Image not available

500x310

darkmatter-03.en.png

🧵 what is it?

Anonymous No. 16447701

Image not available

1200x1481

dark.jpg

Anonymous No. 16447704

>>16447701
bullshit

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16449108

>>16447701
black holes don't exist, they're as fictitious and made up as dark matter

Anonymous No. 16449110

>>16447701
>dark energy
the cosmological constant
>dark matter
we don’t know

Anonymous No. 16449128

Electromagnetic radiation of undetectably long wavelengths (aka gravity)
Next question

Anonymous No. 16449133

>>16447701
>our models for the physics of the universe don’t make sense
>theyre gonna cut our funding if we don’t give them an answer
>uhhh oh yeah forgot about this totally real thing we discovered that conveniently makes our models work here you go pls gib 10 million dollars

Image not available

1000x620

1729796595333677.png

Anonymous No. 16449201

>>16447701

Image not available

1200x1372

statistic.png

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16449202

>>16449201

Anonymous No. 16449211

>>16447701
>Implying we understand the observable matter
>Implying we can predict proton mass
>Implying we understand plasmas
>Implying

🗑️ EBOK No. 16449260

>>16449211>>16449202
>Implying the Jews were killed
>Implying it wasn't incursion
>Implying Holocaust denial law isn't a clue
>Implying that was Hitlers crime

Anonymous No. 16449387

>>16449211
What are you getting at? The proton mass can be calculated directly in lattice QCD.

Image not available

768x432

1540146028244.gif

Anonymous No. 16449754

>>16447701
Hypothesizing about something that's missing to salvage your theory after making wrong predictions is understandable when it's the best theory you have. But when another theory comes along that predicts things like galaxy rotation and universe expansion without any dark stuff, it's time to call bullshit on the first theory and move on. We now have that second theory in the form of Quantized Inertia, so the dark stuff is just cope for General Relativity being wrong.

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16451372

>>16449754
theoretically, how big is a unicorn's penis?

Anonymous No. 16451605

>>16449387
Lol

Anonymous No. 16451893

>>16449754

Nope. QI does not predict anything new. QI basically copies the equations of MOND, which are 40 years old. So it didn't really provide anything new. And like MOND, QI is very limited. MOND works on the scale of galaxies, but on the larger scales of clusters of galaxies and cosmology it falls apart. The Bullet Cluster is a famous example where the gravitational lensing is offset from most of the normal matter, something unthinkable in radial models like MOND. QI does exactly the same thing. But McCulloch waves his hands and says something magical happens, but he does not provide any substantial argument or quantitative analysis of these systems.

It's "predictions" for dynamics have already been falsified, with wide binaries. People are still arguing about GR vs MOND, but QI is just way off.
https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2024MNRAS.527.4573B/abstract
https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019MNRAS.488.4740P/abstract

And then when it comes to the actual cosmology, there is no quantitative model which describes expansion and the formation of structure. And there is glaring contradictions, in the fact that McCulloch uses some numbers from standard cosmology (e.g. the radius of the universe), which was calculated assuming dark matter and energy. So you see the very basic contradiction, that QI supposedly replaces these things and yet cannot calculate anything independently.

Anonymous No. 16451919

>>16447701
1. come up with a physical theory and equations
2. yey, we science now, we know everything, trust us
3. oh, it doesn't apply to anything we actually see in the galaxy and beyond?
4. fuck you, we KNOW better, let's keep the theory and fix the results by adding imaginary matter and energy that nobody can see
5. now it works perfectly fine and we, scientists, are right again
6. trust science

Image not available

460x461

the univesere acc....jpg

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16453006

Anonymous No. 16453464

>>16451919
>you dont believe me
>i dont care give me billions in funding
>and you arent allowed to have political opinions that disagree
>yes our dingbat teachers get to program your children for decades

EBOK No. 16453482

>>16451919
Academic trained prey

Anonymous No. 16454319

>cryptocurrency backed by dark matter
how much would it be worth?

Anonymous No. 16454652

>>16449260
>Implying that millions more european Christians than the Nazi regimes “sworn enemies” didn’t die
>Implying that Hitler didn’t gladly take funding in exchange for letting certain families off the hook
>Implying German culture isn’t obsessed with micromanaging reality itself, as thousands of years of history have told us
>Implying this is the right board.

Anonymous No. 16455482

>>16454652
>I hate Hitler because he didn't kill all the jews, too many got away
based

Anonymous No. 16456619

>>16454319
You could buy a lot of NFTs with that kind of money

Anonymous No. 16457602

oh hey it's this thread again

Anonymous No. 16459244

>>16449260
Hitler converted the jews to dark matter and thats why nobody can find any evidence of any of the 6,000,000 dead bodies

Anonymous No. 16460492

>>16459244
>nazi superscience
operation paperclip kidnapped the wrong guys. rockets are pretty neat-o, but nothing compared to dark matter

Anonymous No. 16460506

>>16447701
It's non baryonic matter. That's all. We're just used to everything being made out of baryons. So we found something in the universe not made of baryons and it doesn't fit any of our models. That's all.

