you provide evidence and explain how Stars are embedded in Dark Matter. Also, HOW is it KNOWN that Stars are embedded in the invisible Dark Matter. Photo links would also be helpful. Thanks.
Why dont you read the paper you fucking troll? Thanks.

Apr 30, 2019
Perhaps YOU, RC, would be willing to either deny the existence of Dark Matter and say why, OR say why you believe it exists in the Universe.
Personally, I don't believe there is any such thing
Who here does not want this person gone? AGAIN??

Mods do your jobs. At least zephyr knew science.

Apr 30, 2019
Theghostofotto1923 aka SpookyOtto1923 has been promptly REPORTED for ABUSIVE and INAPPROPRIATE LANGUAGE directed at a physorg commentator according to Physorg Terms of Service.

Apr 30, 2019
@S_E_U.
Perhaps YOU, RC, would be willing to either deny the existence of Dark Matter and say why, OR say why you believe it exists in the Universe.
Personally, I don't believe there is any such thing.
I'm long on record that ORDINARY dark matter exists; is being increasingly FOUND all over the place by MAINSTREAM astronomers the more/better they look with newer more capable telescopes/instruments over recent years (and ongoing). That new increasingly huge amount of previously 'dark' (ie previously 'too faint', but still normal) matter explains some of the supposed 'motional anomalies'; with the rest being explained by proper application of Einsteinian GR to NON-Keplerian matter distributions/orbital situations, the effects of which were previously not properly allowed for when the 'anomalies' were first observed.

In short: 'dark' matter is ordinary matter; being discovered more and more; that combined with proper application of GR explains 'anomalies'.

Ok?

Apr 30, 2019
But that bald assumption does not explain WHY there isn't 'enough'; especially IF 'exotic' DM existed within our galaxy at 4x normal matter?
...........it just might if our solar system is located within the only part of the galaxy where DM doesn't exist?

Ewww, I can hear the angst among those spooky Pop-Cosmology fantasy addicts......."What do you mean? Are you trying to suggest planet Earth is somehow special, that it can't have it's share of what 80% of the rest of the galaxy is composed of?". Or is it a matter of being ignored & we remain forgotten about?

Apr 30, 2019
When they start denying the spectroscopic and imaging data I generally get bored and move on.

Typical crank troll liar deniers.

Apr 30, 2019
ORDINARY dark matter exists
huge amount of previously 'dark' (ie previously 'too faint', but still normal

Stop using contradictions of terms, "ordinary" & "dark" are two words in cosmology that don't mix. Ever try mixing oil & water? Same idea, capiche?

Apr 30, 2019
When they start denying the spectroscopic and imaging data I generally get bored and move on.
.........never stop moving on schneibo, that is always your biggest contribution to discussions of science here in this chatroom.

Apr 30, 2019
When they start denying the spectroscopic and imaging data I generally get bored and move on.

Typical crank troll liar deniers.
says Da Schniebo

Physorg Commenting Guidelines

Be civil: Please respond insightfully and respectfully, avoiding personal attacks and name calling. Do not make comments that are threatening, obscene, profane, contain hate speech or degrade others. Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Apr 30, 2019
@Benni.
ORDINARY dark matter exists
huge amount of previously 'dark' (ie previously 'too faint', but still normal

Stop using contradictions of terms, "ordinary" & "dark" are two words in cosmology that don't mix. Ever try mixing oil & water? Same idea, capiche?

Not so. The term 'dark' is perfectly legit to indicate some 'ordinary' matter whose photonic radiation is either too faint or not able to be seen/detected at certain distances with certain telescopes/instruments. That situation changes as new/better instruments/telescopes become available...as is increasingly the case more recently/ongoing with the mainstream increasing efforts/findings of humongous 'ordinary' previously 'dark' matter all over the place.

The REAL problem arises whenever people do not discern between 'exotic' and 'ordinary' DM.

So please don't start gratuitously 'strawmannirg' or 'redefining' in order to concoct another of your baiting/trolling gambits, @Benni. Thanks.

Apr 30, 2019
Bit late on this one, aren't I but when I saw the title I thought it might be fun to read, the comments that is. Haven't got much to say except that there must have many observations by many worldwide observers to tell us that there is something there causing what is observed. I mean, let's face it, even if one uses an alternative theory to explain it, it still means that one has observed the same phenomena but just trying to explain it it differently. As they say 'Rome was built in a day' and it may take a long time to discover what DM is but it will happen. As with recent images of M87's smbh, which show we are capable of so much without even leaving the planet, I hope they have the same success with DM...which I think they said they would tackle later. BH, DM and DE 'hunters' get my vote anyway, ha!

Apr 30, 2019
@S_E_U.
Perhaps YOU, RC, would be willing to either deny the existence of Dark Matter and say why, OR say why you believe it exists
Personally, I don't believe there is any such thing.
I'm long on record that ORDINARY dark matter exists; is being increasingly FOUND all over the place by MAINSTREAM astronomers the more/better they look with newer more capable telescopes/instruments over recent years (and ongoing). That new increasingly huge amount of previously 'dark' (ie previously 'too faint', but still normal) matter explains ....previously not properly allowed for when the 'anomalies' were first observed.

In short: 'dark' matter is ordinary matter; being discovered more and more; that combined with proper application of GR explains 'anomalies'.

Ok?
says RC

Apr 30, 2019
In short: 'dark' matter is ordinary matter; being discovered more and more; that combined with proper application of GR explains 'anomalies'.

Ok?
says RC

I will now ask of you what some may consider a silly question: Could SHADOWS be considered as a form of "Dark Matter"? Very little or no light is one property of a shadow, and yet it still is made of particles and energy (Matter/Energy). On the planet shadows are the result of a lack of sunlight in dark recesses such as caves. In the Cosmos, shadows might be mistaken for Dark Matter due to its lack of light also.
In places in the Universe where there are no Stars or very few, whatever Stars there are could create shadows on large objects, similar to the Earth's shadow falling on the Moon. It's just a wild guess, but I would like your opinion on it.

Apr 30, 2019
@Uncle Ira.
"We have studied the relationship between total acceleration and its ordinary component in 106 galaxies, obtaining different results from those that had been previously observed," explains Paolo Salucci,.... "This not only demonstrates the inexactness of the empirical relationship previously described but removes doubts on the existence of dark matter in the galaxies. Furthermore, the new relationship found could provide crucial information on the understanding of the nature of this indefinite component."
So I guess this means you have been INcorrect all along, eh?
Again you "guess" wrong, Ira. Read the last sentence in the quote. Then realise the "nature" of the DM is 'ordinary' (ie, interacts both gravitationally and electromagnetically), not 'exotic'.

Then read my posts since yours. And realise I am being increasingly confirmed correct all along by recent/ongoing mainstream discoveries/reviews re 'ordinary' nature of DM being found in profusion.

Apr 30, 2019
@S_E_U.
Could SHADOWS be considered as a form of "Dark Matter"? Very little or no light is one property of a shadow, and yet it still is made of particles and energy (Matter/Energy). On the planet shadows are the result of a lack of sunlight in dark recesses such as caves. In the Cosmos, shadows might be mistaken for Dark Matter due to its lack of light also.
In places in the Universe where there are no Stars or very few, whatever Stars there are could create shadows on large objects, similar to the Earth's shadow falling on the Moon. It's just a wild guess, but I would like your opinion on it.
Actually, shadows are 'optical artifacts', not 'material things'. It's gravitational effects, representing 'motional anomalies' when compared to expected motions due to the readily 'visible matter' content in that region, that indicate some 'material thing' is not being 'seen' or taken into account. The 'exotic' DM claims were unfortunate, since we're now finding 'ordinary' DM.

Apr 30, 2019
Gotta go now. Back tomorrow if I can. Cheers all. :)

Apr 30, 2019
Reminds me how they proved the earth was the center of the cosmos.

One or two more epicycles and the Big Bank will be perfect.

May 01, 2019
Rather worthless article, and especially worthless title.
"Observations disprove alternate explanations," Incorrect. Once again Dark Matter is postulated to exist because of stupid Newton and consequently Einstein's model of gravity are assumed to be correct. I do not challenge the proficiency that Newton or Einstein describe gravity in a small system (i.e., solar system). I refute that they describe gravity fully. I propose they there is a small long range force that acts like a string (the greater the mass, the thicker the string, so the galactic black would have the thickest invisible string to each star in the galaxy). The arms have enough strings to keep themselves together, and the galactic black hole pulls on each star nearly equally so that the arms must form a spiral.

May 01, 2019
How does this long range gravity work? Much the same way as regular gravity, mass deforms the space-time blacket but for some stupid reason we have said the gravity curve stops or returns after X range; so there is a number of mistakes there. The gravity curve described by newton and Einstein is wrong is simply put correct short range, incorrect at long range. There are some parameters we can use to deduce what the correct curve may be. First, range, the spiral arms themselves stay intact, this is an important parameter. Second, magnitude, the galactic black hole pulls ever so slightly on each star in the galaxy.

May 01, 2019
Observations may disprove certain alternative explanations, but it doesn't mean they prove the existence of dark matter. For example, check the data against a more relativistic type of explanation, where the velocities are inversely proportional to the total time dilation (velocity & gravitational), measured from the galactic center. Sample comparison plots can be found here: https://www.faceb...tion=ufi

May 01, 2019
When a stream of particles casts a shadow
@S_E_U. Could SHADOWS be considered as a form of "Dark Matter"? Very little or no light is one property of a shadow, and yet it still is made of particles and energy (Matter/Energy). On the planet shadows are the result of a lack of sunlight in dark recesses such as caves. In the Cosmos, shadows might be mistaken for Dark Matter due to its lack of light also.

Cast a shadow in this vacuum
as
there is no material or energy in this shadow
this
Shadow is indistinguishable from this Vacuum

p.s. RealityCheck, are you in this shadow of SEU, or this shadow of this vacuum?

