Off Topic Dark Matter and other Astronomy information.

The last genuin picture i saw it was on the back of four elephants, the elephants were stood on the turtles back

 

I just spent 26 mins watching this, "turns out" he said nothing at all. Sisu, did you actally listen to what he said and think there was any proof of any kind given to support his claims?

 

You probably should have skipped to the summary at the end where he lays it out in pretty simple terms. The light passing the sun has been observed and the light behaves as claimed. There are papers on it, if you wanna look at them go ahead.

He does actually say what I said. The images are from his presentation on the video you nutcase. Did you watch it or zone out after 5 minutes and re live an episode of McGuiver?

If light doesn't bend then there isn't any so called space-time curvature.

I at your proof comment, go check it, if the observational data is confirmed accurate then that's proof enough on it's own.

You forget there is other evidence, the alleged super massive black hole in the centre of our own galaxy, it has several large stars orbiting it and guess what, no light scattering or lensing, if they are traveling on the rim of a curve in space time there should be lensing and scattering of light as the stars pass close by the alleged black hole, he covers this and explains in depth what is happening when light passes the sun. I am not sure wtf you are on about He said more than once that this is not good for the followers of General relativity, says general relativity has failed man times.

The guy worked for NASA, he's no slouch.

You smoking crack?

 

If i am to believe his diagrams, the observational data came from satellites arrange in a straight line millions of miles apart where as the only fixed satellites i know of orbit the Earth and range only thousands of miles. They also describe a parabola not a straight line which would affect the angle the light hits it. Think about the diameter of the Sun, the diameter described by our satellites and the distance the Earth is from the Sun and you will realise the limited observational data we can gain.

 

Anyway...


@RHC

Turns out this Higgs Bosons of yours, interesting stuff, the Higgs Bosons discovery means that if the big bang actually occurred then the Universe should have collapsed back in on it's self billions of years ago.

Another nail in the coffin of the big bang cos, as you state, the Higgs Bonsons is scientifically verified as legit

Cheers

 

no actually what it means is if you find experimental data you revise the hypothesis to fit the evidence which is the whole point of the dark mater discussion.

higgs doesn't preclude big bang or not... it just adds more wonderful data to the imponderable

 

Why thank you MITO

 

i love wonderful data and pondering the imponderable

 

Back in the beginning of this thread, the electric theory was mocked, laughed at.

The idea of electric comets was a comical . Someone even tried to personally slate the people behind EU theory.

well, now NASA have weighed in, yet another win for electric theory. Another solid set of predictions. No doubt mainstream science publishers will give NASA the credit for this and not even mention EU theory.

I guess people absorb stuff better when it comes form sources they recognise as legit and discount other ideas as, as referred to as "crap" earlier in this thread.

Clearly not just dirty snowballs. Comets are electrical and the solar wind affects the comet to give the visuals we see, and not evaporating water..
http://www.nasa.gov/content/goddard...ble-world-of-electric-asteroids/#.U7dDaznvaCh

Observation and common sense came first, then finally, came NASA's acceptance of such solid scientific work.

obvious implications for all astrophysics not just asteroids, with the acceptance of electrical currents in the vacuum of space and the reactions between negatively charged bodies and positively charged solar winds. Nice to see common sense override entrenched beliefs for once

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-31058529
Scientists who claimed last year to have found a pattern in the sky left by the super-rapid expansion of space just fractions of a second after the Big Bang were mistaken.

It's good that science is waking up to this big bang\inflation garbage.

