/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #11034599

234KiB, 936x848, dm.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Sat 05 Oct 19:50:30 2019 No.11034599 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>11034602 >>11035059 >>11035935 >>11036392 >>11036487 >>11036578 >>11036598 >>11036803 >>11037021 >>11037028

Do you think dark matter will stand the test of time?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 05 Oct 2019 19:51:36 No.11034602 Report

Quoted By: >>11036052

>>11034599
http://www.astronomy.com/news/2019/09/astronomers-cant-agree-on-galaxies-without-dark-matter

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 05 Oct 2019 22:57:14 No.11035059 Report

Quoted By:

>>11034599
no one even knows what dark matter is

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 05:47:23 No.11035926 Report

Quoted By:

bump

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 05:52:59 No.11035935 Report

Quoted By:

>>11034599
Nah.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 06:50:22 No.11036052 Report

Quoted By: >>11036350

>>11034602
>oh noes, discussion
fuck off jesusnut

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 07:00:54 No.11036072 Report

Quoted By:

My money is on a unified quantum gravity giving us a model which fits.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO amused.jpg, 103KiB, 1280x720

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 09:19:56 No.11036317 Report

Quoted By:

My money is on self-moving stars.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 09:44:36 No.11036350 Report

Quoted By:

>>11036052
I didn’t imply anything though.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO giphy (1).gif, 3MiB, 480x270

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 10:15:12 No.11036392 Report

Quoted By: >>11036481

>>11034599
>dark matter
>real

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 10:54:42 No.11036481 Report

Quoted By: >>11036495 >>11037297

>>11036392
Propose something better then that fits all the astronomical observations.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 10:57:01 No.11036487 Report

Quoted By: >>11036578

>>11034599
But anon... dark matter IS time.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 11:00:41 No.11036495 Report

Quoted By: >>11036509

>>11036481
Not an argument.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 11:06:40 No.11036509 Report

Quoted By: >>11037297

>>11036495
It's a better one than yours.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 11:35:52 No.11036567 Report

Quoted By:

NGC1052-DF2 is an artificial galaxy. Those ayys are serious business so stay away.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 11:47:53 No.11036578 Report

Quoted By: >>11037031

>>11036487
Then it doesn't exist. time is imaginary measure of motion, motion is the real one.

>>11034599
The problem with todays science is that there is a lot of scientism lots of goobers who start believing in scifi shit one of the major offenders is unironically Hawkings he was smart but a retard at the same time.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO astrophysics[1].png, 28KiB, 579x328

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 12:04:20 No.11036598 Report

Quoted By: >>11036673 >>11036780

>>11034599
Likely yes. There is no reason at all to expect most matter in the universe to interact with light. If you think about it, something like a dark matter seems natural.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 12:07:23 No.11036603 Report

Quoted By:

dark matter is the only explanation that fits observation. it isn't going anywhere, it will only be refined

i bet half of /sci/ is unironic MONDfags

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 13:01:12 No.11036673 Report

Quoted By:

>>11036598
Honestly the idea of a dark sector of particle physics has always spooped me at an existential level.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 14:14:58 No.11036780 Report

Quoted By: >>11036806 >>11037075

>>11036598
Why are there galaxies without it then?

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1542861167844.jpg, 126KiB, 1131x622

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 14:24:20 No.11036803 Report

Quoted By:

>>11034599
dark matter, dark energy, dark numbers - same cope in different forms

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 14:26:11 No.11036806 Report

Quoted By: >>11036842

>>11036780
first, those findings are disputed, literally what OP's article is about
second, what makes more sense, galaxies variant in the distribution of matter they contain or galaxies literally randomly choosing to follow entirely different laws of physics

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 14:43:24 No.11036842 Report

Quoted By: >>11036854

>>11036806
What’s more likely? That the current models are incomplete or that there are some yet understand phenomenon or that there is some kind of substance which cannot be measured?

>but the math just works

You can make any theory work if you can add any random amount of matter (or anything) to the equations.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 14:49:13 No.11036854 Report

Quoted By: >>11037026

>>11036842
>some kind of substance which cannot be measured
that would only be true if we could not observe any of the effects of gravity

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 16:06:57 No.11036997 Report

Quoted By: >>11037056

How do dark matter alternatives explain galaxies that don't have any apparent dark matter? Why do some galaxies have their MOND turned off?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 16:18:15 No.11037021 Report

Quoted By:

>>11034599
It may. But that is assuming all matter in all dimensions emits photons.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 16:20:15 No.11037025 Report

Quoted By:

Primordial black holes seem more likely to me

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 16:20:55 No.11037026 Report

Quoted By: >>11037096

>>11036854
No. We observe that nature is acting differently than it should be according to our best models. Now in any case this would mean that there are problems with the current model. Instead of that however we come up with dark matter and we ‘manually’ correct the results. Reminder that it’s not even just some nuance but theoretically 85% of mass of the entire Universe.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 16:21:53 No.11037028 Report

Quoted By:

>>11034599
>Do you think dark matter will stand the test of time?

There is no *think*. That would be to have faith in unverified conclusions.
Either the model is refuted and replaced, or it isn’t. That’s it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 16:22:56 No.11037031 Report

Quoted By:

>>11036578
>time is imaginary measure of motion

Oh no it’s one of those “time isn’t real” schizos

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 16:32:01 No.11037056 Report

Quoted By: >>11037059 >>11039007

>>11036997
You don’t need to be able to present a better alternative to point out a theory’s possible inconsistencies. I’m not a MOND fag btw and I don’t have other pet ideas. What I claim is that the existance of dark matter is questionable and applying it to the observed natural phenomenon could be a methodological error where theory comes before observation.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 16:33:01 No.11037059 Report

Quoted By: >>11037153

>>11037056
>methodological error where theory comes before observation

Like the higgs boson?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 16:39:25 No.11037075 Report

Quoted By: >>11038617

>>11036780
>Why are there galaxies without it then?

Why wouldn't there be? That is exactly what you wouold expect if there is dark matter. If the cause is a new type of matter, then it will be somewhat randomly distributed just like regular matter. So some galaxies will have little of it.

If the cause is a new law of physics, then it you would not expect any galaxies without "dark matter" at all.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 16:47:02 No.11037096 Report

Quoted By:

>>11037026
>Instead of that however we come up with dark matter and we ‘manually’ correct the results.
no, that's what happens when we try to adjust the models. hilarious degrees of tuning to get a desired result which much be manually altered for every galaxy and situation. galaxies with various levels of dark matter - oh i guess the gravitational constant not only varies with scale but also differs from one galaxy to the next. galaxies which collide and show displaced gravity where dark matter has disassociated from normal matter - guess the laws of physics and colliding galaxies have, what, a lag time?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 17:12:27 No.11037153 Report

Quoted By:

>>11037059
Comes first not in time but in importance. By the way who measured dark matter? It must be a plenty of it everywhere. Well except in a few galaxies.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 06 Oct 2019 18:35:41 No.11037297 Report

Quoted By:

>>11036481
God would work too
>>11036509

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 07 Oct 2019 07:03:32 No.11038617 Report

Quoted By:

>>11037075
Didn't scientist claim that they knew how much matter must be in the universe, since there was a little more matter than antimatter at the start of time or something

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 07 Oct 2019 11:06:30 No.11039007 Report

Quoted By:

>>11037056
>You don’t need to be able to present a better alternative to point out a theory’s possible inconsistencies.
What inconsistencies are you talking about?

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches