View Single Post
  #13  
Old 03-04-2011, 03:48 PM
xelasnave's Avatar
xelasnave
Gravity does not Suck

xelasnave is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tabulam
Posts: 17,003
Craig I agree that dark matter is hypothetical..

That was and has been my point for many years....

But the fact is it is hypothetical and yet it is clear that most who write upon its existence do not treat it in such a manner as it is no longer hypothetical but a fact...yes a fact.. this is undeniable it is treated as more than hypothetical and to say otherwisw does not embrace what is going on ...man just read up..and tell me again folk see dark matter as merely hypothetical...they dont.

Dark matter is fact because our sums say it must be so...

Reliance upon math can be dangerous like many things humans say they use with skill it only does what it does..it is the human who corrupts..a gun is a gun and only kills when a human uses it so. I dont blame the gun or the math for an unacceptable outcome.

I see no problem with the math but when humans apply it to things they can and do get it wrong on occasion..not the fault of math but the fault is in its application..... and I recall how those dumb Greeks figured that the Earth was the center and the planets revolved in circular fashion about it...the math proof said it was irrefutably so ..but the math although correct did not show the reality ..the math proved the reality those Greeks had worked out but they had worked out the incorrect reality.. OK those Greeks were ignorant fools who have nothing of the sophistication humans have today but I suggest that a similar problem exists in so far as our math can support the unsupportable and deny a correct view of reality.....

there is no doubt in my mind that for most dark matter is a fact beyond doubt and not regarded as a mere hypothetical proposition..

It is not correct to say it is only hypothetical because dark matter is not embraced in such a manner ..since Vera Ruben put it out there it has only existed as a hypothetical I think not... who out there sees it as hypothetical...only you and me I suggest...really it is nice to say that it is all it is but for most it is now a fact..most folk do not see it as hypothetical as for them it is real..if it is not real then our science as to gravity is simply wrong is it not???.. read the articles and ask yourself..do these folk call dark matter hypothetical..clearly they do not and so there are only a few of us who see dark matter as hypothetical because science has absolutely embraced it..as science must if they are to support the current views of gravity.
If hypothetical why do they have those vats of cleaning fluid in mines ..to find hypothetical dark matter?

Dark matter is more than hypothetical and that is the danger for alternatives will never be presented..

AND so I say my concerns, that dark matter is treated as an acceptable answer to the observations that do not fit our sums, are valid...WE have a hypothetical view carrying the weight of sciences endorsement.

ANYWAYS science should not for one moment entertain such rampant speculation upon one single matter to the exclusion of any alternative if it is indeed merely hypothetical...we chat about hy[potheticals but leaqve it before experiment I would think...we cant have a hypothetical given such a degree of respect such that all other than it is eliminated.... and so I ask what alternatives do we have to dark matter...none you say or will say and such a answer proves that there is a determination to have only one result and that result is the one that supports all we have supported to date..irrespective that many observations simply cut away the ground under the theory (dark matter) stand upon...I presume although hypothetical dark matter is nevertheless treated as a theory..a very high level of reality be that to those keen to limit science to hypothesis, observation, prediction, theory and sample testing to establish trends etc.

I disagree that the observations support the concept of dark matter....the interpretations of the observations is another matter.

The pioneer is set aside on the basis that we are right on gravity so there must be something else going wrong because certainly our views as to how gravity works is not wrong....

An observation is used by folk to establish as a fact what they already believe in my view.

I heard about some aborigines who believe that winter occurs because a certain flower blooms. AND clearly when the flower blooms winter does follow...now they have an observation and a prediction of sorts which strangely all fit..and yet one feels they may have missed what is really going on..I suggest that what has been going on when attempts are made to fit the unpleasant observations with our current sums is similar...Could it be that reality is missed by those who must fit what they observe into a universe they have in effect laid plans to well before their observations...it does seem to me that there is a desire to prove what we know is right even when the observations have various opportunity of interpretation... to limit an observation to one set of outcomes seems to do no more than those aboriginals who attribute the coming of winter to the appearance of a specific bloom...why can we look at these folk as being ignorant of reality when we do much similar in our interpretation of our observations...

The big bang takes an observation of an apparent expansion of the universe with glee as it offers support for the theory..is any other outcome considered..no of course not ..is this any different to our aboriginal interpretation of the blooms that bring winter?

I do think that as we specialize we do lose the ability to consider alternatives and I find that the absence of an alternative to dark matter laughable in the extreme....

Folk say I have an approach that is not scientific and yet I would suggest that I at least do not get carried away by a single concept and single possible interpretation of how the universe may work and do not present a hypothetical as an answer only to say it is only hypothetical if questioned....

AND I ask..what more should one "learn up" as to dark matter.
Is it that we dont understand the math? Dark matter is there to explain the unexplainable in that the universe is not obeying our sums..dam universe..

what more does one have to "learn up" to find an uneasiness with a proposition that suggests of all that is out there we can not observe the bulk of it and that this "dark matter" only shows itself by gravitational influences ..is it not us who have determined in advance what these gravitational influence must be....is it all so neat and nice now we have dark matter cause the sums now work ... what more does one have to "learn up" to find the concept that gravity is a weak force because much of its power "leaks" into another dimension or universe..there must be a big universe draining off the gravity when it comes to dark matter I guess....AND although these concepts may be supportable in math I do think that observation and testing is still where science finds its strength and that speculation upon things we can not see and can never see (or observe) is the strength of witch craft and superstition.

I have no time to edit so I hope grammar etc is ok

alex
Reply With Quote