Dark Matter; Real? Or Imagined?

[zaangalewa]

....

What are the evidences of dark matter?

Still what Vera Rubin found out in context of the rotation of the galaxy Andromeda is a very impressing question, which makes plaubsible the existence of "dark matter" (better to say: "unknown mass" - or "still unknown source of something what looks like gravitational force").

Here an example for the galaxy Messier 33:

Rotation curve of spiral galaxy Messier 33 (yellow and blue points with error bars), and a predicted one from distribution of the visible matter (gray line). The discrepancy between the two curves can be accounted for by adding a dark matter halo surrounding the galaxy.

Otherwise known as a fudge factor.

May I ask, why you say such an unbelievable stupid nonsense? Do you love pub brawls?

The path velocity far from the bulge of a galaxy should be proportional in an idealized Kepler system to the squareroot of the reziprocal radius. Why is it not?

 

[ding]

....

What are the evidences of dark matter?

Still what Vera Rubin found out in context of the rotation of the galaxy Andromeda is a very impressing question, which makes plaubsible the existence of "dark matter" (better to say: "unknown mass" - or "still unknown source of something what looks like gravitational force").

Here an example for the galaxy Messier 33:

Rotation curve of spiral galaxy Messier 33 (yellow and blue points with error bars), and a predicted one from distribution of the visible matter (gray line). The discrepancy between the two curves can be accounted for by adding a dark matter halo surrounding the galaxy.

Otherwise known as a fudge factor.

May I ask, why you say such an unbelievable stupid nonsense? Do you love pub brawls?

The path velocity far from the bulge of a galaxy should be proportional in an idealized Kepler system to the squareroot of the reziprocal radius. Why is it not?

I say it because that's exactly what it is; a fudge factor to make observations match calculations.

There is no explanation for what particles make up dark matter/energy or an explanation for how it was created without violating the FLoT or an explanation for why gravitational forces don't affect it like it does the rest of the universe.

You might start with answering the questions asked by the OP before you make foolish assumptions about me.

 

[ding]

....

What are the evidences of dark matter?

Still what Vera Rubin found out in context of the rotation of the galaxy Andromeda is a very impressing question, which makes plaubsible the existence of "dark matter" (better to say: "unknown mass" - or "still unknown source of something what looks like gravitational force").

Here an example for the galaxy Messier 33:

Rotation curve of spiral galaxy Messier 33 (yellow and blue points with error bars), and a predicted one from distribution of the visible matter (gray line). The discrepancy between the two curves can be accounted for by adding a dark matter halo surrounding the galaxy.

Otherwise known as a fudge factor.

May I ask, why you say such an unbelievable stupid nonsense? Do you love pub brawls?

The path velocity far from the bulge of a galaxy should be proportional in an idealized Kepler system to the squareroot of the reziprocal radius. Why is it not?

What type of matter is dark matter?
Of which particles consist dark matter?
How does dark matter arise?
What are the evidences of dark matter?

 

[zaangalewa]

....

What are the evidences of dark matter?

Still what Vera Rubin found out in context of the rotation of the galaxy Andromeda is a very impressing question, which makes plaubsible the existence of "dark matter" (better to say: "unknown mass" - or "still unknown source of something what looks like gravitational force").

Here an example for the galaxy Messier 33:

Rotation curve of spiral galaxy Messier 33 (yellow and blue points with error bars), and a predicted one from distribution of the visible matter (gray line). The discrepancy between the two curves can be accounted for by adding a dark matter halo surrounding the galaxy.

Otherwise known as a fudge factor.

May I ask, why you say such an unbelievable stupid nonsense? Do you love pub brawls?

The path velocity far from the bulge of a galaxy should be proportional in an idealized Kepler system to the squareroot of the reziprocal radius. Why is it not?

What type of matter is dark matter?
Of which particles consist dark matter?
How does dark matter arise?
What are the evidences of dark matter?

You don't understand what you ask and why you ask this. Think about what I said - or let it be.

 

[zaangalewa]

....

What are the evidences of dark matter?

Still what Vera Rubin found out in context of the rotation of the galaxy Andromeda is a very impressing question, which makes plaubsible the existence of "dark matter" (better to say: "unknown mass" - or "still unknown source of something what looks like gravitational force").

Here an example for the galaxy Messier 33:

Rotation curve of spiral galaxy Messier 33 (yellow and blue points with error bars), and a predicted one from distribution of the visible matter (gray line). The discrepancy between the two curves can be accounted for by adding a dark matter halo surrounding the galaxy.

