/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15678195
Then write down your proposed new formula describing gravity. And watch as people laugh because other people already thought of your idea decades ago.

>>15678195
its just regular matter, physicists cant count

>>15678233
Based

>>15678213
Electrons and protons don't know gravity exists, they can't feel it they can't see it. What forces don't we see and feel that exist and that become noticeable at a larger scale? How many are there?

>>15678195
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/ace101

new paper describing exactly what you're talking about, newtonian gravity breaking down at large scales. oh well guess we're on MOND gravity now

Anyone who questions Dark Matter is just a scam artist fishing for suckers.

>>15678282
Show me dark matter if there's so much of it and it's everywhere. Let's see it.

If 85% of the universe is dark matter that means that the tiny fraction of the universe we can observe is anomalous and not a meaningful or worthwhile basis for making conjectures about the entirety of the universe.

>>15678195

>>15678317
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/ace101

read the damn paper and actually give me some advice on this crap. looks to me like we just didn't have enough information to make good judgements on this.

>>15678294
Based

>>15678195
Midwit here, how do we know about dark matter if it's undetectable? Please explain in layman's terms.

>>15678195
Scale dependent vacuum energy explains dark matter and dark energy quite easily

>>15678971
When Harry Potter puts on the Cloak of Invisibility, you can't see him. But if he knocks over a vase while wearing it, you can see the vase break. Same thing.

>>15679095
This analogy doesn’t apply because it already assumes such a thing exist in order to fit the model. It is ridiculously circular to assume something magical exists instead of trying to come up with other models that don’t involve magic.

>>15679115
Fair. So instead, picture somebody in bed, with the covers pulled completely over their head, no hands or feet sticking out, entirely covered. You can't see that person. Now pour a bucket of small beads on top of the covers covering the person. You'll be able to tell by the distribution of those beads where the person is and how their presence distorts the top-of-the-bed plane, even though you can't see the person.

>>15679132
This analogy fails as well, as it relies on the same magical property of an unobservable, untestable thing, which in this case is the ‘person’ of substance with mass that all of the observed behaviors of gravity are assumed to be coming from (I am not discounting normal matter’s gravitational interaction, only the presupposed existence of dark matter and similarly, dark energy). There are far better ways to investigate reality by relying on more logical assumptions, such as scale-invariant models, rather than having less logical ways to fit the data curve.

>>15679176
>This analogy fails as well, as it relies on the same magical property
The only way there's magic involved is if you're homeless, thus lacking a bed, and also schizophrenic, thus explaining the ability to be functional enough to have your own bed via magic. Or I guess if you're an incel and thus the concept of seeing someone else in your bed could also seem magical. Otherwise, the analogy suggests experimentally pulling up the covers to make ordinary matter dark, and pulling them back to make dark matter ordinary.

>>15679095
I think of it more like seeing symptoms of a disease but not knowing what disease is causing the symptoms.
You're coughing up blood. This is abnormal. We know you're sick and there is something in your body causing you to cough up blood, but we need more information to figure out the exact disease

>>15678195
Modified gravity won dark matter lost

>>15679095
harry potter has hot girls in it the people who watched it for the plot are gay

Scientists are basically saying that nothing is something, there's no actual proof behind any of it, but the mere fact that you are giving a name to the lack thereof, in the minds of people it becomes tangible. It's a type of thought connundrum where they can't make sense of the fact that there actually is nothing there.

Dark matter is simply the medium in which electromagnetism propagates. The aether. There is zero proof that photons are actually a thing. Its literally a wave in a medium. Funny how the equation for photon energy is exactly the equation for the energy of a sound wave. Funny how photons have zero mass and sound waves have zero mass. Yet both carry momentum. Because they move a medium.

> blablabla photoelectric effect

You can explain this by sufficiently dense wavelengths rocking the electrons a longer distance in a shorter time.

>>15679201

Logically, if the reality, or at least theoretical coherence, of the bed is contingent on there being someone or something under the covers, which no one can see, then yes, the bed itself can be said to be just as tenuous.

>>15679095
>>15679115
The analogy is actually very fitting. Something happens that you cant explain, so you conjure an invisible magic entity responsible for the dissonance between your understanding of the world and reality.
Next, you spend decades and billions on detection equipment, trying to find evidence of the invisible wizard.

>>15679320
I forget, does the experiment where you shine light through a couple of slits in a barrier only to have it re-converge on the wall on the other side prove that light is a wave or is it the proof used for photons?

>>15679354
To be fair, that is pretty much how neutrinos were discovered. Beta decay violated the laws of conservation of momentum, Pauli proposed that a small particle that was invisible to the equipment of the day was carrying off the missing momentum. It took a few decades and multiple tries with expensive, dedicated equipment to directly detect those neutrinos.

That is also how Neptune was discovered as well; astronomers noticed that Uranus's orbit didn't seem right, so someone proposed there was another planet out there messing things up. Amusingly, in the decades between that proposal and Neptune actually being observed, there were multiple proposals that maybe gravity worked differently in the outer solar system.

Anyways, it is important to remember that our knowledge of what kinds of matter exist, and in what amounts is itself a theory, and that theory could very well be wrong. Its already had to be updated multiple times in the last century (i.e. for those neutrinos, among other particles) and it would be hubris to suggest that we have discovered every possible form of matter.

Of course, it may very well be that it is the theory of gravity that is what we have wrong, so that needs to be considered. Or for that matter, both our theory of gravity could be wrong AND some form of dark matter could exist. Those have to be seriously considered.

