dark matter

[Anonymous No.6949723]

Am I the only one who feels like dark matter is just going to turn out to be a crutch used to prop up our current science model? In the same way the planet Vulcan was used as a crutch for Newton's thoery?

[Anonymous No.6949757]

>>6949723
No. Dark matter is not an addition to the model, it is more of a question to be answered than a feature.

[Anonymous No.6949763]

>>6949723

The difference is that Vulcan was required for Newton's model to work, whereas relativity works regardless of whether or not dark matter exists. The model just provides evidence for dark matter's existence.

[http://home.web.cern.ch/about/(...) No.6949778]

>>>6949763
>Galaxies in our universe seem to be achieving an impossible feat. They are rotating with such speed that the gravity generated by their observable matter could not possibly hold them together; they should have torn themselves apart long ago. The same is true of galaxies in clusters, which leads scientists to believe that something we cannot see is at work. They think something we have yet to detect directly is giving these galaxies extra mass, generating the extra gravity they need to stay intact. This strange and unknown matter was called “dark matter” since it is not visible.

[Anonymous No.6949782]

>>6949778
Sound familiar to Vulcan to you? Because it does to me.

[Anonymous No.6949815]

>>6949782
There are several key differences. Dark matter is necessitated by several different observations, while Vulcan only explained one and thus was susceptible to alternatives. Vulcan was never nearly as popular as dark matter because of this.

[Anonymous No.6949818]

>>6949815
I get what you're saying and I agree, considering that what I'm talking about is just a gut feeling, but it all feels too convenient, even if it's not as big a jump from Newton's theory to Einsteins I think we have another one or two jumps to go.

[Anonymous No.6949863]

>>6949818
if it helps, the lady that discovered the whacky rotation curves that led to "dark matter" also rejects dark matter and wants modified newtonian physics instead. all on your very basis of "it's too convenient"

[Anonymous No.6949880]

>>6949863
Yeah I read about that. It fits the current model and we should definitly look into it as its totally possible, but occam's razor can only go so far in theoretical physics.

[Anonymous No.6949938]

>>6949723

[Anonymous No.6949961]

>>6949723
Dark matter is literally just the name of a fucking variable in an equation. That is all it is. You have no idea what you are talking about OP.

We could call the variable "unknown place holder", or "OP is a faggot", but it wouldn't change anything.