Next, awaiting for someone to dismantle this garbage about gravitational waves, there are no such thing The claims about finding gravitational waves also came from gross misinterpretation of Bicep2 data.

inagine it, a wave of gravity traveling along without the mass to create it, ridiculous and actualy a violation of Einstein's General Relativity because space-time and matter are coupled by his field equations to create "gravity". They use Lorentz symmetry and things like "time direction" and "time frames" to create some mathemagics to twist and warp GR much like space time allegedly gets twisted and warped in a blackhole Our understanding of the universe should be a linear theory, it's all the one system with constants and variants. Using non linear theory allows the creation of any fictious outcome. Newton was almost there, pity he didn't live another 100 years, I reckon we'd have a lot more understanding of how things really work, truly one of the(if not the) greatest scientists to ever have existed. Unfortunately for Newton sub atmoic and particle physics was a nonplus in his time, if he was around in the present day his work would be something to behold.

These guys just make it up as they go along, shoehorning everything they find into existing theories. DDDDogma

Also, it's slowly being accepted that WMAP and cosmic background radiation is bollocks and that the NASA team are cooking the numbers and creating something out of nothing. They even change the coefficients every year and the world's top imaging experts say their processes are way outside the standard boundaries for image verification.
That's what happens when religion interfers with science, the big bang theory originally came from a priest mathematicial that wanted to prove a saint's dictum of "Creation out of nothing"

 

Also, Comets have shale oil(organic material, hydrocarbons). Not possible if they formed in space. Recent findings have shown that comets consist of materials that could only have formed on a planet. This further supports the theory that the planets were closer 5000 years ago and literally ripped chunks off each other via massive electrical machining of planets that come close to each other, plus our own mythology that describes these events all over the world.


Michael Steinbacher is currently explaining much that geologists have struggled with for decades offering absolutely no explanations for geological structures that just cannot be explained AT ALL by current theories. These geological formations can now be replicated in the lab with electricity applied to material like sand and rock. There is some great photographic evidence appearing now showing massive elevated plateaus with massive depressions near them indicating positive and negative electrical charges of massive proportions that literally raised the surface on one area and cut out the surface at the other.
Some really interesting stuff from Steinbacher if anyone is interested.
https://www.youtube.com/user/michaelsteinbacher

The next few decades are going to be very interesting. History will have to be re written and as always, that is a struggle as the current history and the careers that depend on it fight for survival, which shows us humans really are vein self important douche bags

 

Hmmm. I'll regret this, I know, but... consider that gravity is the effect of mass on spacetime, as in the warping of the surrounding fabric. The larger the warping, the larger the ripple, the large the 'wave', so goes the theory. Must admit though, surely this means super-massive blackholes should produce tsunami like waves?

Dark matter - my twatty theory is that this (and cosmic background radiation, for that matter) is the cosmic froth of particles of matter and anti-matter continuously anahilating each other, producing energy that becomes fractionally short-lived matter. Well, that's the basis of Hawking radiation on the periphery of black holes, but I can't do sums like him.

 

Don't be silly I'll try not ramble and bore you to death
Space time is a geometric distortion. Kind of like displacement of water by objects, energy momentum is required to create waves. Let me explain.
Your analogy is dropping a ball into water, what causes the ripple\wave is not the ball, it is the energy from the ball's momentum being dispersed into the water. All the actual physical ball does is displace water, with a dropped ball, the energy momentum is transferred to the displaced water which travels out in waves but waves only appear because gravity keeps the water's form constant(if we take a still pool for example) No gravity and that water will float off in all directions for ever when we drop the ball in) so there would be no waves without gravity. No mass means no gravity ergo no waves.

So, resolving Einstein's equations has been done, and we know that IF there is no mass there is no space-time curvature. This pretty much rules out gravitational waves travelling along without the corresponding mass to create it. It's akin to trying to displace water to create waves with no input of mass\energy.

Another example for mass creating space time curvature is putting a bowling ball on a trampoline. I like this analogy because you would see the same effects on the trampoline, when you put the bowling ball on it distorts the fabric and if you spin the ball it will have a twisting effect on the fabric too just like space time does distort and slightly twist with earth's rotation. The bowling ball will never create a wave on the trampoline unless you introduce, remove and reintroduce energy momentum (bouncing the ball) which would create a "pulsing" of energy momentum and if you bounce it fast enough you will create a wave like effect because the bouncing is faster than the geometric shape can form and collapse. For example, this is how glass shatters from vibration.

