I don’t have a dog in this fight, and, besides, the math involved is way over my head. My only observation, worth what you paid for it: this dark matter/dark energy stuff strikes me, with my utterly tenuous and superficial grasp of the issues, as a little deus ex machina-ish: Its only observable property is that it perfectly solves the shortcomings of our theories. But, like virtually all astrophysics, it’s fascinating and completely unimportant. Maybe efforts to understand the issues will result in something pertinent or useful someday. Until then, it’s pretty much a fascinating irrelevancy.
I mention this because of something totally excellent I heard on a YouTube video today, on recent developments in this esoteric kerfuffle. Some researchers came up with some observations which challenge the Dark Matter theory:
“Now apparently the authors spent months checking their work, just to make sure it was robust and would stand up to very intense scrutiny because they knew it was going to get that. They checked it for measurement error and systematic error and statistical errors, but by the end of it they just couldn’t deny what they found. You know, even the most die-hard of dark matter fans could not deny what they found.”
Wow. Actual SCIENCE! You mean, you present EVIDENCE after you’ve checked it and checked it and checked it again BECAUSE YOUR PEERS ARE EXPECTED TO CRITICIZE IT? And submitting to that scrutiny and criticism is the price of admittance? D*mn, that’s beautiful!
Now, could we apply the same standards and behaviors to COVID and Global Warming and gender theory, etc.?
Yeah, dream on.
4 thoughts on “Dark Matter & Science”
It’s a good dream. We keep it alive with our kids.
Maybe not so utterly esoteric if “Quantized Inertia” ends up explaining these observations as well/better. I’ve been following physicsfromtheedge.blogspot.com for a while and kind of hoping it represents reality – it would unlock technologies to colonize the solar system, among other things. It seems like a fun universe to be in. See for example his posts “Wide Binaries 3.0” (9 February 2019), “Towards Propellant-less Propulsion” (19 December 2018), and a number of others. I think in one of the comment threads someone imagined a set of high-Q emdrives powered by an aircraft carrier-sized nuclear reactor providing about 1 g of “thrust” to an aircraft carrier-sized vessel – so enough to levitate it on earth, or accelerate at 1 g in space. Quite the revolution in thinking about space travel (and many other things).
(BTW, first time commenting here. Thanks for hosting a bit of sanity in these crazy years.)