Otherwise known as a fudge factor.

May I ask, why you say such an unbelievable stupid nonsense? Do you love pub brawls?

The path velocity far from the bulge of a galaxy should be proportional in an idealized Kepler system to the squareroot of the reziprocal radius. Why is it not?

I say it because that's exactly what it is; a fudge factor to make observations match calculations.

There is no explanation for what particles make up dark matter/energy or an explanation for how it was created without violating the FLoT or an explanation for why gravitational forces don't affect it like it does the rest of the universe.

You might start with answering the questions asked by the OP before you make foolish assumptions about me.

no comment

 

[ding]

....

What are the evidences of dark matter?

Still what Vera Rubin found out in context of the rotation of the galaxy Andromeda is a very impressing question, which makes plaubsible the existence of "dark matter" (better to say: "unknown mass" - or "still unknown source of something what looks like gravitational force").

Here an example for the galaxy Messier 33:

Rotation curve of spiral galaxy Messier 33 (yellow and blue points with error bars), and a predicted one from distribution of the visible matter (gray line). The discrepancy between the two curves can be accounted for by adding a dark matter halo surrounding the galaxy.

Otherwise known as a fudge factor.

May I ask, why you say such an unbelievable stupid nonsense? Do you love pub brawls?

The path velocity far from the bulge of a galaxy should be proportional in an idealized Kepler system to the squareroot of the reziprocal radius. Why is it not?

What type of matter is dark matter?
Of which particles consist dark matter?
How does dark matter arise?
What are the evidences of dark matter?

You don't understand what you ask and why you ask this. Think about what I said - or let it be.

I do understand what I ask and why I ask it. If they are correct and dark matter accounts for 85% of the matter in the universe then these are important questions.

 

[zaangalewa]

....

What are the evidences of dark matter?

Still what Vera Rubin found out in context of the rotation of the galaxy Andromeda is a very impressing question, which makes plaubsible the existence of "dark matter" (better to say: "unknown mass" - or "still unknown source of something what looks like gravitational force").

Here an example for the galaxy Messier 33:

Rotation curve of spiral galaxy Messier 33 (yellow and blue points with error bars), and a predicted one from distribution of the visible matter (gray line). The discrepancy between the two curves can be accounted for by adding a dark matter halo surrounding the galaxy.

Otherwise known as a fudge factor.

May I ask, why you say such an unbelievable stupid nonsense? Do you love pub brawls?

The path velocity far from the bulge of a galaxy should be proportional in an idealized Kepler system to the squareroot of the reziprocal radius. Why is it not?

What type of matter is dark matter?
Of which particles consist dark matter?
How does dark matter arise?
What are the evidences of dark matter?

You don't understand what you ask and why you ask this. Think about what I said - or let it be.

I do understand what I ask and why I ask it. If they are correct and dark matter accounts for 85% of the matter in the universe then these are important questions.

no comment

 

[ding]

....

What are the evidences of dark matter?

Still what Vera Rubin found out in context of the rotation of the galaxy Andromeda is a very impressing question, which makes plaubsible the existence of "dark matter" (better to say: "unknown mass" - or "still unknown source of something what looks like gravitational force").

Here an example for the galaxy Messier 33:

Rotation curve of spiral galaxy Messier 33 (yellow and blue points with error bars), and a predicted one from distribution of the visible matter (gray line). The discrepancy between the two curves can be accounted for by adding a dark matter halo surrounding the galaxy.

Otherwise known as a fudge factor.

May I ask, why you say such an unbelievable stupid nonsense? Do you love pub brawls?

The path velocity far from the bulge of a galaxy should be proportional in an idealized Kepler system to the squareroot of the reziprocal radius. Why is it not?

What type of matter is dark matter?
Of which particles consist dark matter?
How does dark matter arise?
What are the evidences of dark matter?

You don't understand what you ask and why you ask this. Think about what I said - or let it be.

I do understand what I ask and why I ask it. If they are correct and dark matter accounts for 85% of the matter in the universe then these are important questions.

no comment

Hence, it's a fudge factor.

 

[Quasar44]

What type of matter is dark matter?
Of which particles consist dark matter?
How does dark matter arise?
What are the evidences of dark matter?

Dark matter and energy are 100 percent real
It’s been unanswered the last 90 yrs
It has zero interaction with anything
they are passing through you but it has zero interactions with any electrons

 

[zaangalewa]

....