May 01, 2019
Observations may disprove certain alternative explanations, but it doesn't mean they prove the existence of dark matter. For example, check the data against a more relativistic type of explanation, where the velocities are inversely proportional to the total time dilation (velocity & gravitational), measured from the galactic center. Sample comparison plots can be found here: https://www.faceb...tion=ufi

You misunderstand. Mass tells space-time how to curve and vice versa. The problem with newton is he says everything rotates around another object; this is true short range. But long range what is orbited is a large area of disturbed space-time; the galactic core orbits around the galactic black hole, and the rest of the galaxy orbits around the galactic core; however because each star has a unique distance to the galactic core some stars will encounter more time dilation then others resulting in a spiral effect.

May 01, 2019
Non-spirals are basically the milky way stripped of its arms. You get arms after colliding with a bigger galaxy. It goes like this; bigger and bigger ball, then bigger and bigger arms. That is many many collisions.

May 01, 2019
But long range what is orbited is a large area of disturbed space-time; the galactic core orbits around the galactic black hole, and the rest of the galaxy orbits around the galactic core

......it's called a BARYCENTER, the center of mass of two or more bodies that orbit one another and is the point about which the bodies orbit.

May 01, 2019
@Benni.
ORDINARY dark matter exists
huge amount of previously 'dark' (ie previously 'too faint', but still normal

Stop using contradictions of terms, "ordinary" & "dark" are two words in cosmology that don't mix. Ever try mixing oil & water? Same idea, capiche?

Not so. The term 'dark' is perfectly legit to indicate some 'ordinary' matter whose photonic radiation is either too faint or not able to be seen/detected at certain distances with certain telescopes/instruments. The REAL problem arises whenever people do not discern between 'exotic' and 'ordinary' DM.
........and it's because clowns like you come into a chatroom like this creating contradictions in terminology that is so murky that they can't figure what YOU mean by dark matter.

So please don't start gratuitously 'strawmannirg' or 'redefining' in order to concoct another of your baiting/trolling gambits, @Benni. Thanks.
You're not welcome.

May 01, 2019
But long range what is orbited is a large area of disturbed space-time; the galactic core orbits around the galactic black hole, and the rest of the galaxy orbits around the galactic core

......it's called a BARYCENTER, the center of mass of two or more bodies that orbit one another and is the point about which the bodies orbit.

No it isn't. Stop talking crap.

May 01, 2019
jonesdumb has to lie to support his beliefs, and he has questionable character so this is no surprise.

I am not lying. Nobody has ever shown how stars can be moved around by magnetic forces. If you believe otherwise, point to the equations and maths in the scientific literature. You cannot, because you are lying.

May 01, 2019
The Electric Universe doesn't experience too much of the inexplicable, it is why it is a superior cosmology. It enlightens with answers, not more darkness and mysteries like the standard guesswork.

Nope, it is a bunch of Velikovskian woo, that is totally debunked. No science, no mechanisms, no evidence. Only believed by idiots.

May 01, 2019
Plasma based cosmology however has no problem explaining flat rotation curves.
No faerie dust required.
In order to gauge the credibility of a proponent's claim, it's often useful to find out how  m u c h  the claimant believes his/her theory can parsimoniously explain.

Good point, a theory that explains everything - fit all observations - explains nothing - no constraint can be tested. But specifically here, the article illustration is of a *non-flat* rotation curve. So either the idea - which is not a cosmology mind, no cosmologist accepts it - cannot explain this curve - so is wrong. Or it can explain any curve - so is not scientific. Which is it?

So if it can explain the physics of reality without resorting to faerie dust and magic then it is not scientific?
Got it, no wonder the darkists are disillusioned. Ignorance is knowledge, black is white, up is down, inventing faerie dust to save their beliefs is science. LOL!

May 01, 2019
So if it can explain the physics of reality without resorting to faerie dust and magic then it is not scientific?
Got it, no wonder the darkists are disillusioned. Ignorance is knowledge, black is white, up is down, inventing faerie dust to save their beliefs is science. LOL!

It cannot explain anything, and has never managed to do such a thing.

May 01, 2019
It cannot explain anything, and has never managed to do such a thing.

Finally, the answer to the question.
What is CastratedGiovASSi?

May 01, 2019
It cannot explain anything, and has never managed to do such a thing.

Finally, the answer to the question.
What is CastratedGiovASSi?

Weirdo. What are you prattling on about, you clown?

May 01, 2019
Theghostofotto1923 aka SpookyOtto1923 has been promptly REPORTED for ABUSIVE and INAPPROPRIATE LANGUAGE directed at a physorg commentator according to Physorg Terms of Service.
Doesnt really compare to the stuff you routinely plop. Like this gem from awhile ago
"Hey Blotto, how's your mama's pussy. I hear you've been giving her a good lickin and she still keeps on tickin, aye? Here puss puss. Oh BTW, how's your boyfriend Ritchieguy?..."DO SOME RESEARCH BEFORE YOU STICK YOUR FOOT UP YOUR ASS
-now does it? Pussytard also boasted of 6 'miscarriages' I suppose because she couldnt refrain from having saucy sex up against her stove while cooking dinner. And also posting gay porn links here on physorg which got her banned. Again.

Remember? EVERY TIME you show up the outcome is the same.Everybody wastes an enormous amount of time correcting your BULLSHIT and you just love the attention.

Leave_now_you_freak.

May 01, 2019
To Shed a Ghostly Tear

Oh Ghostly one
SEU> Perhaps RC, would be willing to either deny the existence of Dark Matter and say why

TheGhostofOtto192> At least zephyr knew science.

What is this we hear, Oh Ghostly One?
are you lamenting your overzealous work
the Makita's, the zephyr 's, all these lost lamented friends
just like the cantdrives of this world
actually
know their stuff
your ghostly haunting are ridding these corridors
of these last remaining knowledgeable benefactors
is that a tear we see in your eye, Oh Ghostly One
Well, Oh Ghostly One, it is a bit late crying over spilt milk old bean

To Shed a Ghostly Tear

Oh Ghostly One
till you rid these boards
till all have left Oh Ghostly One
you can shed a tear
a ghostly tear
for that last remaining
knowledgeable benefactor
Then all your haunting be complete

May 01, 2019
just like the cantdrives of this world
actually
know their stuff

cantthink doesn't know sh*t from shinola! Neither do you. Nor SEU. Nor Benni. And any number of other cranks who post their drivel on here.

May 01, 2019
To Shed a Ghostly Tear

jonesdave
just like the cantdrives of this world
actually
know their stuff

cantthink doesn't know sh*t from shinola! Neither do you. Nor SEU. Nor Benni. And any number of other cranks who post their drivel on here.

You were jonesdave
on that first hard as nails icy comet
that braketh the grappling hook
from the creme de creme, PW
you will always remain jonesdave
having seen PW demise
the creme de crème, PW
this lack of knowledgeable benefactors is known first hand, old friend
there was nothing like PW, jonesdave
that depth of knowledge in those ancient comments was irreplaceable, jonesdave
it contained the like not seen anywhere else
gone with its knowledgeable benefactors
Gone forever

p.s. this Oh Ghostly One hath just seeneth this error of his ghostly ways, this crossroad hath reached
it is not to late to turn around jonesdave, old chap before this pile simply becometh these quantum fluctuations

May 01, 2019
Poppycock. Like claiming that disproving existence of christian god confirms existence of Ganesha.

May 01, 2019
@Benni
@granville

https://en.wikipe...r_matter

I thought that there is a possibility that 'Dark Matter' is 'Mirror Matter.
Please let me know what you think.

I see that Castrovagina has reverted to his jonesdave role again. Too bad.
:(
SpookyOtto REPORTED AGAIN

May 01, 2019
SEU, Dark Matter, is it Mirror Matter.

Antimatter Mass
as normal mass
like matter has its negative counterpart, antimatter
as this is not true antimatter
this antimatter is its appositively polarity of matter
it is simply as an electron is negatively charged
a positron is simply a positively charged electron
in a nutshell positrons are equal in charge and every conceivable physical property as a electron
is the same
the only difference in antimatter
is
Opposite polarity
so
coming to Negative Mass
the Mirror image of Mass
where every property of a kg of mass
is
mirrored in its negative mass counterpart
so
gravity repels inversely proportional to radii
opposite polarity
negative mass
negative magnetic field
negative spin
in other words
Negative mass
in every conceivable property
this
Dark Matter Mirror of Matter

p.s. a tall order you hath seteth yourself, SEU

May 01, 2019
SEU, Dark Matter, is it Mirror Matter.

Antimatter Mass
as normal mass
like matter has its negative counterpart, antimatter
as this is not true antimatter
this antimatter is its appositively polarity of matter
in other words
Negative mass
in every conceivable property
this
Dark Matter Mirror of Matter

p.s. a tall order you hath seteth yourself, SEU
says granville

Yes indeed. I haven't read of Dark Matter being called "Mirror Matter" anywhere in physorg, so I was quite taken with the possibility of it being a 'sister' component of normal/regular Matter. Right-Handed. Yin/Yang and all that good stuff. LOL

The term "Dark Matter" is so gloomy, so I will refer to it as 'Mirror Matter' now and hope that scientists will consider it as a better 'alternative' to the Dark they have been calling it.
I rather like the idea of a 'sister' component of Matter, invisible as it is.

May 01, 2019
Mirror Matter

In every conceivable property
this
Mirror of Matter

darkmatter is a little old in the tooth
it is time to revisit this darkly stuff

iteth time for a Sparklyeth neweth theory, SEU
the darkly darkest's in their shadowery world
hath
had a fair crack at this whip
it
is time to revisit this afresh
with
a
brand new sparkly theory
Mirror Matter

p.s. now to this nitty-gritty, the science behind Mirror Matter, the meat on thar bones
https://en.wikipe...r_matter

May 01, 2019
Mirror Matter

And so it shalleth be called
from now on frometh
for to be,eth called
Mirror Matter

May 01, 2019
Gloomy descriptivist's

I agree SEU
SEU> The term "Dark Matter" is so gloomy, so I will refer to it as 'Mirror Matter' now and hope that scientists will consider it as a better 'alternative' to the Dark they have been calling it.

