The Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter
1–10 of 315 posts
Re: The Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter
#2I'm guessing that "guessing in the dark" is the way experiments for particles in the standard model have been done for a while now. I would assume that a single success would set off a chain reaction as the author said.
Re: The Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter
#3Really well written article, especially as someone who is interested in the topic but not an expert.
Re: The Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter
#4We have a room filled with one foot of iron, one foot of sand, one foot of water, one foot of air, and some empty space filled with god knows what needs to be filled in order to balance the gravity equations. There is one group of people looking for particles less dense than air to fill the rest of the room. I am in the group that's looking at the other end for particles denser than iron, and I firmly believe they are contained in black stars (wrongly named black holes).
Re: The Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter
#5Because it doesn’t exist. Dark matter is a fudge factor to prop-up a theory that astrophysics is too afraid to put to rest.
Re: The Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter
#6We have a room filled with one foot of iron, one foot of sand, one foot of water, one foot of air, and some empty space filled with god knows what needs to be filled in order to balance the gravity equations. There is one group of people looking for particles less dense than air to fill the rest of the room. I am in the group that's looking at the other end for particles denser than iron, and I firmly believe they ar…
aren't black holes mass already computed accurately ?
Re: The Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter
#7Because it doesn’t exist. Dark matter is a fudge factor to prop-up a theory that astrophysics is too afraid to put to rest.
Indeed.
Physics is wrong on many fundamental levels, but everytime physicists find fundamental errors, they propose another entirely theoretical layer of complexity, with the "benfit" that no one is able to practically refute it.
Re: The Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter
#8Because it doesn’t exist. Dark matter is a fudge factor to prop-up a theory that astrophysics is too afraid to put to rest.
It worked for neutrinos.
Re: The Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter
#9We have a room filled with one foot of iron, one foot of sand, one foot of water, one foot of air, and some empty space filled with god knows what needs to be filled in order to balance the gravity equations. There is one group of people looking for particles less dense than air to fill the rest of the room. I am in the group that's looking at the other end for particles denser than iron, and I firmly believe they ar…
Is there anything on Arxiv I could read to learn more about your approach?
Re: The Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter
#10Because it doesn’t exist. Dark matter is a fudge factor to prop-up a theory that astrophysics is too afraid to put to rest.
I'm not sure which theory you refer to? Normal physics works pretty well for most stuff and no one claims it knows everything.