Serious question about "Dark Matter"

[emperor_of_localgroup]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Thanks saiph, i appreciate your response, along with&nbsp;others that have gone out if their way to help me understand the problems. Its a fascinating subject, and i just wish i could study under a researcher in the field (among other things).Indeed if what this person is saying is correct, its very counter intuitive.&nbsp; <br />Posted by BoJangles</DIV><br /><br /><font size="2">I would never understand why some people abusively defend a theory (i mean any theory, not only this), when someone points out the weak points in the theory.</font></p><p><font size="2">I have problem with dark matter and dark energy because of its history, its origin, what leads to the concept of dark anything?&nbsp; It's not like violation of law conservation of energy (or other conservation&nbsp;laws) &nbsp;which generally leads to discovery of a new particle(s) on earth.</font></p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="2" color="#ff0000"><strong>Earth is Boring</strong></font> </div>

 

[origin]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I have problem with dark matter and dark energy because of its history, its origin, what leads to the concept of dark anything?&nbsp; It's not like violation of law conservation of energy (or other conservation&nbsp;laws) &nbsp;which generally leads to discovery of a new particle(s) on earth.&nbsp; <br />Posted by emperor_of_localgroup</DIV><br /><br />I am not sure why you have a problem.&nbsp; There is 'dark matter' that is a given.&nbsp; What I mean by this is that there is a gravitational affect on galaxies that cannot be a result from the matter that is seen.&nbsp; So dark matter exists but 'dark matter'&nbsp;could be anything.&nbsp; It could be rubber bands that god has incorporated into galaxies (I am not a fan of this idea), but the point is there is a gravitational&nbsp;affect that cannot be associated with any detectable matter&nbsp;so it is termed dark matter.&nbsp; What dark matter actually is, remains to be discovered.</p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[emperor_of_localgroup]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I am not sure why you have a problem.&nbsp; There is 'dark matter' that is a given.&nbsp; What I mean by this is that there is a gravitational affect on galaxies that cannot be a result from the matter that is seen.&nbsp; So dark matter exists but 'dark matter'&nbsp;could be anything.&nbsp; It could be rubber bands that god has incorporated into galaxies (I am not a fan of this idea), but the point is there is a gravitational&nbsp;affect that cannot be associated with any detectable matter&nbsp;so it is termed dark matter.&nbsp; What dark matter actually is, remains to be discovered.&nbsp; <br /> Posted by origin</DIV></p><p><font size="2">I was merely pointing out that there is a difference between violation of a law (cons of energy) and violation of a theory. Dark matter/energy, to some extend, come from violation of a theory. I don't know if anyone has already looked at this from that angle.</font></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="2" color="#ff0000"><strong>Earth is Boring</strong></font> </div>

 

[michaelmozina]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I am not sure why you have a problem.&nbsp; There is 'dark matter' that is a given.&nbsp; What I mean by this is that there is a gravitational affect on galaxies that cannot be a result from the matter that is seen.&nbsp; So dark matter exists but 'dark matter'&nbsp;could be anything.&nbsp; It could be rubber bands that god has incorporated into galaxies (I am not a fan of this idea), but the point is there is a gravitational&nbsp;affect that cannot be associated with any detectable matter&nbsp;so it is termed dark matter.&nbsp; What dark matter actually is, remains to be discovered.&nbsp; <br /> Posted by origin</DIV></p><p>Oddly enough I find myself in complete agreement with origin on the issue of dark matter. &nbsp; The lensing data from galaxy collisions in particular would seem to favor the notion that there is additional matter in a galaxy that is not accounted for based on our current methods of estimating the amount of a mass in a galaxy. &nbsp;&nbsp; I don't believe in SUSY forms of DM but I have no problem believing that we grossly underestimate the amount of ordinary matter in a galaxy. </p><p>Saiphs point about the overall layout and distribution of "dark matter" in a galaxy is particularly perplexing, but that does seem to be accurate based on what we observe. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> It seems to be a natural consequence of our points of view to assume that the whole of space is filled with electrons and flying electric ions of all kinds. - Kristian Birkeland </div>

 

[emperor_of_localgroup]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Oddly enough I find myself in complete agreement with origin on the issue of dark matter. &nbsp; The lensing data from galaxy collisions in particular would seem to favor the notion that there is additional matter in a galaxy that is not accounted for based on our current methods of estimating the amount of a mass in a galaxy. &nbsp;&nbsp; I don't believe in SUSY forms of DM but I have no problem believing that we grossly underestimate the amount of ordinary matter in a galaxy. Saiphs point about the overall layout and distribution of "dark matter" in a galaxy is particularly perplexing, but that does seem to be accurate based on what we observe. <br />Posted by michaelmozina</DIV><br /><br /><font size="2">That was exactly my point, uncounted and undetected ordinary matters. I don't know&nbsp; if astronomers have given any thought (and later ruled out) about non-luminous solar systems. Instead of death by explosion, whether a star can just run out of energy and get turned off like a light bulb with all its planets still revolving around it. If the universe is old enough, there may be billions of such solar systems in the universe.</font></p><p><font size="2">We don't need any exotic matters or energy.&nbsp; That was my point.</font></p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="2" color="#ff0000"><strong>Earth is Boring</strong></font> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>That was exactly my point, uncounted and undetected ordinary matters. I don't know&nbsp; if astronomers have given any thought (and later ruled out) about non-luminous solar systems. Instead of death by explosion, whether a star can just run out of energy and get turned off like a light bulb with all its planets still revolving around it. If the universe is old enough, there may be billions of such solar systems in the universe.We don't need any exotic matters or energy.&nbsp; That was my point.&nbsp; <br />Posted by emperor_of_localgroup</DIV><br /><br />Of course that has been considered. You should do some research on the background of Dark Matter. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>