3
   

Scientists Offer Proof of 'Dark Matter'

 
 
oralloy
 
Reply Tue 22 Aug, 2006 06:26 am
Link:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/21/AR2006082101139.html
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 3 • Views: 9,540 • Replies: 14
No top replies

 
stuh505
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Aug, 2006 03:30 pm
I don't get your poll, but I am very skeptical of dark matter, and rightly so. It is a misnomer to refer to the "theory of dark matter" because in a scientific context, a theory is supposed to be demonstrated correct under all circumstances. While the effects of dark matter might be well verified, the cause of those effects is not clear. I consider it "bad science" to think of an arbitrary cause, such as dark matter, or a modification to newton or einstein's laws and call that a new "theory" when it is REALLY just a hypothesis. If people were more consistent when it came to terminology there would be a lot less confusion on these things and a lot less distrust in science in general, because many people (and rightly so) have trouble distinguishing between TRUE theories and "popular theories."
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 5 Oct, 2006 06:37 pm
stuh505 wrote:
I don't get your poll, but I am very skeptical of dark matter, and rightly so. It is a misnomer to refer to the "theory of dark matter" because in a scientific context, a theory is supposed to be demonstrated correct under all circumstances. While the effects of dark matter might be well verified, the cause of those effects is not clear. I consider it "bad science" to think of an arbitrary cause, such as dark matter, or a modification to newton or einstein's laws and call that a new "theory" when it is REALLY just a hypothesis. If people were more consistent when it came to terminology there would be a lot less confusion on these things and a lot less distrust in science in general, because many people (and rightly so) have trouble distinguishing between TRUE theories and "popular theories."


22% of the universe is composed of dark matter.

4% of the universe is composed of matter.

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_ig/060916/UniversePie75.jpg
0 Replies
 
Jiggy
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 3 Dec, 2020 04:00 pm
Yes, I would agree terminology has caused quite a bit of confusion @stuh505
@oralloy not that it matters greatly the accuracy of the figures related to these hypothetical, since there are more speculative, but those figures are constantly changing, and being updated. https://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/focus-areas/what-is-dark-energy


URL: https://able2know.org/topic/81386-1

URL: https://able2know.org/topic/81386-1.
0 Replies
 
htam9876
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Dec, 2020 10:22 pm
Philosophy of existence:
Male rabbit vs female rabbit; male pig vs female pig; male cat vs female cat; male dog vs female dog; male duck vs female duck...
matter vs anti matter vs similar matter.
Have a lovely weekend, boys. haha
Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Sat 5 Dec, 2020 12:51 am
@htam9876,
You are "Yong yanginging" all over the place... and from your profound insight we can conclude the nights are black and the mornings are blue! Cheers!
0 Replies
 
AngleWyrm10
 
  1  
Reply Sat 29 Jan, 2022 06:49 am
@oralloy,
https://i.imgur.com/ytCFPS3.png
0 Replies
 
Jasper10
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 13 Feb, 2022 02:31 am
@oralloy,
Scientist have not offered proof of anything………they need to focus on consciousness…….there is no such thing as dark matter just as there is no such thing as black holes or white holes……there are just holes my friend.

When science begins to factor in consciousness into equations …then, and only then will we see major breakthroughs.
Tiptop
 
  0  
Reply Fri 25 Feb, 2022 05:07 pm
@Jasper10,
You really think that black holes don't exist? How did you come to a conclusion that's the opposite of the entire scientific community? Was it the same place you determined that astronomers should be focused on consciousness?
Jasper10
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 26 Feb, 2022 01:42 am
@Tiptop,
No……….I don’t think “black” or “white” holes exist……..just “holes” and yes the science community should be focussing more on “consciousness” that word it freely admits it knows nothing about but then has the arrogance to state that we are no more than consciousness.

This is the problem with science which has a crisis on its hands …….it’s at a cross roads ………..what should it do? …….at the moment it is constantly making claims it can’t substantiate and then trying to SELL them as FACTS.It does it all the time.

Most of the scientific community just doesn’t get it……..tell me how can you stay separate from science when you are totally embroiled with it?…….the answer is that you can’t separate yourself from it if you are apart of it……embroiled with it.

Presently, the scientific community wants to stay separate from science and just observe it and then produce its one sided theories and calcs…….this is called a SPECTATOR in philosophy.

It has a choice to make ….remain doing the same old same old …..churning out it’s pointless one sided theories/calcs or embrace consciousness……become a PLAYER.

The scientific community doesn’t like the idea of becoming a “player” because that is a whole new ball game……it prefers denial.



Jasper10
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 26 Feb, 2022 02:09 am
@Jasper10,
The thing is,if you become a PLAYER then you need to scrap the present scientific MODEL……because it just doesn’t work………and that’s the fundamental problem……..the scientific community is still trying to desperately cling on to its sinking (model) ship…..
0 Replies
 
Jasper10
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 26 Feb, 2022 10:49 am
@Jasper10,
If the scientific community focussed more on consciousness then it would know EXACTLY why there is no such thing as black or white holes…
0 Replies
 
Tiptop
 
  0  
Reply Sun 27 Feb, 2022 07:14 pm
@Jasper10,
Kind of weird to paint all of science with "it" does this or that. It's not a monolith. I'll reach out to some physicists and mathematicians to see if they can focus more on consciousness to help us with this difficult crossroads.
Jasper10
 
  -2  
Reply Mon 28 Feb, 2022 01:49 am
@Tiptop,
I never said it was a monilith……I merely said that if science knew more about consciousness and the FACT that it is totally embroiled within nature then it would have a different view of things.

Science is aware of consciousness but takes no account of it in its calcs or theories……
0 Replies
 
Jasper10
 
  1  
Reply Sun 20 Mar, 2022 02:10 am
@Tiptop,
The thing is, what does darkness or light matter to consciousness?

Both darkness and light exist in consciousness together.

Presence is aware of consciousness types with or without darkness or light.

0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Evolution 101 - Discussion by gungasnake
Typing Equations on a PC - Discussion by Brandon9000
The Future of Artificial Intelligence - Discussion by Brandon9000
The well known Mind vs Brain. - Discussion by crayon851
Blue Saturn - Discussion by oralloy
Bald Eagle-DDT Myth Still Flying High - Discussion by gungasnake
DDT: A Weapon of Mass Survival - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Scientists Offer Proof of 'Dark Matter'
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/02/2022 at 02:51:48