Darkmatter liketh blackholes is to submerged in darkness
to
Its culmination of monstrosity in this Selfie

May 01, 2019
SEU, you need not worry so over jonesdave no more
He was caught talking to himself,
as though scolding

May 01, 2019
SEU, you need not worry so over jonesdave no more
He was caught talking to himself,
as though scolding
says granville

Poor poor jonesy. He was destined to be a likable fellow, but somewhere along the way stepped off the curb of normal dlscourse and has remained in the gutter ever since. Perhaps he became lost in the jungles of Manchester or Liverpool and was adopted by the beasties who roam those mean streets, changing old jonesy to their habituation from which he has still never fully or partially recovered.
He and Spooky would make strange bedfellows if they ever got together.

Am studying the "Mirror Matter" quite studiously and will likely be up all night absorbing the subject. Tis the very thing that I was hoping for, to extricate from the disaster that is "Dark Matter".
That term tended to be too negative to describe a possibly wondrous part of our Universe.
It be Twins now.

May 01, 2019
@Benni.
The term 'dark' is perfectly legit to indicate some 'ordinary' matter whose photonic radiation is either too faint or not able to be seen/detected at certain distances with certain telescopes/instruments. The REAL problem arises whenever people do not discern between 'exotic' and 'ordinary' DM.
....and it's because clowns like you come into a chatroom like this creating contradictions in terminology that is so murky that they can't figure what YOU mean by dark matter.
Now Benni, is that any way to talk about the one who long ago explained that Zwicky's original hypothesis was for ORDINARY MATTER that was "dunkle" (ie, German for 'dark'; ie, because telescopes/instruments of his time weren't up to the task of seeing/detecting it; ie, how long will it take for the 'penny to drop' and you wise up, mate)? :)

Again, please don't start gratuitously 'strawmannirg' or 'redefining' in order to concoct another of your baiting/trolling gambits, @Benni. Thanks. :)

May 01, 2019
Pity poor Liverpool town

Poor poor jonesy. He was destined to be a likable fellow, but somewhere along the way stepped off the curb of normal dlscourse and has remained in the gutter ever since. Perhaps he became lost in the jungles of Manchester or Liverpool and was adopted by the beasties who roam those mean streets, changing old jonesy to their habituation from which he has still never fully or partially recovered.
He and Spooky would make strange bedfellows if they ever got together

The remaining fogies
A time
of sparking clogs
back to back slums
gas lights
dark alleys

On the other hand
the town of The Liver Birds
the Beatles
and
that famous comedian
with his tickling stick
right up to his last day on this earth
Sir Kenneth Arthur Dodd OBE
Born 8 November 1927, Knotty Ash, Liverpool
Died 11 March 2018, Knotty Ash, Liverpool
brought laughter
with
not
one
Single rude or offensive world as the little angels with sensitive ears were listening

May 01, 2019
Am studying the "Mirror Matter" quite studiously and will likely be up all night absorbing the subject. Tis the very thing that I was hoping for, to extricate from the disaster that is "Dark Matter".
That term tended to be too negative to describe a possibly wondrous part of our Universe.
It be Twins now.

They both be the same - hypothetical...
It's gonna be real simple. A forehead smacker.
Gravity ONLY pulls.

May 01, 2019
It's pointless to argue with people who deny data and lie about it.

The data show the rotation curve. Neither "no dark matter" nor any of the field solutions ("alternatives") is capable of reproducing the observed rotation curve. Only dark matter fulfills all the requirements.

It's kinda like when we got pictures of the M87* black hole.

That's the way it is. Get over it.

May 01, 2019
Am studying the "Mirror Matter" quite studiously and will likely be up all night absorbing the subject. Tis the very thing that I was hoping for, to extricate from the disaster that is "Dark Matter".
That term tended to be too negative to describe a possibly wondrous part of our Universe.
It be Twins now.

They both be the same - hypothetical...
It's gonna be real simple. A forehead smacker.
Gravity ONLY pulls.
says Whyde

Many things are hypothetical - including Black Hole photos with Imaging Algorithms to add whatever is missing.
Yes, it could be as simple as the nose on your face, but a 'mirror image' of normal matter is very likely the 80% of different Matter that they claim has to be found. And it was there all along.
Do butterflies and birds have 2 wings? Everything in the Universe seem to have a 'body double'. There is male and female; the right hand and the left hand. When you look in the mirror, is there someone staring back at you?

May 01, 2019
Actually butterflies have four wings.

On Earth.

May 01, 2019
Mirror Matter

Whydening Gyre
Am studying the Mirror Matter quite studiously and will likely be up all night absorbing the subject. Tis the very thing that I was hoping for, to extricate from the disaster that is "Dark Matter".
That term tended to be too negative to describe a possibly wondrous part of our Universe.
It be Twins now.

Whydening Gyre> They both be the same - hypothetical...
It's gonna be real simple Gravity ONLY pulls

Whydening Gyre

Really, Whydening Gyre
what do think gravity is
It is a graviton
that
accelerates the moon in the direction of the earth
as it passes
through the moon and attracts the sun in the direction the earth
In Mirror Matter
gravity simply accelerates this moon oppositely as it passes through this moon after travelling from earth
because
a graviton travelling to moon
Makes no never mind which way it propels this moon with or against this direction of this graviton
A graviton is a force carrier

May 01, 2019

Gravity only accelerates, it does not push
and yes SEU
it is all in this graviton
this Mirror Graviton
Accelerates oppositely
to
Gravitons in unmirrored Gravitons

Gravitons do not push
Gravitons only accelerate in line of sight direction at the speed of light

May 01, 2019
Whydening Gyre, you are missing this boat
Missing this sparkly theory
That is 330 years, old Sir Isaac Newton

Sorry to disappoint you, Whydening Gyre old bean
Whydening Gyre> Gravity ONLY pulls

Gravity only accelerates
it
neither push's or pulls
gravity simply accelerates
Through this force carrier, this Graviton

May 01, 2019

They both be the same - hypothetical...
It's gonna be real simple. A forehead smacker.
Gravity ONLY pulls.
says Whyde

Yes, it could be as simple as the nose on your face, but a 'mirror image' of normal matter is very likely the 80% of different Matter that they claim has to be found. And it was there all along.

If it's 80%, it ain't a "reflection"...
Do butterflies and birds have 2 wings? Everything in the Universe seem to have a 'body double'. There is male and female; the right hand and the left hand. When you look in the mirror, is there someone staring back at you?

But what does look back at me is definitely not 4 times more of me.

May 01, 2019

May 01, 2019

May 01, 2019
Hmmm... Looks like someone is living in a "recreational pot" state... :-)

May 01, 2019
But what does look back at me is definitely not 4 times more of me.
says Whyde

Your reflection in the mirror {your mirror image} is not a 4X image but only reflects YOU once as your right hand has become the left hand of your image in the mirror, providing that you are looking DIRECTLY at the mirror. That is your 'body double'. Your image in the mirror itself is not made of flesh, but it is still material due to the molecules of which the glass was made.
What if there was a 'glass universe' where the image of yourself that you see in the mirror is actually looking at YOU, where it is YOU who is in his mirror.

May 01, 2019
We can walk our road together
If our goals are all the same
We can run alone and free
If we pursue a different aim

Let the truth of love be lighted
Let the love of truth shine clear
Sensibility, armed with truth and liberty
With the heart and mind united
In a single, perfect sphere

For this truth must shine and those who reject it are not invited. Data are truth.

May 01, 2019
If it's 80%, it ain't a "reflection"...
.
says Whyde

They claim that normal matter is only ~5% in the whole Universe. Thus, the rest is ~80-95% 'Mirror Matter'. That would be a valid estimate IF their technology & instruments were able to SEE the WHOLE Universe in every direction - but that is not possible at this time, and likely will never be possible.
Which means that there are many regions of the Universe that haven't been explored with 'scopes' and it is unknown if there is anymore normal matter in the Universe that is much too far to detect.
So it is all hypotheses and hoping. If fully HALF is normal matter, that would lower the estimated 80 - 95% dark "Mirror Matter" in the Universe to make all things equal.

May 01, 2019
But what does look back at me is definitely not 4 times more of me.
says Whyde

Your reflection in the mirror {your mirror image} is not a 4X image but only reflects YOU once as your right hand has become the left hand of your image in the mirror, providing that you are looking DIRECTLY at the mirror. That is your 'body double'. Your image in the mirror itself is not made of flesh, but it is still material due to the molecules of which the glass was made.

The image "I" am looking at is nothing but photons reflecting from the mirror. A "body double" would have mass.
What if there was a 'glass universe' where the image of yourself that you see in the mirror is actually looking at YOU, where it is YOU who is in his mirror.

And it's not the glass providing the reflection. It's the material behind it.

May 01, 2019
But what does look back at me is definitely not 4 times more of me.
says Whyde

Your reflection in the mirror {your mirror image} is not a 4X image but only reflects YOU once as your right hand has become the left hand of your image in the mirror, providing that you are looking DIRECTLY at the mirror. That is your 'body double'. Your image in the mirror itself is not made of flesh, but it is still material due to the molecules of which the glass was made.

The image "I" am looking at is nothing but photons reflecting from the mirror. A "body double" would have mass.
What if there was a 'glass universe' where the image of yourself that you see in the mirror is actually looking at YOU, where it is YOU who is in his mirror.

And it's not the glass providing the reflection. It's the material behind it.
says Whyde

No matter what it's made of, the point is that it is a reflection of YOU. And you are their reflection.

May 01, 2019
So you seriously believe that there are people behind mirrors.

OK.

May 01, 2019
No matter what it's made of, the point is that it is a reflection of YOU.

Yes.
And you are their reflection.

Incorrect.

May 02, 2019
No matter what it's made of, the point is that it is a reflection of YOU.

Yes.
And you are their reflection.

Incorrect.
says Whyde {with great confidence}

How do you know that there isn't an alternate universe behind that mirror, and that ALL mirrors aren't windows to that universe? Purely hypothetical, of course. But an interesting concept, yes?

May 02, 2019
More to the point, since mirrors seem to simply reflect light, how do you know there is one?

May 02, 2019
No matter what it's made of, the point is that it is a reflection of YOU.

Yes.
And you are their reflection.

Incorrect.
says Whyde {with great confidence}

How do you know that there isn't an alternate universe behind that mirror, and that ALL mirrors aren't windows to that universe? Purely hypothetical, of course. But an interesting concept, yes?

I'll consult Alice, maybe she can help, Ha!

May 02, 2019
MIRROR MATTER

Mirror matter is matters mirror image
its electron are positrons
its protons are negatively charged
it gravity accelerates in the opposite direction
its magnetism accelerates in the opposite direction
is spin is in the opposite direction
so
as one and all considers this reality
of
this MIRROR UNIVERSE
it is time to take some time out
and consider some timely consequences
when
mirror matter is truly found
where every charge and force is opposite
this Isaac Newton gravity
accelerating oppositely
consider this possibility
as
one and all
denigrates this mirror matter
saying it will not work
gravity only pulls
for those who rack their brains
these nimbi's
need to rack their grey matter a little more

A Universe of Gravity Accelerating Oppositely
What is Holding this Universe Intact?

May 02, 2019

May 02, 2019

Incorrect.
says Whyde {with great confidence}

How do you know that there isn't an alternate universe behind that mirror, and that ALL mirrors aren't windows to that universe? Purely hypothetical, of course. But an interesting concept, yes?

What have YOU been smoking, tonite?

May 02, 2019
Probably the same stuff as the caterpillar.

May 02, 2019
Either that or eating the same mushrooms as Alice.

May 02, 2019
dark matter no extranuclear electron structure, ordinary spin1 spread child cannot detect. Different energy transition width between dark matter at least 1000 atom, leap energy spectrum should be detect in the sky,recently noticed DAMPE found 1500 atom mutation phenomenon in sky background.would
become direct evidence for dark matter existence .

May 02, 2019
there's not enough DM in a single solar system to affect the dynamics. You've been told this time and again and you keep ignoring it. It's not gonna go away.

Dark matter is obviously dilute, since it is (mostly or) only affected by gravity; no chemical bonds. The amount of it in the solar system is estimated to be a sizable asteroid's worth. It simply cannot affect gravitational dynamics on such scales.

Dark matter effects are fairly localized at that, compare with how dark energy is so weak that its effect starts to dominate first on scales larger than the entire Local Group of galaxies; 100 klyrs vs 10 Mlyrs or a 1/100 smaller scale.

May 02, 2019
The larger the sample, the less likely systematic bias is. This is 1900 observations, a couple orders of magnitude better than any previous data set.

Also, not inly sizable spiral galaxies but all kinds - more diversity - which is why they found that the earlier relation was a limiting (cherry picked) case of dark matter influence.

May 02, 2019
Once again Dark Matter is postulated to exist because of stupid Newton and consequently Einstein's model of gravity are assumed to be correct.

Currently general relativity describes gravity from the scale of the whole universe (Planck 2018 with two independent data sets) to right up to the event horizon of black holes (M87*). and all other theories have either failed outright or become very contrived.

The abive article is empirically data driven, not using philosophic "assumptions".

Also, blocked for inane trolling of science based on no useful data but worthless opinion.

May 02, 2019
Observations may disprove certain alternative explanations, but it doesn't mean they prove the existence of dark matter. For example, check the data against a more relativistic type of explanation, where the velocities are inversely proportional to the total time dilation

Typical engineer (seen from link), I see no more "relativity" in introducing more feedback. We all know that Einstein and other checked the consistency of GR against both spacetime curvature tension vs matter energy densities and so inertial mass = gravitational mass; no other theory fulfills that.

And that link goes to unreferenced, unpublished own data, so nothing of relevance here.

Dark matter is proven if all contenders are rejected. The article implies that one of the last hold out areas died in test. Most other ones were already gone thanks to the 1st observed binary neutron star merger: https://www.quant...0180430/ .

May 02, 2019
All I learn from this thread is that Da Schneib does not block trolls as I do, and has a lot of patience as I don't. But we agree on the science!

May 02, 2019
Also, blocked for inane trolling of science based on no useful data but worthless opinion.
........you mean you're blocking yourself?

Then why did you bother with your worthless opinion in the first place?

May 02, 2019
Everything in the Universe seem to have a 'body double'. There is male and female; the right hand and the left hand
Jeez pussytard I guess you forgot your own wisdom from a few years ago:
HUMAN EVOLUTION "We have not grown a third eye, a huge skull and much larger brain than what we already have, nor have we evolved to reproduce by splitting into two equal parts similar to amoebae"
Moving on...
When you look in the mirror, is there someone staring back at you?
Well in your case both sides are equally vacuous. You're just some asshole troll pretending to be an imbecile for shits and giggles.

Arent you?

You fucking waste of time.

May 02, 2019
This MIRROR UNIVERSE

It is time to take some time out
and consider some timely consequences
when
mirror matter is truly found
where every charge and force is opposite
this Isaac Newton gravity
accelerating oppositely
consider this possibility
as
one and all
denigrates this mirror matter
saying it will not work
gravity only pulls
for those who rack their brains
these nimbi's
need to rack their grey matter a little more

A Universe of Gravity Accelerating Oppositely
What is Holding this Universe Intact?

p.s. copious preceding comments, but no answer forth coming, obviously these nimbi's
need to rack their grey matter even lot more than the original little more
to answer this question, may be there is more belief in mirror matter than meets ther eye

May 02, 2019

Incorrect.
says Whyde {with great confidence}

How do you know that there isn't an alternate universe behind that mirror, and that ALL mirrors aren't windows to that universe? Purely hypothetical, of course. But an interesting concept, yes?

What have YOU been smoking, tonite?
says Whyde

Did you miss the part where I said: "Purely hypothetical, of course. But an interesting concept, yes?"
I suppose that any science research into "alternate universes", "string theory", and all other possible universes other than the one in which you are existing - is absolutely impossible UNLESS you are smoking something. OK, I get it now.

SpookyOtto1923 again was REPORTED for lies and his mistaken identity (mistaking me for those with whom he had some past problems) and can't seem to learn from his mistakes.

May 02, 2019
MIRROR MATTER

Mirror matter is matters mirror image
its electron are positrons
its protons are negatively charged
it gravity accelerates in the opposite direction
its magnetism accelerates in the opposite direction
is spin is in the opposite direction
so as one and all considers this reality of this MIRROR UNIVERSE
it is time to take some time out
and consider some timely consequences
when mirror matter is truly found
where every charge and force is opposite this Isaac Newton gravity
accelerating oppositely consider this possibility
as one and all denigrates this mirror matter saying it will not work
gravity only pulls for those who rack their brains these nimbi's
need to rack their grey matter a little more to answer this question

A Universe of Gravity Accelerating Oppositely
What is Holding this Universe Intact?
says granville

I would GUESS that it's held together by the opposite of what is holding the known Universe together.
-contd-

May 02, 2019
-contd-
@granville
@Benni
@Whyde

What is holding this Mirror Matter universe together where everything is opposite of the known universe?
My guess is that the Mirror Matter universe is complentary to the known universe and is possibly crucial in its "possible" existence to the existence of the known universe. Similar to a bird with 2 wings trying to fly with only one wing. That other wing enables the bird to FLY and stay aloft. Perhaps this Mirror Matter universe offers a Symmetry to the universe in which you live.
The left wing complements the right wing and neither one alone by itself can exist or function.

May 02, 2019
-contd-
@granville
@Benni
@Whyde

What is holding this Mirror Matter universe together where everything is opposite of the known universe?
My guess is that the Mirror Matter universe is complentary to the known universe and is possibly crucial in its "possible" existence to the existence of the known universe. Similar to a bird with 2 wings trying to fly with only one wing. That other wing enables the bird to FLY and stay aloft. Perhaps this Mirror Matter universe offers a Symmetry to the universe in which you live.
The left wing complements the right wing and neither one alone by itself can exist or function.

.........never before heard of the concept.

May 02, 2019
-contd-
@granville
@Benni
@Whyde

What is holding this Mirror Matter universe together where everything is opposite of the known universe?
My guess is that the Mirror Matter universe is complentary to the known universe and is possibly crucial in its "possible" existence to the existence of the known universe. Similar to a bird with 2 wings trying to fly with only one wing. That other wing enables the bird to FLY and stay aloft. Perhaps this Mirror Matter universe offers a Symmetry to the universe in which you live.
The left wing complements the right wing and neither one alone by itself can exist or function.

.........never before heard of the concept.
says Benni

I just came upon it the other day and decided to present it here to see how it would be received.
Of course, there needs to be much more research done on it for it to pass the "scientific methodists". LOL Methodists, get it?

May 02, 2019
https://phys.org/...ate.html

Explaining Mirror Matter 9 years ago.

May 02, 2019
Dark matter is obviously dilute,.... The amount of it in the solar system is estimated to be a sizable asteroid's worth. It simply cannot affect gravitational dynamics on such scales. Dark matter effects are fairly localized.....
You just contradicted all the mainstream claims re distribution/clumping etc 'features' of 'exotic' DM, mate! :)

See? IF 'exotic' DM in galaxy WAS so dilutely distributed over WHOLE galaxy's SPHERICAL VOLUME (ie, not gravitationally concentrated around accretion disc mass of ordinary matter), THEN the "SHELL THEOREM" would mean that ANY 'exotic' DM gravity effect on any stars/nebulae throughout the whole galaxy would REDUCE!

Which means that ONLY stars/nebulae WELL OUTSIDE our galaxy would 'feel' ANY (weak at such distances) gravity from such 'exotic' DM distribution; ie, NO DISC STARS WITHIN our galaxy could be 'net-accelerration-affected' as much as claimed would be required to produce a 'flat' ROTATION CURVE. :)

May 02, 2019
Charge Parity violation

Wonders never cease, SEU
https://phys.org/news/2010-04-dark-mirror-candidate.html

Explaining Mirror Matter 9 years ago.

