/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #11394347

61KiB, 500x639, 1569043038886.png

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Anonymous Mon 17 Feb 22:52:54 2020 No.11394347 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>11394499 >>11394512 >>11394698 >>11394736 >>11395435 >>11395469 >>11395818 >>11400290

>Astronomers simulate galaxy formation without dark matter and find it still works. The research bolsters a "controversial" claim that dark matter doesn't really exist, and is instead the result of the laws of gravity working differently on different scales.
https://astronomy.com/news/2020/02/controversial-simulation-creates-galaxies-without-using-dark-matter

Darkies are in denial and call the simulation "controversial" because it contradicts their cult.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 17 Feb 2020 23:33:01 No.11394499 Report

Quoted By:

>>11394347
based
fuck dorkoid "matter"

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO bAV.gif, 142KiB, 900x480

Anonymous Mon 17 Feb 2020 23:35:06 No.11394510 Report

Quoted By:

hey what's goin on in here seems pretty cool

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 17 Feb 2020 23:35:47 No.11394512 Report

Quoted By: >>11394532

>>11394347
ok maybe dark matter doesnt real but what about dark energy which is whats thought to contribute to the current sped up inflation, is that still valid in this no dark matter theory

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 17 Feb 2020 23:43:54 No.11394532 Report

Quoted By: >>11394558

>>11394512
There’s no dark matter theory, dark matter is literally op’s pic, the x variable that we are yet to find in our equations. According to the research, previous math was wrong and there was no need for this x all along

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 17 Feb 2020 23:52:30 No.11394558 Report

Quoted By: >>11394572 >>11395833

>>11394532
What about the whole 80% of the universe matter is dark matter thing, that's a false claim too under this theory then right, I always thought it was BS.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 17 Feb 2020 23:56:44 No.11394572 Report

Quoted By: >>11394634

>>11394558
What it means is that physicists need to make up 80% of fake matter in their flawed calculations for them to match up with reality which is just a lazy way of using old flawed math by changing the input variables instead of figuring out what is wrong about the math, dark matter by definition is not real since known matter is no longer "dark".

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 18 Feb 2020 00:17:34 No.11394634 Report

Quoted By: >>11394675 >>11395465 >>11398832

>>11394572
I thought the whole belief in dark matter was the result of other more strongly supported facts. That is, we measure the universe being pretty much flat with a huge degree of certainty but the we’re missing the amount of matter we think we need for a flat universe. Also, the universe is expanding at a certain rate higher than we expect it and the matter we’d need is exactly what we need for a flat universe. I don’t know, I know it was some weird coincidence like that.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 18 Feb 2020 00:27:41 No.11394675 Report

Quoted By: >>11394770

>>11394634

So the universe is not flat?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 18 Feb 2020 00:33:48 No.11394698 Report

Quoted By:

>>11394347
>laws of gravity working differently on different scales
maybe it is right I dunno, but that sounds just another type of cope

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 18 Feb 2020 00:50:35 No.11394736 Report

Quoted By: >>11394787

>>11394347
ITT: undergrads not understanding what dark matter and dark energy mean.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 18 Feb 2020 01:04:13 No.11394770 Report

Quoted By:

>>11394675
Except the shape is measured using CMBR, nothing to do with dark matter. I forget what degree of certainty they claim for a flat universe, but I know it was absurdly small. Dark matter itself is a really iffy concept, but it is inferred from the results of much stronger scientific facts.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 18 Feb 2020 01:08:56 No.11394787 Report

Quoted By: >>11394904 >>11395509

>>11394736
Casual ignoramus here.

I thought they were merely placeholders. Unknowns which balance the equation to explain the observational evidence. The reason being that perhaps these quantities do exist, in which case we can look for evidence of them and perhaps learn about a new source of energy and matter we didn't previously know about. Or if they dont, then there is some error with the observational evidence we have collected so far, or else some error with our calculations. Either way we get to learn something new.

Is that a fair summary or have I missed the point entirely?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 18 Feb 2020 01:44:35 No.11394902 Report

Quoted By:

Dark matter? More like dark shatter into pieces.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO loadsomoney.jpg, 137KiB, 640x640

Anonymous Tue 18 Feb 2020 01:45:29 No.11394904 Report

Quoted By: >>11395370

>>11394787
there are forces at work here you can not possibly comprehend.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 18 Feb 2020 05:29:48 No.11395370 Report

Quoted By: >>11395430

>>11394904
t. schizo with guaranteed 0% scientific support for his claim

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 18 Feb 2020 05:57:46 No.11395430 Report

Quoted By: >>11395477

>>11395370
Read OP, dark matter has been scientifically debunked.

Hoaxfag

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1576414069160.jpg, 901KiB, 1668x1537

Hoaxfag Tue 18 Feb 2020 06:00:42 No.11395435 Report

Quoted By:

>>11394347
Pic related.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 18 Feb 2020 06:11:51 No.11395465 Report

Quoted By: >>11396826

>>11394634
No. Dark matter came about when someone looked at how quickly galaxies spin, realized they needed to have way more mass than what had been calculated to have enough gravity to not come apart and thus made up dark matter.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 18 Feb 2020 06:14:08 No.11395469 Report

Quoted By:

>>11394347
Your OP pic is retarded.
If you have evidence that the answer is 3 and you have evidence that there is a 1+1 then you'd be quite certain there is another 1 there somewhere.
Did you finish high school math?

