>>13628930>the most sensible explanation of something they can't experiment with themselvesso you look at a galaxy and you invent a model of gravitation in that galaxy based on the galaxy's apparent external radiation of electromagnetic waves.
you then inspect that same galaxy spectroscopically and measure the rotation rate of the galaxy.
if the spectroscopically measured rotation rate does not equal the rotation rates predicted by the model of gravity based on the gravity's total light output, is the most sensible explanation that 85% of everything is secretly invisible and noninteracting in any way except for that its normally interacting for the purposes of gravity or is the most sensible explanation that the model of gravity based on total light output was inaccurate?
keep in mind that that the original model of gravity that failed to accurately predict observed galactic rotation rates was very incomplete, and does not include anything to account for observed hubble expansion and a number of other meaningful factors.
