Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 72 (9014 total)
44 online now:
PaulK (1 member, 43 visitors)
Newest Member: Ashles
Upcoming Birthdays: Raphael
Post Volume: Total: 882,017 Year: 13,765/23,288 Month: 283/412 Week: 70/40 Day: 0/19 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Dark matter a dying theory?
jar
Member
Posts: 33015
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 46 of 113 (619361)
06-09-2011 3:23 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by tesla
06-09-2011 2:13 PM


Re: Not so fast....
tesla writes:

But when you say "God" is "exerting emotional and behavioral influences on mankind" you're implying a very specific answer, one you have no evidence for.

Do you know anything at all about the history of mankind and mankind’s buildings of temples and cities in the name of God?

Or noticed 'In God we trust' on money?

Have you seen the joy in a person’s face in a church when they have prayed?

No evidence? The evidence of the influence on this mystery called "God" on mankind is so bold and evident you can only ignore it to not see it.

I know that man has built buildings for many reasons.

God does not back the value of the money. What actually backs the money is the trust in the full faith and honor of the US Government.

And I was in the generation that had to relearn the pledge 'cause they stuck God in, so know the history of it.

Seen the joy on someone face when they get a job, meet a lover, taste a new food, get a 'brain freeze'?


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by tesla, posted 06-09-2011 2:13 PM tesla has acknowledged this reply

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8445
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 7.4


Message 47 of 113 (619364)
06-09-2011 3:28 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by tesla
06-08-2011 6:16 PM


Re: Not so fast....
Initial post. That site [The initial analyses] is from: is dedicated to new science. I'm pointing out there is not any evidence.

What are you trying to say here?

LMAO an 'educated' guess is still a guess !

A verified hypothesis is not an educated guess. Do you even understand how science works?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by tesla, posted 06-08-2011 6:16 PM tesla has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by tesla, posted 06-09-2011 3:31 PM Taq has responded
 Message 49 by slevesque, posted 06-09-2011 3:31 PM Taq has responded

  
tesla
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 1199
Joined: 12-22-2007


Message 48 of 113 (619366)
06-09-2011 3:31 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by Taq
06-09-2011 3:28 PM


Re: Not so fast....
A verified hypothesis is not an educated guess. Do you even understand how science works?

A verified hypothesis is not a hypothesis. Are you attempting to convince me that science has accepted dark matter as a fact? Because if so, scientists accept dark matter is only 'potential' and has no verification. Do you know more than all of today’s leading scientists?


keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Taq, posted 06-09-2011 3:28 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by Taq, posted 06-09-2011 3:39 PM tesla has responded

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 3332 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 49 of 113 (619367)
06-09-2011 3:31 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by Taq
06-09-2011 3:28 PM


Re: Not so fast....
A verified hypothesis is not an educated guess. Do you even understand how science works?

Try not to play on words. You did say ''creating a hypothesis'', which is pretty much making an educated guess.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Taq, posted 06-09-2011 3:28 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Taq, posted 06-09-2011 3:35 PM slevesque has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8445
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 7.4


Message 50 of 113 (619368)
06-09-2011 3:31 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by tesla
06-09-2011 2:49 AM


Re: Not so fast....
If all the space dust in a galaxy is collected, what is its gravitational capability?

The sum of the mass is the gravitational capability. This sum is much less than the amount of gravity that galaxies are producing as observed by spin rate and gravitational lensing.

"noth­ing vis­i­ble can ex­plain."

Yep, matter that does not absorb, reflect, or emit light. What is wrong with that?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by tesla, posted 06-09-2011 2:49 AM tesla has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by tesla, posted 06-09-2011 6:40 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8445
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 7.4


Message 51 of 113 (619369)
06-09-2011 3:35 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by slevesque
06-09-2011 3:31 PM


Re: Not so fast....
Try not to play on words. You did say ''creating a hypothesis'', which is pretty much making an educated guess.

I have always found you to be a pretty honest person, so I will assume that you are making an honest mistake here. Let's see what I actually said:

"Scientists aren't guessing. They are creating hypotheses and testing those hypotheses."

