The recent "discovery" of Dark Matter

[Glenn Millam]

I would like to hear anyone’s take on the recent “discovery” of dark matter, from where dark matter is inferred via gravitational lensing where gigantic galactic clusters are colliding. As one of the problems of the BBT, a true measurement of dark matter would go a good way in supporting the theory, although it is not the complete confirmation. What effect does this finding have on your cosmological theories, or on Plasma Cosmology in general?

[Charles Wilcox]

“Dark Matter” is discovered all the time, and the gusto with which it is proclaimed should make me nauseous.

“Dark Matter” == BBT predicted matter – observable matter. The acceptance of an unprovable concept by the larger astronomical community is contemptible.

Most people consider a discrepancy between theory and measure to mean the theory is bad, especially if the relative error is high. An 85% error rate in any class lab experiment would earn you a failing grade and some public ridicule. (Number derived from the wikipedia entry for Dark Matter.) Yet, this is how gravitation-only cosmology matches up to measure.

Like so many other facets of modern Big-Bang theory, Dark Matter was not predicted by or a part of the theory before it surfaced as a discrepancy. Adding on another strut to fill in that hole is somehow reminiscent of other patchwork on top of a idealized/idolized belief.

— Charles Wilcox

P.S. Sorry for being a little off topic; this isn’t exactly about how gravitational lensing is invoked to alleviate the behavior or galaxy clusters.

[Glenn Millam]

Well, I’m not really sure what you’re saying here. Maybe I need to clarify the question.

There are a lot of holes in the BBT. One is the need for non-baryonic “dark matter” and lots of it. It has only been inferred in the past, but, according to NASA scientists, dark matter has been found.

http://chandra.harvard.edu/photo/2006/1e0657/

Now, this isn’t enough by itself to solve the problems with the BBT, but it does seem to go a long way. What is the take of Plasma Cosmologists on this discovery, and what impact does it have on their theories?

[Lerner]

I

[Glenn Millam]

The flaw in this argument is this assumption that all the ordinary matter in galaxies is in easily-visible, bright, stars. Instead, most of the mass of galaxies may well be in the form of dwarf stars, which produce very little light per unit mass

[Frenetic]

Glenn Millam wrote: I would like to hear anyone’s take on the recent “discovery” of dark matter, from where dark matter is inferred via gravitational lensing where gigantic galactic clusters are colliding. As one of the problems of the BBT, a true measurement of dark matter would go a good way in supporting the theory, although it is not the complete confirmation. What effect does this finding have on your cosmological theories, or on Plasma Cosmology in general?

The problem of “dark matter” was identified by Fritz Zwicky way back in 1933. Galaxies, he noticed, lacked sufficient glowing matter to hold them together. It is not a “new” problem but an old one.

It has no effect on my theory because I do not have one and I dislike all the ones I have studied. None of them strike me as being particularly likely.

[pluto]

Hello All

Dark Matter has been an issue for many years.

Its the unseen matter that makes up most of the matter in the universe. Its degenerated matter in the form of ultra dense plasma matter. It is found in compacted cores such as Neutrons, quarks and the so called compacted matter that prevents ligt from escaping ( so called black Holes).

[Author]

Posts