What are the evidences of dark matter?

Still what Vera Rubin found out in context of the rotation of the galaxy Andromeda is a very impressing question, which makes plaubsible the existence of "dark matter" (better to say: "unknown mass" - or "still unknown source of something what looks like gravitational force").

Here an example for the galaxy Messier 33:

Rotation curve of spiral galaxy Messier 33 (yellow and blue points with error bars), and a predicted one from distribution of the visible matter (gray line). The discrepancy between the two curves can be accounted for by adding a dark matter halo surrounding the galaxy.

Otherwise known as a fudge factor.

May I ask, why you say such an unbelievable stupid nonsense? Do you love pub brawls?

The path velocity far from the bulge of a galaxy should be proportional in an idealized Kepler system to the squareroot of the reziprocal radius. Why is it not?

What type of matter is dark matter?
Of which particles consist dark matter?
How does dark matter arise?
What are the evidences of dark matter?

You don't understand what you ask and why you ask this. Think about what I said - or let it be.

I do understand what I ask and why I ask it. If they are correct and dark matter accounts for 85% of the matter in the universe then these are important questions.

no comment

Hence, it's a fudge factor.

What's nonsense. To say so has more to do with psychology, sociology and politics than mathematics and physics.

Short: Explain why in a galaxy the path velocity is not proportional to ~ (1/radius)^1/2. Why exists such a huge difference in the expected values of an ideal Kepler system and the real measured values? Which other kind of formula is to use? "Dark matter" means in this context - as far as I am able to see - the formulas are correct, but there exists in reality indeed an additional gravity force. To use the word "dark" instead of "unknown" is perhaps just simple a poetical mistake. You can use instead of "dark matter" also an expression like "unknown gravity force" - or "gravity force, which comes from something, what we still don't know".

 

[ding]

What type of matter is dark matter?
Of which particles consist dark matter?
How does dark matter arise?
What are the evidences of dark matter?

Dark matter and energy are 100 percent real
It’s been unanswered the last 90 yrs
It has zero interaction with anything
they are passing through you but it has zero interactions with any electrons

I think you are thinking of neutrinos.

 

[ding]

....

What are the evidences of dark matter?

Still what Vera Rubin found out in context of the rotation of the galaxy Andromeda is a very impressing question, which makes plaubsible the existence of "dark matter" (better to say: "unknown mass" - or "still unknown source of something what looks like gravitational force").

Here an example for the galaxy Messier 33:

Rotation curve of spiral galaxy Messier 33 (yellow and blue points with error bars), and a predicted one from distribution of the visible matter (gray line). The discrepancy between the two curves can be accounted for by adding a dark matter halo surrounding the galaxy.

Otherwise known as a fudge factor.

May I ask, why you say such an unbelievable stupid nonsense? Do you love pub brawls?

The path velocity far from the bulge of a galaxy should be proportional in an idealized Kepler system to the squareroot of the reziprocal radius. Why is it not?

What type of matter is dark matter?
Of which particles consist dark matter?
How does dark matter arise?
What are the evidences of dark matter?

You don't understand what you ask and why you ask this. Think about what I said - or let it be.

I do understand what I ask and why I ask it. If they are correct and dark matter accounts for 85% of the matter in the universe then these are important questions.

no comment

Hence, it's a fudge factor.

What's nonsense. To say so has more to do with psychology, sociology and politics than mathematics and physics.

Short: Explain why in a galaxy the path velocity is not proportional to ~ (1/radius)^1/2. Why exists such a huge difference in the expected values of an ideal Kepler system and the real measured values? Which other kind of formula is to use? "Dark matter" means in this context - as far as I am able to see - the formulas are correct, but there exists in reality indeed an additional gravity force. To use the word "dark" instead of "unknown" is perhaps just simple a poetical mistake. You can use instead of "dark matter" also an expression like "unknown gravity force" - or "gravity force, which comes from something, what we still don't know".

Which particles make up dark matter?

 

[zaangalewa]

....

What are the evidences of dark matter?

Still what Vera Rubin found out in context of the rotation of the galaxy Andromeda is a very impressing question, which makes plaubsible the existence of "dark matter" (better to say: "unknown mass" - or "still unknown source of something what looks like gravitational force").

Here an example for the galaxy Messier 33:

Rotation curve of spiral galaxy Messier 33 (yellow and blue points with error bars), and a predicted one from distribution of the visible matter (gray line). The discrepancy between the two curves can be accounted for by adding a dark matter halo surrounding the galaxy.