You only quoted the creating part and left out the rest. Most would consider that to be a quote mine. A hypothesis that is tested and passes those tests is a verified hypothesis, not an educated guess.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by slevesque, posted 06-09-2011 3:31 PM slevesque has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by slevesque, posted 06-09-2011 3:49 PM Taq has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8445
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 7.4


(1)
Message 52 of 113 (619370)
06-09-2011 3:39 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by tesla
06-09-2011 3:31 PM


Re: Not so fast....
A verified hypothesis is not a hypothesis.

I never said that it was. What is so hard to understand here? This is Science 101.

I posted a picture and posted a link describing research into dark matter. I described how it tested for the presence of dark matter, and how dark matter was verified. How is this an "educated guess"? Most would call it strong evidence, and most astronomers do.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by tesla, posted 06-09-2011 3:31 PM tesla has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by tesla, posted 06-09-2011 6:42 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8445
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 7.4


Message 53 of 113 (619371)
06-09-2011 3:41 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by tesla
06-09-2011 3:22 PM


Re: Not so fast....
I see nothing wrong with that. What I am pointing out is due to lack of evidence it might be wise to put alternative idea's into the foreground and keep dark matter a potential until proven otherwise.

What is wrong with the explanation that this gravitational influence is due to matter that does not absorb, emit, or reflect light as well as having very weak interactions with luminous matter? What do you find so objectionable? It fits the data perfectly.

Edited by Taq, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by tesla, posted 06-09-2011 3:22 PM tesla has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Percy, posted 06-09-2011 4:20 PM Taq has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8445
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 7.4


Message 54 of 113 (619374)
06-09-2011 3:45 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by slevesque
06-09-2011 2:37 PM


What I'm saying is that I see little basis for such a strong tendency to think unknown kinds of matter are responsible for what we see

Astronomers are able to map where dark matter is in the universe, and yet you think there is little basis for its existence. Perhaps the problem isn't with the evidence?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by slevesque, posted 06-09-2011 2:37 PM slevesque has not yet responded

  
Theodoric
Member (Idle past 11 days)
Posts: 7051
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005


Message 55 of 113 (619376)
06-09-2011 3:47 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by tesla
06-09-2011 2:13 PM


Re: Not so fast....
Or noticed 'In God we trust' on money?

Do you have any idea when this became the official US motto and when god was inserted in to pledge of allegiance?

Do you think all money has this motto?
And what the hell does this have to do with the topic?


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by tesla, posted 06-09-2011 2:13 PM tesla has acknowledged this reply

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16629
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 56 of 113 (619377)
06-09-2011 3:49 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by slevesque
06-09-2011 3:21 PM


quote:

It has little to do with YECism, and more to do with discussions I have had and reading. I also don't pretend to have looked in depth into the subject either.

Given that you are clearly strongly biased in favour of YEC views, and many YECs are opposed to dark matter the evidence does suggest a connection.

quote:

Also, YECist have no reason to reject dark matter nor dark energy that I know of. It would be interesting for you to point out which arguments you are referring to.

Sure.

[qs]
Dark matter is also required to hold the galaxies together during all the supposed time the universe has existed

...

Perhaps the observations should be interpreted more straightforward, in which case the universe is not nearly as old as astronomers believe. The ‘big bang’ theory would also have to be either abandoned or greatly retooled.
[qs]

From: No dark matter found in the Milky Way Galaxy

CMI seem to think that they should be arguing against the existence of dark matter.

quote:

I am definitely not leaning towards MON either, which seems to be the main concern of the astrophysicist you quoted. I can't comment on any points specifically because his comment was much too general.

But, you will note that several points were listed as being in favour of dark matter, rather than simply favouring it over MOND. However, at this stage my point is not that you should simply accept an expert opinion, but simply to point out that there is a lot more evidence that needs consideration than you were aware of.

Your assessment that the only evidence was the rotational speed, and that dark matter is likely a mistake that we should give up on is certainly premature at the very least - and certainly not based on the evidence, since you hadn't researched the matter enough to even know what evidence you needed to consider.

quote:

I agree the bullet cluster sutdy is interesting, but previous claims of direct detection have also come and gone before.

But the fact that we have two consistent reports means that now would be a very bad time to give up on dark matter.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by slevesque, posted 06-09-2011 3:21 PM slevesque has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by slevesque, posted 06-09-2011 4:13 PM PaulK has responded

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 3332 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 57 of 113 (619378)
06-09-2011 3:49 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Taq
06-09-2011 3:35 PM


Re: Not so fast....
I have always found you to be a pretty honest person, so I will assume that you are making an honest mistake here. Let's see what I actually said:

"Scientists aren't guessing. They are creating hypotheses and testing those hypotheses."

