The “dark matter” is a generic surrogate invented to provide credibility to the “Big Bang” theory. It represents what we do not know nor, apparently, what we are willing to acknowledge. It represents an alternative to the religious description of the underlying order to our universe. At this time, both can legitimately be considered as articles of faith.
The science of astronomy is suffering, and being exploited, in a manner analogous to the observed quick transition from weather to climate, before the former, which represents a simpler and causal problem, is fully characterized; and, presumably, for the same reason.
Dark matter is observable gravity fields unaccounted by stars, black holes, quasars, dust and gas and do not reveal themselves by any other effects except gravitation. But reality of these concentrations of matter is beyond any doubt, since the laws of celestial mechanics are so firmly established and precise that any differencies in star motion can be used to calculate distribution of mass in space perfectly well. The nature of this matter is another thing, here we all are, indeed, in the dark.
n.n. what Sergey says. You are way off-base as to what we characterize as “dark matter.”
My guess, for what it’s worth, is that this problem and others such as the Higgs, may all be solved when someone finally figures out how to merge General Relativity with Quantum Mechanics. That is, how to successfully quantize spacetime itself. Won’t be me; I’m one of those lowly experimentalists 🙂
“how to merge General Relativity with Quantum Mechanics”
That is exactly the problem which Einstein tried to solve for 30 years and failed. And all further attempts failed too. I would not be surprised if somebody one day will prove that it is simply unsolvable, that is, the basic premises of these two theories are not compatible.
Ah, theory precious theory. Kinda like religion. There are two basic presumptions of Big Bang cosmology: that the observed red shift is a Doppler effect and that gravity is the only long range force that rules the heavens. Holding these premises as revealed Truth has led to a plethora of mystical particles, undetectable and unknowable, created on an ad-hoc basis to explain all the nasty little surprises uncovered by subsequent observations.
Rube Goldberg would be proud.
There are no competitive theories alternative to Big Bang. And lots of observations supporting these basic assumptions, like distribution of relict radiation. Moreover, Doppler effect and universality of gravity laws are not revealed truth but unescapable inference from pletora of observations and experiments. Theoretical physics is so coherent and mathematically brilliant that it can not be arbitrary modified, only completely rejected if there were something else to replace it. But now there no anything else.
Theoretical physics is something to pursue for its own sake, but our math is limited and subject to revision as is our imagination. We homo sapiens are blind men/women stumbling in the darkness of our limitations much like the proverbial blind men feeling the tail, the tusks, the ears, the legs, etc. of an elephant and each comes up with his own explanation of what he has touched. This doesn’t mean we should stop trying to understand, it means we should be humble.
Yes, Roy, no alternatives. The source you cited is so tinfoil-hat, that it does not worth any discussion. (Here even reality of neutron stars and black holes is denied.) Learn some real physics before jumping on bandwagon of ignorant fantasists.
Sergey,
I am truly disappointed. I attempted to initiate a discussion of a subject that is a matter of serious dispute and you respond with considerable invective and personal insult.
The first of the above references cites many articles on plasma cosmology. If you were to look at it you will find that there a number of Nobel Prize winners cited.
You know absolutely nothing about my background in physics or mathematics. I daresay that I have been intensely interested in these questions since well before you were born. I have done course work in both General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. Granted, we used slide rules in those days, but I had a 45 year career in computer technology. Perhaps, young whippersnapper, some day you will shed your acolyte’s robes and start to look at the world outside of your catechism.
Regards,
Roy
My cathehism is science, and beyond it there is nothing worthy serious consideration. “Plasma cosmology” which begins with denial of well established astronomical facts and theories, like existence of neutron stars and black holes, is simply nonsence.
From 1978 to 2000 I was science editor in “Mir Publishers”, a dedicated science book publisher of translations of foreign scientific literature, in Russia practically monopolist in the field. I can say definitely that I read, translated or edited everything important in theoretical and mathematical physics, and still never heard about any viable alternative to so called “standard model” of theoretical physics, except string theory. I was a translator of monograph “String Theory” by Kaku.
I think they are either an alien fleet moving around or some two interstellar factions are having a war that we can see all the way out here.