>>15679328
>your bed isn't real if your dog is hiding under the covers

>>15678971
At large scales (the movement of stars orbiting galactic cores, and the movement of galaxies relative to each other) the movements we see do not match what you would expect from our existing models of gravity & the observed matter. That means either our model of gravity is wrong, or our model of how much matter exists is wrong. (Or possibly both, to make things extra complicated). Dark matter theory is stating that there is a large amount of matter that is really hard to see, to explain these anomalies.

Dark matter is usually the favored explanation due to a number of later observations that make sense if there is a large amount of invisible matter, but are hard to explain with modified gravity, like the bullet cluster & other locations where gravitation lensing does not match the visible matter.

>>15680013

If the reality of the bed is purportedly contingent on the reality of the dog, yes.

>>15678195
Scientists would love to get rid of dark matter. And there have been significant work in trying to modify gravity to make it go away. As far as I can tell though, no amount of massaging the equations can make it completely go away. The problem is, dark matter is not everywhere, its in some places but not others, which is why people think it might be a real thing, rather than just a mathematical error.

>>15678276
>korean scientist
not again...

>>15678286
no no it cannot be seen or detected or measured but it is there honest just look at this computer model of the cosmic microwave background radiation and give me a billion in grants

>>15680000
yes and scientists spent 150 years looking for Vulcan because that was what their model told them

>>15681891
That is very true, and why I specifically stated that existing theories of gravity could also be the issue, and modified gravity theories given serious consideration. That said, dark matter being the explanation has a lot of strong indirect evidence at this point, with a number of observations that are really hard to fit into any modified gravity model. For example, under most modified gravity theories you would expect dwarf galaxies with about the same amount of visible matter to have their motions be "off" from the predictions of standard gravity + visible matter by the same amount. And while most dwarf galaxies are off by about the same amount, their are weird exceptions - there are a few that do behave like what you would expect from standard gravity, or closer too it, and there are also a few that behave in a way that is even further off from standard predictions than others. Dark matter theories can explain these galaxies as having more or less dark matter than average, due to odd events in the past separating it from the normal matter, or concentrating it in other areas. I have yet to see a modified gravity theory that can adequately explain these sorts of observations.

>>15681491
The only thing contingent upon the dog's presence under the covers is the contour of said covers, not the existence of the bed upon which they lie.

>>15681988
If 85% of the universe is dark matter that means that the tiny fraction of the universe we can observe is anomalous and not a meaningful or worthwhile basis for making conjectures about the entirety of the universe, so why do you think you can suss it all out knowing that you can't even observe the overwhelming majority of matter?

>>15678195
Dark Matter is a very stupid term. It should be Diaphanous Mass since it is perfectly transparent, and we don't know yet if it takes up space by having volume. We only know for sure it has gravitational mass.

>>15679089
No it doesn't

>>15678195
There is no dark matter. There are two types of gravitons. One weakly interacting with a half-life of 20 thousand years decays into the second stronger interacting type. Quantum numbers are not conserved.

i love it when fat unwashed neckbeards with no relevant higher education smugly act as if they've figured something out
if teams of scientists with far more knowledge and skills than you cant make MOND work then why the fuck do you think you can?

>>15680000
Quads witnessed. Good post. Yeah, this guy gets it.
My money is on that we're wrong about gravity. Black Holes are fucky too.

>>15683002
I am really fucking smart, that's what you didn't consider in your equation.

>>15683020
No you aren't lmao
If you were smart you wouldn't be posting about this on 4chan, you'd be writing papers and working to prove your theory.

>>15683026
>If you were smart you wouldn't be posting about this on 4chan, you'd be writing papers and working to prove your theory.
Are you sure about that?

>>15683002
>Blindly assuming that the person questioning your belief must be “uneducated” by virtue of disagreeing with you
Congratulations on being the cancer that killed academia, midwit

>>15679305
not as gay as people who think they can discuss science while their mind is still obsessing over children's fairy tales and other hollywood garbage.
>i know all about physics, i learned from watching the harry potter show

>>15678195
Read up on planet Vulcan, you will understand everything about the dark shit.

>>15682868

Is it not true that, without "dark matter", the observable matter would be quite tenuous? What is matter in general without the urgrund of gravity?

>>15684475
>Is it not true that, without "dark matter", the observable matter would be quite tenuous?
If you're talking about the dog-under-the-blanket analogy then ordinary matter is the beads that get poured atop the blanket, and no, I would not say that such matter is tenuous. The dog-under-the-blanket dark matter only affects its distribution of the observable matter.
>What is matter in general without the urgrund of gravity?
Gravity isn't "real," it's just the running total of all the interactions you aren't observing.

>>15678195
>that image
why do people state these things like facts when they are only theories and not proven beyond all doubt?

>>15678195
>muh edgy spooky special OC matterino!
Ockham's razor, tranny.

>>15684984
Because the average person is too stupid to understand science as an institution and a method and rather follow it with blind faith like they would a church or a cult. They treat differing opinions or disbelief in the scientific narrative as a personal affront despite being able to stand up to scrutiny being one of the more important facets of the scientific method.

>>15678195
>I can't see glass therefore I cannot know its there through other methods
So many smooth brained schizos here.

>>15684984
>they are only theories and not proven beyond all doubt?
dark matter isn't a scientific theory, scientific theories are disprovable

>>15681879
/thread

>>15686678
>dark matter isn't a scientific theory, scientific theories are disprovable
this
dark matter is a superstition
>oy vey evil ghosts are conspiring to make einstein theory look wrong