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 18 Feb 2020 06:18:13 No.11395477 Report

Quoted By: >>11395510 >>11395512

>>11395430
>dark matter has been debunked
no, dark matter is a concept that can be carried by adaptations in GR, contrary to the brainlet-tier belief that it is necessarily matter.
OP’s article has merely found a candidate for dark matter, a hypothesis that has to be tested and make predictions just like WIMPs

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 18 Feb 2020 06:49:25 No.11395509 Report

Quoted By: >>11395512

>>11394787
Pretty much that. The name does hint at a preference for something massive causing the effects, but that's not how it was meant. It simply means "there's something causing pull which our equations can't explain, yet, but if we add a mass term it works out so maybe it's matter". They never ruled out a change in physical law.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 18 Feb 2020 06:50:13 No.11395510 Report

Quoted By: >>11395536

>>11395477
>OP’s article has merely found a candidate for dark matter
No, it doesn't make up any fake matter, it just tweaks the assumptions about the laws of physics into something more accurate.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 18 Feb 2020 06:51:17 No.11395512 Report

Quoted By:

>>11395509
Didn't see that this guy >>11395477 already btfo op.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 18 Feb 2020 07:05:23 No.11395536 Report

Quoted By:

>>11395510
according to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter
-> observational evidence
and
-> alternative hypotheses
MONDs have a pretty weak case against lambda-cdm
And it is sensible to talk about Dark Matter as the discrepancies between observation and GR calculations with baryonic matter.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 18 Feb 2020 10:16:01 No.11395818 Report

Quoted By:

>>11394347
This confirms my theory about dark intelligence. The more a subject requires intelligence the more anyone who tries to tackle it ends up being a retard about it. Modern astrophysics are a pretty good example:
>hurr folding extra dimensions as strings to explain anything we want
>durr dark matter and dark energy
You need to be very smart just to reach that level of retardation.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 18 Feb 2020 10:23:24 No.11395833 Report

Quoted By: >>11398799

>>11394558

It means astrophysicists made various predictions and models about the universe, which were then contradicted by literally every observation.

Being astrophysicists, they then came to the only reasonable conclusion, namely that their ideas were 100% correct and that there was ust a huge amount of completely unobservable mass and energy out there to complete their equations.

Anonymous

Anonymous Tue 18 Feb 2020 20:11:03 No.11396826 Report

Quoted By: >>11398809

>>11395465
Wow that's fucking lazy, it just seems like a misunderstanding of how gravity behaves on the galactic scale

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 3661F715-33CC-4DCB-9102-06C55506 (...).jpg, 99KiB, 960x694

Anonymous Wed 19 Feb 2020 09:16:00 No.11398477 Report

Quoted By:

*blocks your path*

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 19 Feb 2020 13:22:19 No.11398799 Report

Quoted By: >>11401319

>>11395833
read up on the topic or at least read the thread before you shit it up with your unqualified opinions.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 19 Feb 2020 13:32:23 No.11398809 Report

Quoted By:

>>11396826
nope, there’s also gravitational lensing with no apparent source, galaxy clusters, galaxy collisions with offset centers of mass, the CMB, the breaking of the Virial theorem and accelerated expansion in a flat universe to explain, all of which explained coincidentally with the same distribution of dark matter/energy.
Sure, gravity could behave differently on different scales, but no alternative theory that exists so far can explain all of these problems.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 19 Feb 2020 13:50:57 No.11398828 Report

Quoted By: >>11403799

MOND is trash

General relativity with imaginary matter is also trash. Imagine adding up oranges, coming up with a number that doesn't match the weight and then coming up with "dark oranges" as an ad hoc to explain why you counted it wrong

Electrostatic fluid-like spacetime is where lies the answer

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 19 Feb 2020 13:54:06 No.11398832 Report

Quoted By: >>11398850

>>11394634
>huge degree of certainty
Flowery language spotted

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 19 Feb 2020 14:09:48 No.11398850 Report

Quoted By: >>11398851

>>11398832
>provides no numbers to correct op

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 19 Feb 2020 14:10:55 No.11398851 Report

Quoted By:

>>11398850
Flowery numbers

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 19 Feb 2020 22:47:45 No.11400290 Report

Quoted By:

>>11394347
based

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 20 Feb 2020 06:07:22 No.11401319 Report

Quoted By: >>11402585

>>11398799
If you're so well versed on the topic why can't you explain why he's wrong?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 20 Feb 2020 18:33:35 No.11402585 Report

Quoted By:

>>11401319
I already did at least 2 times in this thread

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 21 Feb 2020 02:22:30 No.11403799 Report

Quoted By:

>>11398828
>electric universe theory
Come back with something that hasn't been falsified

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