Otherwise known as a fudge factor.

May I ask, why you say such an unbelievable stupid nonsense? Do you love pub brawls?

The path velocity far from the bulge of a galaxy should be proportional in an idealized Kepler system to the squareroot of the reziprocal radius. Why is it not?

What type of matter is dark matter?
Of which particles consist dark matter?
How does dark matter arise?
What are the evidences of dark matter?

You don't understand what you ask and why you ask this. Think about what I said - or let it be.

I do understand what I ask and why I ask it. If they are correct and dark matter accounts for 85% of the matter in the universe then these are important questions.

no comment

Hence, it's a fudge factor.

What's nonsense. To say so has more to do with psychology, sociology and politics than mathematics and physics.

Short: Explain why in a galaxy the path velocity is not proportional to ~ (1/radius)^1/2. Why exists such a huge difference in the expected values of an ideal Kepler system and the real measured values? Which other kind of formula is to use? "Dark matter" means in this context - as far as I am able to see - the formulas are correct, but there exists in reality indeed an additional gravity force. To use the word "dark" instead of "unknown" is perhaps just simple a poetical mistake. You can use instead of "dark matter" also an expression like "unknown gravity force" - or "gravity force, which comes from something, what we still don't know".

Which particles make up dark matter?

Read, what I said. Think about - or let it be.

 

[ding]

....

What are the evidences of dark matter?

Still what Vera Rubin found out in context of the rotation of the galaxy Andromeda is a very impressing question, which makes plaubsible the existence of "dark matter" (better to say: "unknown mass" - or "still unknown source of something what looks like gravitational force").

Here an example for the galaxy Messier 33:

Rotation curve of spiral galaxy Messier 33 (yellow and blue points with error bars), and a predicted one from distribution of the visible matter (gray line). The discrepancy between the two curves can be accounted for by adding a dark matter halo surrounding the galaxy.

Otherwise known as a fudge factor.

May I ask, why you say such an unbelievable stupid nonsense? Do you love pub brawls?

The path velocity far from the bulge of a galaxy should be proportional in an idealized Kepler system to the squareroot of the reziprocal radius. Why is it not?

What type of matter is dark matter?
Of which particles consist dark matter?
How does dark matter arise?
What are the evidences of dark matter?

You don't understand what you ask and why you ask this. Think about what I said - or let it be.

I do understand what I ask and why I ask it. If they are correct and dark matter accounts for 85% of the matter in the universe then these are important questions.

no comment

Hence, it's a fudge factor.

What's nonsense. To say so has more to do with psychology, sociology and politics than mathematics and physics.

Short: Explain why in a galaxy the path velocity is not proportional to ~ (1/radius)^1/2. Why exists such a huge difference in the expected values of an ideal Kepler system and the real measured values? Which other kind of formula is to use? "Dark matter" means in this context - as far as I am able to see - the formulas are correct, but there exists in reality indeed an additional gravity force. To use the word "dark" instead of "unknown" is perhaps just simple a poetical mistake. You can use instead of "dark matter" also an expression like "unknown gravity force" - or "gravity force, which comes from something, what we still don't know".

Which particles make up dark matter?

Read, what I said. Think about - or let it be.

I did read what you wrote. You are essentially agreeing with me. It's a fudge factor.

 

[zaangalewa]

... I did read what you wrote. You are essentially agreeing with me.

I agree with nothing what you say and specially I do absolutelly not agree with the way how you say what you say.

It's a fudge factor.

You love it to babble. Tell me how to solve the problem Fritz Zwicky formulated in 1933 the first time in context Viralsatz (=~¿viral sentence?) or Vera Rubin made popular in context rotation curve. ... Oh I see now... In 1932 Jan Hendrik Oort calculated with 0.092 sun masses per parsec^3 although it were only known in 1932 0.038 sun masses per parsec^3. Why is this so? What is 'dark'? What do we not see? Why do we still not see, what we were not able to see since 1932 - although it has effects, which we are able to measure? What's wrong?

 

[ding]

... I did read what you wrote. You are essentially agreeing with me.

I agree with nothing what you say and specially I do absolutelly not agree with the way how you say what you say.

It's a fudge factor.

You love it to babble. Tell me how to solve the problem Fritz Zwicky formulated in 1933 the first time in context Viralsatz (=~¿viral sentence?) or Vera Rubin made popular in context rotation curve. ... Oh I see now... In 1932 Jan Hendrik Oort calculated with 0.092 sun masses per parsec^3 although it were only known in 1932 0.038 sun masses per parsec^3. Why is this so? What is 'dark'? What do we not see? Why do we still not see, what we were not able to see since 1932 - although it has effects, which we are able to measure? What's wrong?