Apart from yourself, SEU
no one attempted to attempt to answer
What is holding this Universe Together?

The latest article on Mirror Matter style
is of April 27, 2010

phys.org, if ordinary and mirror particles interact with each other via a process called photon-mirror photon kinetic mixing, then mirror particles could explain both results. In Foot's theory, a mirror particle plasma would be the predominant ingredient in galactic halos, where dark matter seems to be "hiding" based on observations of its gravity's effects. While this proposal supports the possibility of mirror matter as dark matter, Foot added that experiments in the near future will further test this idea

https://en.wikipe...iolation

Mirror Matter is a sound theory

May 02, 2019
@granville

"In 1964, James Cronin, Val Fitch and coworkers provided clear evidence from kaon decay that CP-symmetry could be broken.[1] This work[2] won them the 1980 Nobel Prize. This discovery showed that weak interactions violate not only the charge-conjugation symmetry C between particles and antiparticles and the P or parity, but also their combination. The discovery shocked particle physics and opened the door to questions still at the core of particle physics and of cosmology today. The lack of an exact CP-symmetry, but also the fact that it is so nearly a symmetry, created a great puzzle.

Only a weaker version of the symmetry could be preserved by physical phenomena, which was CPT symmetry. Besides C and P, there is a third operation, time reversal T, which corresponds to reversal of motion. Invariance under time reversal implies that whenever a motion is allowed by the laws of physics, the reversed motion is also an allowed one and occurs.."

May 02, 2019
Dark matter is obviously dilute, The amount of it in the solar system is estimated to be a sizable asteroid's worth. It simply cannot affect gravitational dynamics on such scales. Dark matter effects are fairly localized
You just contradicted all the mainstream claims re distribution/clumping etc 'features' of 'exotic' DM, mate

IF 'exotic' DM in galaxy WAS so dilutely distributed over WHOLE galaxy's SPHERICAL VOLUME (ie, not gravitationally concentrated around accretion disc mass of ordinary matter), THEN the "SHELL THEOREM" would mean that ANY 'exotic' DM gravity effect on any stars/nebulae throughout the whole galaxy would REDUCE!

Which means that ONLY stars/nebulae WELL OUTSIDE our galaxy would 'feel' ANY (weak at such distances) gravity from such 'exotic' DM distribution; ie, NO DISC STARS WITHIN our galaxy could be 'net-acceleration-affected' as much as claimed would be required to produce a 'flat' ROTATION CURVE.
Making some sense for a change.

May 02, 2019
In Foot's theory, a mirror particle plasma would be the predominant ingredient in galactic halos, where dark matter seems to be "hiding" based on observations of its gravity's effects.

Anyone looking for unaccounted gravity needn't look far. Consider ENERGY DENSITY galaxy by galaxy. All those electro-magnetic waves permeating the Universe carry GRAVITY.

I've brought it up many times before over the course of years, that I've yet to see an Astro-physicist proffer gravity calculations of energy fields. Just in one cubic light year of space containing no stellar mass exists energy as it travels from star to star.

The gravity fields contained within all this energy will of course be dependent on the flux concentrations of the EM Waves produced by stellar mass, the greater the flux concentration of EM Waves, the higher will be the inherent gravity field that acts in all directions attracting nearby mass to that inherent field. It's a START.........Benni.

May 03, 2019
The Amalgamation of Electromagnetic and Gravitational Theory

Benni
Benni> Anyone looking for unaccounted gravity needn't look far. Consider ENERGY DENSITY galaxy by galaxy. All those electro-magnetic waves permeating the Universe carry GRAVITY

These electro-magnetic waves
carry gravity

Is this the actual electro-magnetic waves
carrying gravity
as a measurable gravitational force
or
A theoretical gravitational force
of the theoretical mass that would accrue
if all the energy in these electro-magnetic waves
were turned into mass through the formula M = E/C²

p.s. these sparkly theories are materialising in abundance

May 03, 2019
Anyone looking for unaccounted gravity needn't look far. Consider ENERGY DENSITY galaxy by galaxy. All those electro-magnetic waves permeating the Universe carry GRAVITY.

I've brought it up many times before over the course of years, that I've yet to see an Astro-physicist proffer gravity calculations of energy fields. Just in one cubic light year of space containing no stellar mass exists energy as it travels from star to star.

The gravity fields contained within all this energy will of course be dependent on the flux concentrations of the EM Waves produced by stellar mass, the greater the flux concentration of EM Waves, the higher will be the inherent gravity field that acts in all directions attracting nearby mass to that inherent field. It's a START.........Benni.

Complete gibberish.

May 03, 2019
A theoretical gravitational force
of the theoretical mass that would accrue
if all the energy in these electro-magnetic waves
were turned into mass through the formula M = E/C²

When a star transforms mass to energy, mass is therefore lost to the star, therefore gravity is also lost to the star as it loses mass in accordance with E=mc² or what you have transformed to m=E/c².

When mass is lost to a system so also is gravity. Transformation of mass to energy results in a loss of mass. At the point where the energy exits the system, it carries away an equivalent quantity of gravity of the mass from which it was transformed.

Gravity like energy/mass cannot be destroyed, however neither can it be TRANSFORMED it is a common never changing feature to both energy & mass. The point here being that we know the Universe is filled with an incalculable quantity of energy, each EM Wave having it's own inherent quantity of gravity acting on anything those waves pass near to.

May 03, 2019
@WalThornhill aka @Benni

Wait all this time you have been denying the existence of gravity now it's somehow at the core of your pet theory, WTF?

May 03, 2019
Benni, Gravity like energy/mass cannot be destroyed

The law of conservation of gravitational acceleration of kinetic energy
When gravity accelerates mass
it requires energy
which means transforming mass into energy
so that gravitons transfer this energy into kinetic energy
resulting in increasing kinetic energy come reduction in mass
when a small proportion of the total mass in this universe
is accelerated to practically the speed of light
the remaining total mass of this universe
Is converted into kinetic energy

p.s. This meaneth, darkly matter advocates, this invisible kinetic energy of galaxies in motion, the majority of this mass of these galaxies in this vacuum is tied up in kinetic energy. Kinetic Energy is where the majority of this darkmatter is hidden in the form of kinetic energy

May 03, 2019
The Schooling of jonesdave

jonesdave
jonesdave> Complete gibberish.

where the only syllables
are complete gibberish
is this the only syllable jonesdave knows
tis time jonesdave
to go back to school
Vocabulary school
to increase your range of vocabulary
so that jonesdave can utter utterances
fluidly once again
in words
of
More than one syllable

May 03, 2019
says Benni
When mass is lost to a system so also is gravity. Transformation of mass to energy results in a loss of mass. At the point where the energy exits the system, it carries away an equivalent quantity of gravity of the mass from which it was transformed.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that the loss of gravity depends on the LOCATION of the initial transformation of Mass into Energy. On a planet like Earth, the loss of Mass that is transformed into Energy is limited by the Earth's natural gravity that keeps the Energy that was produced by the transformation within the confines of Earth's natural gravitational pull. Very little Mass escapes from Earth, and thus its gravity remains intact, as well as the produced Energy. That Energy may eventually transform back into Mass through the combination of Particles into molecules and so on.
In the Cosmos, the gravity accompanies Mass to any location. The gravity/Mass duo also carries kinetic energy.
-contd-

May 03, 2019
Anyone looking for unaccounted gravity needn't look far. Consider ENERGY DENSITY galaxy by galaxy. All those electro-magnetic waves permeating the Universe carry GRAVITY.

I've brought it up many times before over the course of years, that I've yet to see an Astro-physicist proffer gravity calculations of energy fields. Just in one cubic light year of space containing no stellar mass exists energy as it travels from star to star.

The gravity fields contained within all this energy will of course be dependent on the flux concentrations of the EM Waves produced by stellar mass, the greater the flux concentration of EM Waves, the higher will be the inherent gravity field that acts in all directions attracting nearby mass to that inherent field. It's a START.........Benni.

Complete gibberish.
...........Anthropologist

May 03, 2019
-contd-
says Benni
Gravity like energy/mass cannot be destroyed, however neither can it be TRANSFORMED it is a common never changing feature to both energy & mass. The point here being that we know the Universe is filled with an incalculable quantity of energy, each EM Wave having it's own inherent quantity of gravity acting on anything those waves pass near to.

I think you're right, that EM waves of Energy carries with it its own gravity waves, which make it more easily detectable by delicate instruments made for that purpose. Gravity wave detectors should also determine the presence of Mass anywhere in the known Universe. Yes?
Kinetic Energy = Motion/Momentum should be easily detected by such instruments.

May 03, 2019
The law of conservation of gravitational acceleration of kinetic energy

Those that believe Albert's addition to Isaacs's kinetic energy formula
will realise
these distant galaxies undergoing gravitational acceleration
these galactic galaxies are in a state of flux
their mass is in variance
as their velocity approaches the speed of light
their mass is reducing as their gravitational force reduces
a balance of forces taketh place

The recession of these galaxies is proportional to the amount of mass providing this gravitational acceleration
Till a balance is met
where these galaxies can no longer convert any more mass into kinetic energy
Then these galaxies accelerate into this infinite vacuous vacuum, infinitely

All that is needed
An Explanation
How gravitational acceleration of attraction
Accelerates Galaxies
into

May 03, 2019
says Benni

Gravity like energy/mass cannot be destroyed, however neither can it be TRANSFORMED it is a common never changing feature to both energy & mass. The point here being that we know the Universe is filled with an incalculable quantity of energy, each EM Wave having it's own inherent quantity of gravity acting on anything those waves pass near to.

I think you're right, that EM waves of Energy carries with it its own gravity waves, which make it more easily detectable by delicate instruments made for that purpose. Gravity wave detectors should also determine the presence of Mass anywhere in the known Universe. Yes?