Now.. try doing that on the trampoline without the bowling ball, or anything else to cause the geometric distortion, so you see, no mass and no energy momentum and you have, no gravity, no waves, in fact you have nothing. This is why they keep coming up with new purely mathematical constructs to follow this ****ing dogma. Hence Lorentz symmetry is used. (Time direction and frame reference)

You are bang on about not just supermassive black holes but black holes in general, take a Quasar, meant to have an immense black hole with immense energy, we can see the light and shouldn't that light be travelling in waves as it gets carried by gravity? We know for a fact this is not the case given every picture ever of a quasar does not show this, also, the stars in our own galaxy that orbit the supermassive black hole, the light from them as they pass very close by in their eliptical orbits display 0 light scattering or bending let alone waves!
Even our own star woud display some evidence of waves given how we can easily measure light. Gravitational waves are a gross misinterpretation of data because that's what the team wanted to see because they set out looking for it.


For me anti matter and matter, my opinion is two universes are created, positive and negative. There was never anti matter in this universe, look at the nature of this universe, it's entirely positive negative, there is another, and it's the same but opposite, two sides of polarity, and of course, anti matter has never been found, only created. Every particle has an opposite in the other universe, electron v positron for example. What happens when we cross electrical charges, positive negative? just like matter anti matter, cancel each other out(or wipe each other out, same net effect)

Dark matter is not needed anyway, consider electromagnetism and gravity. Gravity can only attract but.. EM which is a billion billion billion billion billion billion or more times stronger can attract AND repel! (imagine the EM force from a black hole!!) This is the the force that defines this universe, if it was just gravity, the universe would be one lump of matter and my junk would literally be pressed against your face right now if gravity was the only force worth considering

 

Wrong

 

I actually forget this and why that was my point and because you fail to elaborate at all it is not jogging my memory. You ****

besides the Higgs Bosons is a consensus thing, only one team did the experiment, no one else has replicated it and basically they found a new particle and because the team think they found what they are loooking for and the others who reviewd the data and came to the same conclusion agreed, it enters the anals of history, by a ****ing vote

There is emerging disagreement that they found the HB at all, I know you "dont want" to believe that, but not wanting to believe, is a bit of a religious thing, very unscientific

 

Bollocks. Two of the detectors got it. How many Nobels have been awarded for ****e? I suggest you sit back and enjoy the ride because there's an awful lot more to come from the big boy .

 

As far as I remember AWARDS ARE NOT SCIENTIFIC VALIDATION

Science is as they say "dynamic" meaning they get it wrong then get it right. I can't say who is right ovbiously all I am saying is that the findings are now being questioned.


How often do you hear Hawking was totally wrong, but he was and I can show that in 5 seconds, by quoting his theory of everything from 2006. He was totally wrong on some stuff yet that is not really in the public consciousness strangely, he followed dogma down the rabbit hole so far that he actually forgot basic physics!!!!!!

 

I have a stomach bug and I can tell you theres plenty of dark matter flowing from my astronomy

 

#morehotpocketsmom

 

I am 100% willing to accept I could be 100% wrong and that all of this is far beyond my understanding. This all just my opinion but I like discusing it
The two main indicators of dark matter are galaxy rotation speed compared to determined mass and light lensing.

There is another answer for both. Plasma. Plasma can be dark, a scientific fact. Plasma can lense light so, if we take the calculated mass of a given galaxy (epic approximation) and assume it does not have enough mass, is not plasma a more practical solution than some imaginary undetectable matter? So is Dark Matter not the human mind overcomplicating things to feed "intellect", intellect is measured often by ability to solve abstract sientific problems, and someone on here said before that theoretical science is not abstract, it sure is!

So all of this "missing" mass could in fact be plasma and plasma we can work with, but choose not to, why? Dogma is why