/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #11079300

138KiB, 693x752, external-content.duckduckgo.com.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Mon 21 Oct 08:36:27 2019 No.11079300 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>11079509 >>11079513 >>11079514 >>11079541 >>11079649 >>11079666 >>11079794 >>11080480

List of elementary, basic, 100% true super-real universal-law tier facts:

>Science as we understand it now is 100% correct across all the universe
>There is no possibility of unforeseeable paradigm shifts in physics
>Energy is conserved
>No FTL communication
>Aristotelian mechanics is a true and incomplete description of reality
>Anyone who disagrees with me needs to find a dozen peer reviewed meta-analyses to back them up
>Anyone who has logical objections to my tenets of Absolute Truth is pseudoscience and other buzzwords
>Anyone who demands proof for my Absolute Truth is uneducated and lacks understanding of the Scientific Method

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Oct 2019 11:10:30 No.11079509 Report

Quoted By:

>>11079300
based.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Oct 2019 11:12:18 No.11079513 Report

Quoted By:

>>11079300
I agree

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Oct 2019 11:13:03 No.11079514 Report

Quoted By:

>>11079300
>Energy is conserved
what is dark energy
what is GR

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Oct 2019 11:45:49 No.11079541 Report

Quoted By:

>>11079300
based

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Oct 2019 12:28:41 No.11079586 Report

Quoted By:

>The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Oct 2019 13:16:41 No.11079649 Report

Quoted By: >>11079668 >>11079670

>>11079300
Kekd
The standard model doesn’t work without plugging in the difference of the error when compared with reality though, because stars don’t move like they should.
This puts the standard model at “useful but wrong” at best.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Oct 2019 13:33:03 No.11079666 Report

Quoted By:

>>11079300
>t. fucking pseud
The idea of "universal laws" is unscientific. Science isn't an ideology which lays down unquestionable dogma, it's a process which we use to learn about the universe.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Oct 2019 13:34:18 No.11079668 Report

Quoted By: >>11079794 >>11079802 >>11080493 >>11080497

>>11079649
god i hate it when people use the term "standard model" when they are trying to act smart about astrophysics. in common parlence the "standard model" refers to the one in particle physics.

anyhow the standard model of cosmology, called lambdaCDM, fixes the rotation curve of galaxies by simply incorporating dark matter which is strongly supported observationally

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Oct 2019 13:35:08 No.11079670 Report

Quoted By: >>11079733

>>11079649
>because stars don’t move like they should.

I’m aware that the standard model is wrong because it fails to predict the fact neutrinos have mass, but what’s this about stars moving in unpredicted ways?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Oct 2019 14:08:30 No.11079733 Report

Quoted By:

>>11079670
he's confusing the standard model of particle physics with the lambdaCDM model of cosmology (which unfortunately gets called "the standard model of cosmology" sometimes, and people get confused because they don't know what "of cosmology" means versus "of particle physics")

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Oct 2019 14:28:01 No.11079794 Report

Quoted By:

>>11079300
Based and Aristotle-pilled.
>>11079668
*parlance.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Oct 2019 14:30:23 No.11079802 Report

Quoted By: >>11079850 >>11079854

>>11079668
>fixes the rotation curve of galaxies by simply incorporating dark matter which is strongly supported observationally
I surmise that very strong elephants are not only holding the Earth, but also pushing it upwards, as experimentally verified by the fact that Earth doesn't fall.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Oct 2019 14:57:39 No.11079850 Report

Quoted By:

>>11079802
oh wow internet anti-astronomy troll BTFOs dark matter with epic strawman, Peebles’ nobel revoked

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Oct 2019 14:59:28 No.11079854 Report

Quoted By:

>>11079802
What testable predictions do magic elephants provide?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Oct 2019 20:53:14 No.11080480 Report

Quoted By:

>>11079300
>No FTL communication
what about wormholes and shit? or does that not count since the speed itself is still not FTL?

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Oct 2019 20:57:18 No.11080493 Report

Quoted By: >>11080578 >>11080600

>>11079668
You repeated what I said, “dark matter” is the name for the imaginary number (which is plugged in as whatever amount it needs to be to correct observational error with our theories) that fixes the difference of the error.
Dark matter is supposedly 95% of our universe as a result, but totally undetectable, we just know it’s there because otherwise it means we are wrong, and like you say we can’t be wrong.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Oct 2019 20:59:33 No.11080497 Report

Quoted By: >>11080600

>>11079668
Dark Matter’s value is determined by the error in our calculations to what’s actually observed, it’s basically little more than a placeholder idea and it will be replaced in the future.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Oct 2019 21:36:35 No.11080578 Report

Quoted By:

>>11080493
>Dark matter is supposedly 95% of our universe as a result
good lord you're an idiot

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Oct 2019 21:46:55 No.11080600 Report

Quoted By: >>11080607

>>11080493
>>11080497
no, you’re wrong. if you use gravitational lending to measure the mass of galaxies, they are heavier than the normal matter that you can see. so then if you assume that the rest of the mass is like ordinary normal matter except it doesn’t interact using the non-gravitational forces, you find it would form clouds around the parts of the galaxy made of normal matter. so this is a well-motivated model to explain the mass that is apparently missing.

now, if you go back to the old model where the mass of galaxies is only the normal matter we see, then you get the problem with stellar motion (i.e. the trot action curve of galaxies). however, if you use the same model that makes up for the missing mass in the gravitational lensing observations—the exact same model—it fixes the rotation curve issue automatically. no fudging needed.

i know you hate science and astronomy but quit whining like a retard

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 21 Oct 2019 21:49:20 No.11080607 Report

Quoted By:

>>11080600
*lensing not “lending” and
*rotation not “trot action”

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