I don't think necessarily so, the reason being that EM Waves are present from all directions of the Universe in similar flux concentrations, making galactic & inter-galactic EM Wave gravity somewhat equal throughout the Universe but more concentrated within galactic mass than between inter-galactic mass, the Inverse Square Law.

May 03, 2019
The Schooling of jonesdave

jonesdave
jonesdave> Complete gibberish.

where the only syllables
are complete gibberish
is this the only syllable jonesdave knows
tis time jonesdave
to go back to school
Vocabulary school
to increase your range of vocabulary
so that jonesdave can utter utterances
fluidly once again
in words
of
More than one syllable
says granville

jonesy is quite plainly suffering from UNREQUITED LOVE. He has loved and lost and I would estimate that the guy who got the girl was a far better chap than jonesy believed himself to be.
Such a loss of love often inspires the human animal to be driven to drink, illicit drugs, communal sex and other depravities. Although jonesy roams through physorg looking for ways to forget his lost love, he has decided to forget by chastising such as Benni with repeated strange idioms that are supposedly endowed with a moral

May 03, 2019
Kinetic Energy = Motion/Momentum should be easily detected by such instruments

I don't know how gravity detecting instruments could isolate such a condition.

My point in coming here with this is to raise awareness of the FACT that EM Energy has inherent gravity that it distributes throughout the Universe, this because gravity somehow rides with the EM Wave, every Astro-physicist knows this, Anthropologists do not.

I think because we know Energy is a WAVE that we must surmise gravity is also a WAVE & not little dots called gravitons. It's not co-incidental that gravity & EM Waves move at exactly the same speed, they of course must or one would outpace the other & the Universe couldn't exist under those circumstances.

May 03, 2019

All that is needed
An Explanation
How gravitational acceleration of attraction
Accelerates Galaxies
into

This question is not one of those questions
that is quietly being brushed under the carpet
Gravity is the only force in this vacuum capable of accelerating whole galaxies
there is no Gobi Desert large enough to hide this question in the sand
Gravity only accelerates inertial mass
Gravity is proportional to inertial mass

The Key Word Is ACCELERATION, not DECCELERATION

This universe is purported to be accelerating under the acceleration of gravities attraction

May 03, 2019
jonesdaves requiem
SEU> jonesy is quite plainly suffering from UNREQUITED LOVE. He has loved and lost and I would estimate that the guy who got the girl was a far better chap than jonesy believed himself to be.
Such a loss of love often inspires the human animal to be driven to drink

jonesdaves lost it totally, SEU
when he tangled with the outflows of PW, jonesdave idiosyncrasies revolved in ever decreasing circles
till
that
final day arrived
where jonesdave so refined his immortal utterance
jonesdave> Complete gibberish.

SEU, he even copied the word, gibberish
In these dying embers, the search is now on
for
An a original jonesdave textual commentary

May 03, 2019
Kinetic Energy = Motion/Momentum should be easily detected by such instruments

I don't know how gravity detecting instruments could isolate such a condition.

My point in coming here with this is to raise awareness of the FACT that EM Energy has inherent gravity that it distributes throughout the Universe, this because gravity somehow rides with the EM Wave, every Astro-physicist knows this, Anthropologists do not.

I think because we know Energy is a WAVE that we must surmise gravity is also a WAVE & not little dots called gravitons. It's not co-incidental that gravity & EM Waves move at exactly the same speed, they of course must or one would outpace the other & the Universe couldn't exist under those circumstances.

Gibberish.

May 03, 2019
...........Anthropologist

Scientifically illiterate pathological liar.

May 03, 2019
Frequency and Wave

All mater and energy in this vacuum oscillates with frequency and wave
Benni> I think because we know Energy is a WAVE that we must surmise gravity is also a WAVE & not little dots called gravitons. It's not co-incidental that gravity & EM Waves move at exactly the same speed.

Consistency in all things
this gravity is no different
than matter waves
electromagnetic waves
gravity is the stuff of this vacuum
as
electrical, magnetism, inertial mass, the nuclear forces
they all contain a common denominator
as
frequency and wave is their greatest common denominator
Why no one has squared this circle
Combining
Nuclear, Electromagnetism, Gravity in to unification of similar properties
Is this puzzle of this quantum world we inhabit?

May 03, 2019
...........Anthropologist

Scientifically illiterate pathological liar.
......Anthropologist

May 03, 2019
To think
...........Anthropologist

jonesdave> Scientifically illiterate pathological liar.

When jonesdave's path crossed
In that Cometary path
those
Russian captain icebreakers
how the read the ice flows
how they read the ice refreezing to hard as nails
that can trap and crush Russian icebreakers
as this is how jonesdave realised why these grappling hooks broke
and
now jonesdave is down to this
exchanging petty monosyllables
This surely is the demise of jonesdave

May 03, 2019
......Anthropologist

Who knows more physics than you, you lying clown. Mind you, that isn't saying much, eh janitor boy?

May 03, 2019
......Anthropologist

Who knows more physics than you, you lying clown. Mind you, that isn't saying much, eh janitor boy?

Anthropologist

May 03, 2019
@Castrogiovanni.

As one who willingly put aside your past @jonesdave 'unpleasantnesses', I welcomed you back in your new incarnation as @Castrogiovanni without prejudice at my end re those past unpleasantnesses. Hence it is curious now to see your new 'incarnation' defaulting to the same sort of 'unpleasantnesses' which I assumed you wished to leave behind via your new incarnation as @Castrogivanni.

Your 'recurring unpleasantness' prompts the question: Why take the trouble to re-register under a new username if you were just going to continue the old-username-associated unpleasantness?

Did you intend to leave the old unpleasantnesses out this time round, but are just (all too soon) failing in that intention?

It is very curious no matter how one looks at it; so can you clarify the reason(s) for ditching your old @jonesdave username?

I urge you to address/refute science/logics points/issues rather than again 'feed' trolls/baiters by repeating your own 'unpleasantnesses'.

May 03, 2019
@Castrogiovanni.

As one who willingly put aside your past @jonesdave 'unpleasantnesses', I welcomed you back in your new incarnation as @Castrogiovanni without prejudice at my end re those past unpleasantnesses. Hence it is curious now to see your new 'incarnation' defaulting to the same sort of 'unpleasantnesses' which I assumed you wished to leave behind via your new incarnation as @Castrogivanni.

I urge you to address/refute science/logics points/issues rather than again 'feed' trolls/baiters by repeating your own 'unpleasantnesses'.

He's an Anthropologist doing what anthropologists do, pick bones.

May 03, 2019
Anthropologist

Clueless retard. Loser.

May 03, 2019
You have nailed it, RealityCheck
RealityCheck> your new incarnation as @Castrogivanni.

Your 'recurring unpleasantness' prompts the question: Why take the trouble to re-register under a new username if you were just going to continue the old-username-associated unpleasantness?

It is very curious no matter how one looks at it; so can you clarify the reason(s) for ditching your old @jonesdave username?

May 03, 2019
A Clueless retard. Loser.
......Anthropologist

May 03, 2019
RealityCheck, it looks like a burden you will have to bear

Look at it as you will, RealityCheck
a requisite for the privilege for putting your twopence worth of thoughts
in textual format

You must have sinned so, in your past to receive this punishment, RealityCheck

May 03, 2019

"Benni

The psycho-babble mentality of Pop-Cosmology on display."

Mr. (I don't understand or believe in Science so I'll ignore the facts) Trump is that you chiming in? And on phys.org and not Twitter?

We're going back to the moon assuming the anti-science democrats will fund it. That's more than Obama did or Hillary would do.

carry on.

May 03, 2019
RealityCheck, it looks like a burden you will have to bear

Look at it as you will, RealityCheck
a requisite for the privilege for putting your twopence worth of thoughts
in textual format

You must have sinned so, in your past to receive this punishment, RealityCheck
says granville

LOL I'm glad that I came back to this phorum or I would've missed reading all of Castrovagina's infamous misanthropic but meticulously articulated schoolyard bullying verbiage against his personal nemesis, Benni. Benni, having only commented on the science for which this phorum is dedicated, is now reduced to running the gauntlet to avert the unwholesome quackery coming from the thumbs of old 'jonesy', whose commitment to playing the role of "fool" and "jerk" gives pause for reflection as to why jonesy has returned in his new disguise that still embodies the same old blabbermouth jonesy who just cannot contain his derision for those of us who are searching for Truth in Science.
(gasp)

May 03, 2019

"Benni

The psycho-babble mentality of Pop-Cosmology on display."

Mr. (I don't understand or believe in Science so I'll ignore the facts) Trump is that you chiming in? And on phys.org and not Twitter?

We're going back to the moon assuming the anti-science democrats will fund it. That's more than Obama did or Hillary would do.

carry on.
says Shootist

It will be nice to have men on the Moon once more. Hopefully, the vehicles and rockets that will take them there and back safely will not blow up like Elon Musk's capsule did the other day.
But if my memory serves me right, one or more of the last astronauts who walked on the Moon came back with a story that they had been given a warning to not return to the Moon ever again. IF the story is correct and not a hoax or conspiracy theory, then the thought of humans on the Moon again brings chills of reservation to mind. It would not do to have a problem with extraterrestrials - if they exist.

May 03, 2019
I don't know if anyone else here has seen this. re UFOs

https://www.syti....ngs.html

I know that they exist, but do YOU know?

May 03, 2019
I don't know if anyone else here has seen this. re UFOs

https://www.syti....ngs.html

I know that they exist, but do YOU know?
......have never come across one.

one or more of the last astronauts who walked on the Moon came back with a story that they had been given a warning to not return to the Moon ever again.
......who put out the warning?

May 03, 2019
The trolls seem to be working overtime to try to deny the data that makes them look stupid.

Typical trolls.

May 03, 2019
The trolls seem to be working overtime to try to deny the data that makes them look stupid.

Typical trolls.
....embedded moderator performing troll duties.

May 03, 2019
Then stop denying data.

This has been your fallback position every time you post: deny data.

It's a key flaw in all trolling. Eventually they have no place else to go.

The graph in the article image really does say it all.

May 03, 2019
I notice in recent news that a study of the Andromeda galaxy has failed to observe primordial BH's, as a candidate for DM (S. Hawking). Anyone here got some in depth link on this. Thanks in advance.

May 03, 2019
I don't know if anyone else here has seen this. re UFOs

https://www.syti....ngs.html

I know that they exist, but do YOU know?
......have never come across one.

one or more of the last astronauts who walked on the Moon came back with a story that they had been given a warning to not return to the Moon ever again.
......who put out the warning?
says Benni

They (astronauts) were on the Moon's surface when they MAY have gotten the warning telepathically. I can only assume that that was the method by which they received the warning, since their communications system was only geared to receive messages from mission control and from each other when outside the capsule, from what I understood from reading the text.
The first time I saw a UFO above Earth was in 2000. It was approx @10kft and not moving at all. When I saw it I thought it was the Moon and thought that it was too early in the day for it. Then when it began to move down to ~7kft above

May 03, 2019
It was an article on here. Maybe I'll search it up. You can if you have the search term chops.

May 03, 2019
-contd-
@Benni

above the traffic, I KNEW that it wasn't the Moon and it was coming down for a closer look. I believe that others saw it also. I was in my truck on my way to London and had stopped for a traffic light. I saw a pedestrian looking up and knew that he saw it too.
Odd thing is that the craft didn't seem menacing. My human host (I know, I know) didn't show any signs of fear, almost as though it was the most natural thing to see. But others kept on driving and didn't look up.

May 03, 2019
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAhahaha, @Satan is a UFO enthusiast. Only this was missing. So are you an anti-vaxxer Scientologist? I hear a bunch of them got quarantined for measles. You might have seen the story.

This is classic. Next comes the anti-Darwin stuff, or the stars being a few million miles away, or being "sparkles on the cellophane over the top of the fishbowl" or Venus springing out of Jupiter, or Earth orbiting Saturn, or whatnot.

May 03, 2019
@Benni
You DO realise that Da Schneibo is a certifiable nutcase, right? He sounds more and more like SpookyOtto1923. Otto now makes a point of commenting with his accusations of alternate identities and who examines my ratings and exclaims how high my minus ratings have gotten in such a short time. LOL I suppose that I'm supposed to care. (I don't)
I haven't seen Da Schniebo's master, CaptainDumpy lately. Probably presiding over prayers to Baphomet or Wakinyan tanka

May 04, 2019
I notice in recent news that a study of the Andromeda galaxy has failed to observe primordial BH's, as a candidate for DM (S. Hawking). Anyone here got some in depth link on this. Thanks in advance.

Yep, found it on pysorg. thanks. Where I live the gov. sometimes interferes with gateway traffic (red warning webpage). Even physorg is not always available.

May 04, 2019
Andromeda Galaxy
https://cdn.mos.c...0-80.jpg

Any Blackhole has to be taken with a large bushel of salt
as far as Andromedian blackholes go
Andromeda is strangely quite in this department
considering it it only 2 Million light years away
Present galaxy at 26 thousand light years excepted

6 years ago
there was an article
Concerning these mythical beasts

Trove of Black Holes Discovered in Andromeda Galaxy
https://www.space...axy.html

May 04, 2019
Lakenheath Air Force Camp
https://www.lakenheath.af.mil/
SEU> in my truck on my way to London a pedestrian saw it too

One of the largest military air force camps
with a wide variety of low flying aircraft
strange lights in the sky at all times
SEU, not one UFO has been reported by these American pilots living of base in the surrounding Shires
these well paid pilots living of base in these thatched cottage Shire villages
None of the natives have reported UFOs either

is
RAF Marham
https://www.raf.m...-marham/
where these English pilots fly even lower than their American counterparts
no one reports UFOs

Then there is just minutes away Marshals of Cambridge with a large variety of passenger and private aircraft

Finally, London is only one hour away
There is a constant flight path of large flying airliners

These Shires constantly see strange lights in these thatched cottage villages
No UFOs, we have not give up hope

May 04, 2019
The graph in the article image really does say it all.
......no schneibo it doesn't say it all, it's just Pop-Cosmology updating it's fantasies.

May 04, 2019
I don't know if anyone else here has seen this. re UFOs

https://www.syti....ngs.html

I know that they exist, but do YOU know? ......have never come across one.

one or more of the last astronauts who walked on the Moon came back with a story that they had been given a warning to not return to the Moon ever again.
......who put out the warning? says Benni

They (astronauts) were on the Moon's surface when they MAY have gotten the warning telepathically. I can only assume that that was the method by which they received the warning, since their communications system was only geared to receive messages from mission control and from each other when outside the capsule,
......have never heard of this. I don't get the telepathic part & WHY they were warned to never return, you know like as if they were trespassing on someone else's property or something?

May 04, 2019
those of us who are searching for Truth in Science.

Lol. Neither you, nor the idiot Benni, have got the faintest clue about any science.

May 04, 2019
Then stop denying data.

This has been your fallback position every time you post: deny data.

It's a key flaw in all trolling. Eventually they have no place else to go.

The graph in the article image really does say it all.

You are right, that graph says it all. See figures 2 and 6 in this paper;
http://www.ptep-o...3-01.PDF
Pretty much shows the above authors are lying POS, just like you and jonesdumb. It shows an alternative explanation which doesn't require your faerie dust pseudoscience.

May 04, 2019
Lakenheath Air Force Camp
https://www.lakenheath.af.mil/
where these English pilots fly even lower than their American counterparts
no one reports UFOs

Then there is just minutes away Marshals of Cambridge with a large variety of passenger and private aircraft

Finally, London is only one hour away
There is a constant flight path of large flying airliners

These Shires constantly see strange lights in these thatched cottage villages
No UFOs, we have not give up hope
says granville

Oh, the irony! The military of most nations such as US and GB are infamous for keeping a low profile when it comes to extraterrestrial life (UFOs). They do keep files that the public don't get to see, otherwise they might all find religion - or some such thing. :)
Governments, being secular and all-inclusive, wouldn't want that to happen. But ET UFOs appear to employ some sort of 'cloaking device' on their craft, else how could they blink out so easily while outracing military jets?

May 04, 2019
I don't know if anyone else..

https://www.syti....ngs.html

I know that they exist, but..
......have never come across one.

one or more of the last astronauts who walked on the Moon came back with a story that they had been given a warning to not return to the Moon..
......who put out the warning? says Benni

They (astronauts) were on the Moon's surface when they MAY have gotten the warning telepathically. I can only assume that that was the method by which they received the warning, since their communications system was only geared to receive messages from mission control and from each other when outside the capsule,
......have never heard of this. I don't get the telepathic part & WHY they were warned to never return, you know like as if they were trespassing on someone else's property or something? says Benni

I said "MAY have". We can only go by the astronauts' reports. But ET does exist, as I HAVE SEEN evidence of i

May 04, 2019
those of us who are searching for Truth in Science.

Lol. Neither you, nor the idiot Benni, have got the faintest clue about any science.
says Castrovagina

Ahh But we are here to LEARN the Truth in Science. As I am not the reincarnation of Albert Einstein, but only a mere scholar and interested observer who is acquiring more and more knowledge of the Universe, you really MUST UNDERSTAND that 'Rome wasn't built in a day'. You may have a long wait for me to acquire enough scientific knowledge to become one of the greatest scientific achievers of whom future humans will admire. Perhaps sometime in the next 199 years, I will have learnt far more than what is presently in that little pointy pinhead of yours.

I see that you haven't commented on the "MIRROR MATTER" that is about to replace the 'Dark Matter" embolism which prevails in the arteries of present-day scientific research. Perhaps you haven't read up on it and don't know about it. Willful ignorance?

May 04, 2019
Ahh But we are here to LEARN the Truth in Science. As I am not the reincarnation of Albert Einstein, but only a mere scholar and interested observer who is acquiring more and more knowledge of the Universe, you really MUST UNDERSTAND that 'Rome wasn't built in a day'. You may have a long wait for me to acquire enough scientific knowledge to become one of the greatest scientific achievers of whom future humans will admire. Perhaps sometime in the next 199 years, I will have learnt far more than what is presently in that little pointy pinhead of yours.

I see that you haven't commented on the "MIRROR MATTER" that is about to replace the 'Dark Matter" embolism which prevails in the arteries of present-day scientific research. Perhaps you haven't read up on it and don't know about it. Willful ignorance?

Get help, you freak.

May 04, 2019
You are right, that graph says it all. See figures 2 and 6 in this paper;
http://www.ptep-o...3-01.PDF
Pretty much shows the above authors are lying POS, just like you and jonesdumb. It shows an alternative explanation which doesn't require your faerie dust pseudoscience.

That is not a paper. It is a piece of erroneous, pathetic crap in a predatory journal, written by a clown who isn't even remotely qualified in the subject areas.

May 04, 2019
And the title of the article above is:
"Dark matter exists: Observations disprove alternate explanations"
++--by International School of Advanced Studies (SISSA)--++

Then it goes on to say:
"New research conducted by SISSA removes the recent doubts on the presence of dark matter within galaxies, disproving the empirical relations in support of alternative theories."

That statement says it ALL. Dark Matter enthusiasts & aficionados who wish to keep the DarkMatter myth alive and well have been, and are, in the process of doing a hatchet-job on all other alternatives to their beloved invisible faerie tale. AND MORE FUNDING IS NEEDED.
BUT WAIT - they STILL haven't come up with the components of which their alleged Dark Matter is composed. All they have is the usual non-science attitude that demands the Dark Matter to BE, but its relationship to normal Matter is still unknown.
They are attempting to negate the TRUTH by getting rid of such alternatives as MIRROR MATTER.

