Image not available

640x480

sddefault.jpg

๐Ÿงต So dark matter is fake and gay, now what?

Anonymous No. 16488000 Report

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AagyRrIm2W0

Anonymous No. 16488010 Report

>the model that can make accurate predictions is fake and gay
>the model which doesn't even yield consistent behavior on different length scales is totally real

Anonymous No. 16488042 Report

>>16488000
Sabine is based
Academia fucked her over so she is now saying the annoying things that pussy scientists don't want to deal with

Anonymous No. 16488086 Report

>>16488010
Isn't mond just another model of dark matter? Different galaxies have different offsets of rotation speed, which must be treated differently in mond. It seems plausible that it can work.

Anonymous No. 16488097 Report

>>16488010
Yes sweaty, you madly?

Anonymous No. 16488140 Report

Let's take bets, how long until she releases a video advocating flat earth?

Anonymous No. 16488274 Report

>>16488010
MOND didn't predict anything here either. Various galaxy formation models coupled to dark matter cosmology made various predictions for the number of galaxies.
MOND has no such simulations, but someone guessed it should be "more than LCDM". Not saying how much, could be 1% more or a billion times higher. It's the scientific equivalent of guessing one dollar more than the other guy on the Price is Right. It is useless.

>>16488140
No, it's an alternative to dark matter completely. The problem is on the scale of galaxy clusters the corrections are much larger whereas in MOND they shouldn't. And they can't even do cosmology in MOND because it's Newtonian, and doesn't fit any data if you try.

Anonymous No. 16488446 Report

>>16488000
Protecting the gospel of the secular Jewish physics Jesus is more important than being right.

Image not available

1264x1176

smug-pepe.gif

Anonymous No. 16488502 Report

>>16488000
Third option: 25% proper dark matter + 60% of cloaked matter by advanced civilizations + 15% of visible matter.

Anonymous No. 16488512 Report

>>16488502
Nah the 60% is more probably immatter, aka matter which is not yet ripe

Anonymous No. 16488516 Report

>>16488042
Go get a job, Sabine.

Anonymous No. 16488519 Report

>>16488140
Will happen right after her alien Bigfoot reveal

Anonymous No. 16488572 Report

professor dave explains deboonked her tho

Anonymous No. 16489028 Report

>>16488140
She can't be that based

Anonymous No. 16489045 Report

>>16488446

What's happening with all those references to Jews on all 4chan ? Until recently it was mostly constrained to /pol/ and /his/ but now it spread to /sci/, /a/, /biz/, /lit/ ...

Anonymous No. 16489075 Report

>>16488000
Threadly reminder: Lubos was right, Sabine is a dip shit.

Anonymous No. 16489082 Report

>>16489045
ever since the lock-downs really

Anonymous No. 16489098 Report

>>16489075
>Lubos was right
Source?

Anonymous No. 16489127 Report

>>16488086
except MoND doesn't work at all, it fails to explain even basic observations
here's one:
why do galaxies which have similar sizes and shapes sometimes have dramatically different amounts of dark matter in them?
MoND completely fails to answer this question and it's a common observation

Anonymous No. 16489202 Report

>>16489127
By this argument no model of dark matter works. So I don't get your hangup

Anonymous No. 16490331 Report

>>16489202
If it works as an argument against dark matter, then it is an argument against MoND. Even if something is wrong, it doesn't mean that is must be replaced by something else that is wrong. That's politics

Anonymous No. 16490346 Report

>>16489202
>By this argument no model of dark matter works.
If dark matter is actually a physical thing, then it can be distributed unevenly, which is consistent with observations.
If it's due to MoND, then it can't be distributed unevenly, because forces should be similarly modified for galaxies of similar size and shape, but we observe that this doesn't happen. So far MoND can't explain even this, so nobody really takes it seriously.

Anonymous No. 16490364 Report

>>16489127
>why do galaxies which have similar sizes and shapes sometimes have dramatically different amounts of dark matter in them?
Because "dark matter" is just gravitational ripples, which can be at different field intensities anywhere in the universe

Anonymous No. 16490371 Report

>>16490364
MoND doesn't predict gravitational waves

Anonymous No. 16490379 Report

>>16490331
>>16490346
I don't think you guys understand what you're saying. Dark matter is a collection of observational anomalies. Galaxy rotation curves show different degrees of anomalies, in that some show no anomalies and some show dramatic anomalies. As far as I understand, every model of dark matter out there is ad hoc in this regard.

Mond is a model of dark matter insofar that it describes these anomalies. Different galaxies will have different gravitational scaling. Meanwhile with something like WIMPS, the model only works if you say different galaxies have different amount of wimps.

Not sure why you say mond isn't a model of dark matter. It clearly is.

Anonymous No. 16490396 Report

>>16490379
Yes I am well aware of this and I have no idea why you think my post says otherwise. MoND does not explain why some galaxies seem to have a lot of it and others don't, despite being similarly shaped and sized.
>Different galaxies will have different gravitational scaling.
But similar galaxies have been observed to have dramatically different properties with regards to dark matter. So MoND is inconsistent with observations.
>Meanwhile with something like WIMPS, the model only works if you say different galaxies have different amount of wimps.
Yes, there are unsatisfying things about actually having a different kind of matter being the explanation. However, MoND hasn't offered a viable alternative, and the observations cannot be ignored just because some feel MoND is "prettier" to them.
Not sure why you say mond isn't a model of dark matter. It clearly is.
>Not sure why you say mond isn't a model of dark matter. It clearly is.
I did not say this. I said it fails to explain observations.

Anonymous No. 16490410 Report

>>16490371
I'm a different poster and I don't advocate for mond, I just answered your question

Anonymous No. 16490551 Report

is there a theoretical model for Mond or its just saying that gravity is different

Anonymous No. 16490569 Report

>>16490396
>different gravitational scaling coefficients fail to describe different rotational anomalies
you're talking out of your ass

Anonymous No. 16490687 Report

>>16488572
And you will never be a woman.

Anonymous No. 16490709 Report

>>16490687
thanks for validating me
:3

Anonymous No. 16490719 Report

>>16489082
Asking people to social distance and not spread a plague isn't a lockdown. Don't be dramatic.

Anonymous No. 16491394 Report

>>16488512
Probably this, we still don't know why energy turns into particles and matter or what makes it do so, could be just some quantum magic happening there where we can't measure shit for sure.