You mean besides not being able to describe the fundamental composition of matter which supposedly makes up 85% of the universe?

 

[zaangalewa]

... I did read what you wrote. You are essentially agreeing with me.

I agree with nothing what you say and specially I do absolutelly not agree with the way how you say what you say.

It's a fudge factor.

You love it to babble. Tell me how to solve the problem Fritz Zwicky formulated in 1933 the first time in context Viralsatz (=~¿viral sentence?) or Vera Rubin made popular in context rotation curve. ... Oh I see now... In 1932 Jan Hendrik Oort calculated with 0.092 sun masses per parsec^3 although it were only known in 1932 0.038 sun masses per parsec^3. Why is this so? What is 'dark'? What do we not see? Why do we still not see, what we were not able to see since 1932 - although it has effects, which we are able to measure? What's wrong?

You mean besides not being able to describe the fundamental composition of matter which supposedly makes up 85% of the universe?

I hate this aggressive nonsense style of US-Americans in all forms of "discussions". It's always stupid - and never interesting. Asides: What do you call why 85% in this context?

 

[ding]

... I did read what you wrote. You are essentially agreeing with me.

I agree with nothing what you say and specially I do absolutelly not agree with the way how you say what you say.

It's a fudge factor.

You love it to babble. Tell me how to solve the problem Fritz Zwicky formulated in 1933 the first time in context Viralsatz (=~¿viral sentence?) or Vera Rubin made popular in context rotation curve. ... Oh I see now... In 1932 Jan Hendrik Oort calculated with 0.092 sun masses per parsec^3 although it were only known in 1932 0.038 sun masses per parsec^3. Why is this so? What is 'dark'? What do we not see? Why do we still not see, what we were not able to see since 1932 - although it has effects, which we are able to measure? What's wrong?

You mean besides not being able to describe the fundamental composition of matter which supposedly makes up 85% of the universe?

I hate this aggressive nonsense style of US-Americans in all forms of "discussions". It's always stupid - and never interesting. Asides: What do you call why 85% in this context?

To make calculations match observations they say that dark matter accounts for 85% of the matter in the universe.

 

[ding]

... I did read what you wrote. You are essentially agreeing with me.

I agree with nothing what you say and specially I do absolutelly not agree with the way how you say what you say.

It's a fudge factor.

You love it to babble. Tell me how to solve the problem Fritz Zwicky formulated in 1933 the first time in context Viralsatz (=~¿viral sentence?) or Vera Rubin made popular in context rotation curve. ... Oh I see now... In 1932 Jan Hendrik Oort calculated with 0.092 sun masses per parsec^3 although it were only known in 1932 0.038 sun masses per parsec^3. Why is this so? What is 'dark'? What do we not see? Why do we still not see, what we were not able to see since 1932 - although it has effects, which we are able to measure? What's wrong?

You mean besides not being able to describe the fundamental composition of matter which supposedly makes up 85% of the universe?

I hate this aggressive nonsense style of US-Americans in all forms of "discussions". It's always stupid - and never interesting. Asides: What do you call why 85% in this context?

Do you understand how dark matter is supposedly created?

 

[zaangalewa]

... I did read what you wrote. You are essentially agreeing with me.

I agree with nothing what you say and specially I do absolutelly not agree with the way how you say what you say.

It's a fudge factor.

You love it to babble. Tell me how to solve the problem Fritz Zwicky formulated in 1933 the first time in context Viralsatz (=~¿viral sentence?) or Vera Rubin made popular in context rotation curve. ... Oh I see now... In 1932 Jan Hendrik Oort calculated with 0.092 sun masses per parsec^3 although it were only known in 1932 0.038 sun masses per parsec^3. Why is this so? What is 'dark'? What do we not see? Why do we still not see, what we were not able to see since 1932 - although it has effects, which we are able to measure? What's wrong?

You mean besides not being able to describe the fundamental composition of matter which supposedly makes up 85% of the universe?

I hate this aggressive nonsense style of US-Americans in all forms of "discussions". It's always stupid - and never interesting. Asides: What do you call why 85% in this context?

To make calculations match observations they say that dark matter accounts for 85% of the matter in the universe.

How are we able to know this while we are not able to know the total amount of energy of the universe?