May 04, 2019
SEU, Jonesdave is Toast
SEU> And the title of the article above is:
"Dark matter exists: Observations disprove alternate explanations"
by International School of Advanced Studies

ALL Dark Matter enthusiasts & aficionados who wish to keep the Darkmatter myth alive and well have been and are in the process of doing a hatchet-job on all other alternatives to their beloved invisible faerie tale AND MORE FUNDING IS NEEDED.

They are attempting to negate the TRUTH by getting rid of such alternatives as MIRROR MATTER

Any last shreds of credibility jonesdave retained in his original incarnation
for reasons known only to jonesdave
were lost when he changed alias's
as
jonesdave
May 29, 2015
appears to be a fully functional account
as
jonesdave behaviour has deteriorated since his new incarnation
as
this is proof jonesdave's original account is fully functional
otherwise
Jonesdave would be on his best behaviour!

May 04, 2019
Mirror Matter

This mirror matter is illuminating
there appears Mirror Photons
some one appeared to say mirror matter could not exist
because
it would have to be the equivalent of looking in a mirror
but
this is not the case
it
is the properties of normal matter that is mirrored
not
the amount of mirror matter
there could be any amount of mirror matter
this is, SEU these nimbi's trying to find objections
to anything that disturbs the status quo
Hence
TrollianJonesDave

Tommy Steele, What A Mouth What A North And South

Jimmy Bean was a funny lookin' fella'
If he had another mouth he'd look much wella'
But his face
Cleared him
from winning the beauty show
It was like a steam boat funnel
or a railway arch, or the blackwall tunnel
if you can't see Jim when he opens his mouth you'll know
And as poor jim goes walking about
You can hear the kids all hollerin' out
What?
What? oh erm.
What a mouth!
What A North And South

May 04, 2019
Tommy Steele, OBE

Born Thomas Hicks, 17 December 1936
is an English entertainer
regarded as Britain's first teen idol and rock and roll star
He reached number one with "Singing the Blues" in 1957, and The Tommy Steele Story was the first album by a UK act to reach number one.

Steele's film credits include Half a Sixpence, The Happiest Millionaire and Finian's Rainbow, and he has made many stage tours in the UK.
He is also a songwriter, author, and sculptor: Wikipedia

Tommy Steele, what a mouth
https://www.youtu...MbndXTS0

May 04, 2019
These Shire UFOs
SEU> Oh, the irony! The military of most nations such as US and GB are infamous for keeping a low profile when it comes to extraterrestrial life (UFOs). They do keep files that the public don't get to see, otherwise they might all find religion - or some such thing

SEU, these Ospreys keep these Shire Skies under surveillance
Their eagle eyes are all seeing, these vertical take of Ospreys are moving from Mildenhall to take up residence on Lakenheath runway
These UFOs won't know what to make of these metal birds
SEU, please send some of these UFOs across this pond to keep these Hobbits inhabiting these thatched cottages in check
and
in their spare time these UFOs can go into Newmarket to the races
There are four legged creatures emulating UFOs, as UFO is odds on favourite to win!

May 04, 2019
@Surveillance_Egg_Unit
@granville583762.

May 04, 2019
Mirror Matter

This mirror matter is illuminating
there appears Mirror Photons
some one appeared to say mirror matter could not exist
because
it would have to be the equivalent of looking in a mirror
but
this is not the case
it
is the properties of normal matter that is mirrored
not
the amount of mirror matter
there could be any amount of mirror matter
this is, SEU these nimbi's trying to find objections
to anything that disturbs the status quo
Hence
TrollianJonesDave
says granville

Thanks for the memories, but our big favourite was Lonnie Donegan.

Precisely, it is the properties of normal matter that is mirrored.
One would have thought that jonesy might've appreciated the re-introduction of MIRROR MATTER into the physorg phorum, since he is a steady denizen of these hallowed halls where science enthralls.. But where only Dark Matter was softly spoken of with as much awe and fervour as could be mustered by those who are firm believers in Darkest of Dark

May 04, 2019
RealityCheck
RealityCheck> I have been very patient and hoped you two would realise off your own bat that you are cluttering beyond reasonable limits. It makes the affected threads too difficult to 'clean read'I would ask you politely, on their collective behalf, to keep your mutual off-topic/irrelevant 'chatter-clutter' to an absolute/reasonable minimum, if for no other reason than to set a good example for others who may also be tempted to chatter-clutter likewise. Thanks in anticipation for your cooperation. :)

RealityCheck, granville never complained when on the receiving end of RealityCheck's monsters under stones
RealityCheck, never was it thought that RealityCheck would utter those words
"RealityCheck cannot understand granville"
granville has never joined RealityCheck in his nightly unsavoury extremely rude exchanges
between RealityCheck and his friends
and
In the morning granville has made no mention of RealityCheck's rude exchanges

May 04, 2019
RealityCheck, cross this divide

Mirror Matter
SEU> Precisely, it is the properties of normal matter that is mirrored.
One would have thought that jonesy might've appreciated the re-introduction of MIRROR MATTER since he is a steady denizen of these hallowed halls where science enthrals But where only Dark Matter was softly spoken of with as much awe and fervour as could be mustered by those who are firm believers in Darkest of Dark

SEU, it would be interesting
to
hear RealityCheck's ideas on mirror matter
as this language of these Shires
appears to be confusing RealityCheck some what
as this confuscation Shire language is only a shadow of consfucation it once was
RealityCheck, obviously is coming out his shell
into this new world of plain speaking
but
if RealityCheck is crossing this divide
being as one with this loop
with this Spartan Anew, the old is given way to this new
as
this mirror matter exemplifies this Spartan Anew
RealityCheck has to take this step

May 04, 2019
@S_E_U.

Re "mirror matter" as candidate for 'exotic' DM, it seems just as 'imaginary' a hypothetical particle as any of the other mainstream 'exotic' DM hypothetical particles so far put forward (including super-symmetric 's-particles') yet not found despite many experiments. :)

As I have long pointed out, recent mainstream astro observations/discoveries/reviews indicate strongly that DM is NOT exotic' stuff, but rather 'ordinary' stuff which is being increasingly detected by newer more capable instruments/telescopes because it is too faint/distant etc for previous telescopes/instruments to detect.

When we acknowledge the ordinary stuff now being found in the various distributions/motions involved, and properly apply GR correctly to all the many NON-Keplerian distributions/orbital regimes involved, the 'previously-interpreted-as-anomalous' motions/orbital velocities etc are not so 'anomalous' after all...and Einstein's GR field equations are confirmed correct yet again. :)

May 04, 2019
As I have long pointed out, recent mainstream astro observations/discoveries/reviews indicate strongly that DM is NOT exotic' stuff, but rather 'ordinary' stuff which is being increasingly detected by newer more capable instruments/telescopes because it is too faint/distant etc for previous telescopes/instruments to detect.

Trivially wrong.

May 04, 2019
@granville583762.
been very patient and hoped you two would realise off your own bat that you are cluttering beyond reasonable limits. It makes the affected threads too difficult to 'clean read'I would ask you politely, on their collective behalf, to keep your mutual off-topic/irrelevant 'chatter-clutter' to an absolute/reasonable minimum, if for no other reason than to set a good example for others who may also be tempted to chatter-clutter likewise. Thanks in anticipation for your cooperation. :)
never complained when on the receiving end of RealityCheck's monsters under stones
There's a vast difference between my 'reality checking' posts (aimed also at exposing/taming 'monstrous trolls' etc), and your 'chatter-clutter', granville. :)

My posts made certain monstrous trolls' lives 'uncomfortable' (evidence lengthening absence of a previously-incorrigible troll-clutter master!); whereas your posts now replaces THEIR clutter! Less of it please, granville. :)

May 04, 2019
These Shire UFOs
SEU> Oh, the irony! The military of most nations such as US and GB are infamous for keeping a low profile when it comes to extraterrestrial life (UFOs). They do keep files that the public don't get to see, otherwise they might all find religion - or some such thing

SEU, these Ospreys keep these Shire Skies under surveillance
Their eagle eyes are all seeing, these vertical take of Ospreys are moving from Mildenhall to take up residence on Lakenheath runway
These UFOs won't know what to make of these metal birds
SEU, please send some of these UFOs across this pond to keep these Hobbits inhabiting these thatched cottages in check
and
in their spare time these UFOs can go into Newmarket to the races
There are four legged creatures emulating UFOs, as UFO is odds on favourite to win!
says granville

My, we are having a lively conversation, indeed. LOL
Please do a Wiki Search for: "Rendlesham Forest Incident". England does have SOME UFO stories.

May 04, 2019
@Castrogiovanni.
As I have long pointed out, recent mainstream astro observations/discoveries/reviews indicate strongly that DM is NOT exotic' stuff, but rather 'ordinary' stuff which is being increasingly detected by newer more capable instruments/telescopes because it is too faint/distant etc for previous telescopes/instruments to detect.
Trivially wrong.
Your counterargument is so comprehensively exhaustive and compelling that it is futile to try to argue against it any further, mate! [/gentle sarcasm] :)

Have you actually applied GR properly to all the increasingly found ordinary matter (and yet more indicated still too faint to see yet) to take into account the non-Keplerian distributions/motions involved, @castrogiovanni? If not, then your unsupported/uninformative opinion is useless to science/logic of the reality being increasingly discovered that is not as simplistic a schema as previously assumed which led to the 'GR-anomalies' and 'exotic-DM' claims.

May 04, 2019
RealityCheck, your telling commentators to cease commentating
RealityCheck> There's a vast difference between my 'reality checking' posts (aimed also at exposing/taming 'monstrous trolls' etc), and your 'chatter-clutter', granville. :)

RealityCheck, granville never thought he would see the day
when
RealityCheck would tell a commentator to refrain from commentating
your convoluted style has oft been pointed out
oft been un convoluted in unaltered form
but
RealityCheck, never has granville told RealityCheck to stop commentating
what granville does is tell commentators to comment
RealityCheck, you are obviously having a bad hair day
not only are you deciphering Shire incorrectly
you are telling commentators not to comment
in fact RealityCheck
this
is pretty studious of your self