Tidbits of Conspiracy News

TIDBIT: DARK TIMES FOR DARK MATTER?

I never cease to be amazed at the ability of the Standard Model of Physics to multiply entities(an Ockhamist reference for those paying attention to the non-Ockhamist tendencies of modern physics). Well, for those of you following this, there is now:

Dark Matter May Not Exist At All

And gee, where have we heard this before?:

"When the idea of dark matter first pushed its way into astronomers’ consciousness a few decades ago, the primary reaction was: 'Seriously? There’s a mysterious, invisible substance out there, with a mass six or more times greater than that of the visible stars and galaxies, only we have no way of detecting it, but really, it’s there? OK then.' Or something like that, albeit in more formal scientific language."

 

12 thoughts on “TIDBIT: DARK TIMES FOR DARK MATTER?”

  1. OK Yaj: lets have it: what is wrong with Newton’s equations of motion?

    An explanation here, or references to other sources would be much appreciated.

    I would hazard a guess that Newton is pretty much correct, but that sometimes there are other things going on in addition to gravity, such as good ‘ole electromagnetism.

    1. You don’t seem to realize that it’s not me that’s positing that Newton’s equations of motion may not be universal, it’s others who’ve punted things like this alternative explanation of galaxy shape.

      So you can investigate their claims by yourself, those claims aren’t particularly interesting to me.

      One problem with Newton’s equations, and I believe one that he acknowledged, they don’t say what gravity is. But that’s not the kind of problem these other theories generally address. NB: There are huge problems with what electromagnetism is too.

  2. I’m into a few pages of Jim Marrs new book “Our Occulted History”, but it is very plain to see that Jim is taking the mainstream academia “apart”.

    Just a few pages mind you, but a least Jim is trying to make it very clear, that the MONUMENTAL LIES we are being fed will eventually come to an end.

    The world is full of Pinnokio’s and Jim is on to them BIG TIME.

  3. This maybe off topic but not by very much in the same vane. Have you read the two new theories of why the Neanderthals went extinct first they couldn’t hunt rabbits the second their eyes were bigger than ours therefore they were some what dumber than us. Well here a drink to our perfect masters in science caught with their pants down. I kid you not about these stories they have been making the rounds of the science websites look fir them your self. This story does not surprise me if it facts or dogma they choose dogma most of the time.

  4. What really bothered me was when Stacy McGaugh stated: “I bothered to learn about MOND…Many of the more vocal critics choose to remain willfully ignorant.”

    When did it become a “bother” for professional scientists to learn about an alternative theory that actually has explanatory power?

    Where would we be in our understanding of the universe if our researchers got off their smug @%#es and actually “bothered to learn” enough about non-mainstream theories of the universe, rather than learning how to give cute sound bytes for the “Discovery Channel” or the “Science Channel?”

    PS: When did “spot on” enter the vernacular? With the movie, Oceans 13?

    1. I have to agree with you Thomas… We owe much to scientists who were willing to take a look at the “alternative stream”. Where would science be without Copernicus, Kepler, Leibniz, Newton? Yet, these titans of mathematics and science were each influenced by esoteric tradition and streams of knowledge that today would be considered and denounced as pseudo-science, and those showing interest in such things as pseudo-scientists. The glib sound bite and argument from “authority” has become the norm, sadly.

      1. “The glib sound bite and argument from “authority” has become the norm, sadly”- I think you’re absolutely right, Dr. Farrell- for hundreds of years or more mankind blindly accepts “authority” as the truth as opposed to the truth being the authority

        Larry in Germany

  5. The idea that gravity may be different in different situations, and that difference therefore may explain the movement and bunching of galaxies, has been punted about for years as an alternative to dark matter. The problem is that science can’t stand to let go of modeling systems–in this case Newton’s equations of motion.

    1. OK Yaj: lets have it: what is wrong with Newton’s equations of motion?

      An explanation here, or references to other sources would be much appreciated.

      I would hazard a guess that Newton is pretty much correct, but that sometimes there are other things going on in addition to gravity, such as good ‘ole electromagnetism.

Comments are closed.