You only quoted the creating part and left out the rest. Most would consider that to be a quote mine. A hypothesis that is tested and passes those tests is a verified hypothesis, not an educated guess.

It's that I think that what Tesla calls an 'educated guess' is the ''creating a hypothesis'' part of how scientists work.

I'm pointing out that he is right: it is an educated guess, and scientists continually work on educated guess with an increasing level of confidence the more it is tested and verified. Nonetheless, he is right on that.

The mistake is that he attaches a negative connotation to it, as if it was a bad thing. This is where he is wrong: even though this is how scientists (and humans in general) work, there is nothing with it, it's just normal.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Taq, posted 06-09-2011 3:35 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Taq, posted 06-09-2011 4:15 PM slevesque has responded

  
slevesque
Member (Idle past 3332 days)
Posts: 1456
Joined: 05-14-2009


Message 58 of 113 (619383)
06-09-2011 4:13 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by PaulK
06-09-2011 3:49 PM


CMI seem to think that they should be arguing against the existence of dark matter.

The fact that dark matter is necessary to the current Big Bang model does not mean that the none-existence of Dark matter is also necessary to the creationist cosmological models. This is clearly a fallacious reasoning.

Same applies to dark energy, and in fact a recent paper in the journal of creation about dark energy highlighted this point many times: creationists have no inherent reasons to be against dark energy, because creationist cosmologies don't rely on it.

But, you will note that several points were listed as being in favour of dark matter, rather than simply favouring it over MOND. However, at this stage my point is not that you should simply accept an expert opinion, but simply to point out that there is a lot more evidence that needs consideration than you were aware of.

Your assessment that the only evidence was the rotational speed, and that dark matter is likely a mistake that we should give up on is certainly premature at the very least - and certainly not based on the evidence, since you hadn't researched the matter enough to even know what evidence you needed to consider.

I never pretended to have extensively researched the subject either.

But I also do keep in mind what Einstein said to Heisenberg: it is the theory which decides what we can observe. This is especially true in cosmology.

If you really search for something long enough, you'll find it, even if it's not there.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by PaulK, posted 06-09-2011 3:49 PM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by PaulK, posted 06-09-2011 4:26 PM slevesque has responded
 Message 64 by Taq, posted 06-09-2011 4:39 PM slevesque has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8445
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 7.4


Message 59 of 113 (619384)
06-09-2011 4:15 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by slevesque
06-09-2011 3:49 PM


Re: Not so fast....
It's that I think that what Tesla calls an 'educated guess' is the ''creating a hypothesis'' part of how scientists work.

So what shall we call the verified hypothesis? Still an educated guess?

I'm pointing out that he is right: it is an educated guess, and scientists continually work on educated guess with an increasing level of confidence the more it is tested and verified. Nonetheless, he is right on that.

They did work on it, and it passed testing. So what do we call it now? And no, tesla is not right. I distinctly stated that it was a tested hypothesis, one that passed testing. He called this an educated guess, which it is not.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by slevesque, posted 06-09-2011 3:49 PM slevesque has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by slevesque, posted 06-09-2011 10:27 PM Taq has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 19880
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 60 of 113 (619386)
06-09-2011 4:20 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Taq
06-09-2011 3:41 PM


Re: Not so fast....
Taq writes:

What is wrong with the explanation that this gravitational influence is due to matter that does not absorb, emit, or reflect light as well as having very weak interactions with luminous matter? What do you find so objectionable? It fits the data perfectly.

What is leading Tesla astray, and I think you also, is that the term "dark matter" encompasses possibilities that are not matter, such as modified laws of physics or extra dimensions. When the term "dark matter" was originally proposed back in the 1980s and maybe before the only alternatives envisioned *were* actually matter, euphemistically called WIMPs (Weakly Interactive Massive Particles) and MACHOs (Massive Compact Halo Objects), but since that time a whole host of other possibilities have been proposed. The term "dark matter" no longer encompasses only possibilities that are matter.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Taq, posted 06-09-2011 3:41 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Taq, posted 06-09-2011 4:35 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020