Image not available

500x310

1729796595333677.jpg

Anonymous No. 16461620

Anonymous No. 16462661

>>16461620
this except the yellow part is also blatantly and badly misunderstood

Anonymous No. 16462690

>>16447701
dark matter could be the sort of the same concept as a wave function before the collapse.

Anonymous No. 16462702

>fake
>wrong
all those retarded posts in here are cringe. and at least 70% is posted by /pol/tards.

you all act as you would understand this but you are just little childs playing around.
watched 20 min of a popsci docu on youtube and now act like you would be experts.
it took me literally years of reading books to get a glimpse of it.
you act as if science is not aware of the inexplicability or as if scientists would not consider that it is not matter/energy.
admit to yourselves that your passion, your willingness to work and your brains are simply not enough.

Anonymous No. 16463778

>>16462702
I find it interesting that dark matter cultists are 1:1 with globists. Just tell people how it is. Don't ask questions; we know more than you. That's Science, right? That's how your Science works?

Anonymous No. 16463854

>>16463778
sorry I dont speak offended clown.

Image not available

1x1

Gupta_2024_ApJ_96....pdf

Anonymous No. 16465701

>>16462702
you've never studied astronomy even to the point of passing astro 101, you have no idea what you're talking about and you're projecting your ignorance onto everyone else because you presume that everyone is as ignorant as you are.
there is a plethora of professional astronomers who are convinced dark matter is a work of fiction including almost everyone in the references of this paper

Anonymous No. 16465859

>>16465701
>>16465701
That paper is nonsense, dark matter has many pillars within observations: Rotation curves, galaxy clusters, weak lensing, the cosmic microwave background fluctuations, big bang nucleosynthesis, galaxy formation... Gupta doesn't show he can explain any of that. Instead he is looking at a single dataset (baryon acoustic oscillations) and showing that in his model he doesn't need DM, but his model cannot explain all the other things I listed. The power of standard cosmology is it's ability to fit all current data simultaneously, Gupta is looking at the data one plot at a time.

Secondly, it's not removing the need for assumptions like DM, it's just adding different ones. Instead of having dark matter he adds both time varying cosmological constants and some magical tired light model, each of which is a dark matter sized assumption. So wow, he has removed one model parameter by adding two more, this is not a simplification.

Gupta's papers are lazy and uninteresting. And his model of having the physical constants vary with time is already ruled out by lunar ranging.
https://astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm

> including almost everyone in the references of this paper
Lol no, that's not how references work. Look up some of the random papers he cited, you will see few even mention DM. There are people who work on models without dark matter (e.g. MOND), but these models are not simpler and they all have big problems matching observations. Modifying gravity or dynamics is no simpler or better than having it be a particle.

Anonymous No. 16465886

>>16449754
> so the dark stuff is just cope for General Relativity being wrong
All theories are wrong. Whatever replaces General Relativity will also be wrong. Just less wrong.

Anonymous No. 16465931

>>16465859
I found a dark matter particle, it exactly matches prediction, it is confirmed, the appropriate mass, charge, spin, size. It was very hard to detect but me and my team did it in our schools collider. We have already been corroborated by major journals and publications, so it will be quite soon the data and news is made. In your estimate, where does the science go from there, now what?

Anonymous No. 16465999

Dark matter deniers when I show them a window.

Anyways dark matter really is just a way to measure our error from prediction to measurement. Why do you give a shit?

Anonymous No. 16467980

>>16465859
>https://astro.ucla.edu
dude makes $70k/year
thats less than what a bud driver makes

Image not available

1200x961

NDU4NTA5NDE.jpg

Anonymous No. 16468236

>>16465931
Is it an axion? Or something else? Anyways, do you have an expected publishing date, that does sound interesting if you are not larping.

Anonymous No. 16468341

>>16461620
lol

Image not available

620x359

universe_made_of2.jpg

Anonymous No. 16469466

>>16447701

Anonymous No. 16469626

They just couldn't accept fact, that constants and laws of physics are local, and particles a little bit divergent across universe, so they blamed niggers and we have dark energy now.

Image not available

620x359

1731234874345256.jpg

Anonymous No. 16471545

>>16469466

🗑️ Anonymous No. 16472674

>>16471545
lol

Anonymous No. 16474242

>>16467980
Bus drivers are more useful and valuable people than astronomers. Higher IQ too

Image not available

1200x620

cosmological-cons....jpg

Anonymous No. 16475580

>>16449110
>the cosmological constant
even einstein wasn't stupid enough to believe in it

Anonymous No. 16476695

>>16475580
einstein was shit at math, thats why he wasn't able to construct functional mathematical formulas to express his ideas.

Anonymous No. 16478395

>>16455482
Hitler didn't kill any of them, thats the worst thing about him

Anonymous No. 16478661

>>16447704
Kek. Timeless

Anonymous No. 16478665

>>16465859
>The power of standard cosmology is it's ability to fit all current data simultaneously
ie Garbage in garbage out

Anonymous No. 16478895

>>16447701
>matter had anti-matter just because it does
>energy doesn't have anti-energy (not an energy sink, but something that attracts energy itself)
>can't see anti energy because all of your high energy or low energy experiments are looking for energy signatures