Leave a Reply
HTML tags allowed in your
comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
The “dark matter” is a generic surrogate invented to provide credibility to the “Big Bang” theory. It represents what we do not know nor, apparently, what we are willing to acknowledge. It represents an alternative to the religious description of the underlying order to our universe. At this time, both can legitimately be considered as articles of faith.
The science of astronomy is suffering, and being exploited, in a manner analogous to the observed quick transition from weather to climate, before the former, which represents a simpler and causal problem, is fully characterized; and, presumably, for the same reason.
Dark matter is observable gravity fields unaccounted by stars, black holes, quasars, dust and gas and do not reveal themselves by any other effects except gravitation. But reality of these concentrations of matter is beyond any doubt, since the laws of celestial mechanics are so firmly established and precise that any differencies in star motion can be used to calculate distribution of mass in space perfectly well. The nature of this matter is another thing, here we all are, indeed, in the dark.
n.n. what Sergey says. You are way off-base as to what we characterize as “dark matter.”
My guess, for what it’s worth, is that this problem and others such as the Higgs, may all be solved when someone finally figures out how to merge General Relativity with Quantum Mechanics. That is, how to successfully quantize spacetime itself. Won’t be me; I’m one of those lowly experimentalists 🙂
“how to merge General Relativity with Quantum Mechanics”
That is exactly the problem which Einstein tried to solve for 30 years and failed. And all further attempts failed too. I would not be surprised if somebody one day will prove that it is simply unsolvable, that is, the basic premises of these two theories are not compatible.
Ah, theory precious theory. Kinda like religion. There are two basic presumptions of Big Bang cosmology: that the observed red shift is a Doppler effect and that gravity is the only long range force that rules the heavens. Holding these premises as revealed Truth has led to a plethora of mystical particles, undetectable and unknowable, created on an ad-hoc basis to explain all the nasty little surprises uncovered by subsequent observations.
Rube Goldberg would be proud.
There are no competitive theories alternative to Big Bang. And lots of observations supporting these basic assumptions, like distribution of relict radiation. Moreover, Doppler effect and universality of gravity laws are not revealed truth but unescapable inference from pletora of observations and experiments. Theoretical physics is so coherent and mathematically brilliant that it can not be arbitrary modified, only completely rejected if there were something else to replace it. But now there no anything else.
No alternatives?
http://www.plasma-universe.com/Special:Allpages
http://www.electric-cosmos.org/indexOLD.htm
Theoretical physics is something to pursue for its own sake, but our math is limited and subject to revision as is our imagination. We homo sapiens are blind men/women stumbling in the darkness of our limitations much like the proverbial blind men feeling the tail, the tusks, the ears, the legs, etc. of an elephant and each comes up with his own explanation of what he has touched. This doesn’t mean we should stop trying to understand, it means we should be humble.
Yes, Roy, no alternatives. The source you cited is so tinfoil-hat, that it does not worth any discussion. (Here even reality of neutron stars and black holes is denied.) Learn some real physics before jumping on bandwagon of ignorant fantasists.
Sergey,
I am truly disappointed. I attempted to initiate a discussion of a subject that is a matter of serious dispute and you respond with considerable invective and personal insult.
The first of the above references cites many articles on plasma cosmology. If you were to look at it you will find that there a number of Nobel Prize winners cited.
You know absolutely nothing about my background in physics or mathematics. I daresay that I have been intensely interested in these questions since well before you were born. I have done course work in both General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. Granted, we used slide rules in those days, but I had a 45 year career in computer technology. Perhaps, young whippersnapper, some day you will shed your acolyte’s robes and start to look at the world outside of your catechism.
Regards,
Roy
My cathehism is science, and beyond it there is nothing worthy serious consideration. “Plasma cosmology” which begins with denial of well established astronomical facts and theories, like existence of neutron stars and black holes, is simply nonsence.
From 1978 to 2000 I was science editor in “Mir Publishers”, a dedicated science book publisher of translations of foreign scientific literature, in Russia practically monopolist in the field. I can say definitely that I read, translated or edited everything important in theoretical and mathematical physics, and still never heard about any viable alternative to so called “standard model” of theoretical physics, except string theory. I was a translator of monograph “String Theory” by Kaku.
I think they are either an alien fleet moving around or some two interstellar factions are having a war that we can see all the way out here.