Man neutrino even smaller than an atom! Of course trillions pass thru the earth
I was making a point. Neutrinos require extremely sensitive and highly specialised equipment to be detected. We know that there are particles in the universe that simply don't react that much with regular matter. Dark matter, if the theory is correct, is one of these things.
I just went to msn at the top of the page and they saying something different
Well! If someone on MSN says contrary to me, then, by golly by gosh, I must be wrong!
than it be made of things nobody know of.
Which is exactly what I said. It is matter of unknown configuration.
They don't know!! that aint science thay just taking a guess.
Which
is science. We take a guess as to why the facts are as they are, and then we go out and test whether this guess is right or not. Of course, we call this guess a 'hypothesis', and, if it passes the test, a 'theory'.
so if you dont know what it made of you saying with unswerving certainty that an object can just fly thru it?
With unswerving certainty? Heavens no. I am a scientist; I don't make such absolute statements unless there is a rigourous proof in my hand. But I do say it with confidence.
then it go on to say in a new study saying there may be no such thing as dark matter just like i said
You pulled that out of your аrse. Cite your source.
there want enough evidence and you took it on blind faith like a scientist aint supposed to do because someone who know more than you laid it down to you.
I do wish you'd stop that. Prejudice is a terrible thing. I get enough of that because of my being gay, and now I have to get it because of my scientific beliefs? Crikey...
you dont even try to question it like a scientist.
Justify this claim.
you just fold lillies across your chest and lie down for them going along with the program.
Justify this claim.
In fact another article say that scientist just BELIEVE the mass to be there without measuring it or detecting it.
Absolute nonsense. We believe it to be there
because we've gone out and measured it. Our initial assumption (that visable matter was the only mass out there) turned out to be false. Thus, we concluded that there was this 'dark' matter out there. So, we went out and tested for it. Lo and behold, the hypothesis bore out: the evidence confirmed the existance of dark matter.
No, it isn't. Faith is belief in the irrational, and belief is thinking a statement is true. Since we have evidence for the existance of dark matter, belief in its existance is anything
but irrational.
If you can have faith in something you cant see or detect that the same as what I believe except we dont call that science and you shouldnt call it science and then teach it like it is.
Agreed. However, belief in dark matter does not fit this catagory.
that just your belief, not science. But you still calling it science. Playing by your rules you cant be teaching your beliefs without proof.
Actually, that's
your rule. You said that anything without proof shouldn't be taught in your schools.
Now they aint saying for sure it dont exist but they saying there enough uncertainty to question it and that what you didnt do.
I'm a scientist. I question everything. Please stop making assumptions about me. You're making yourself look tacky.
They just said dark matter was invented to explain galaxy rotation but that the NATURE of it is uknown. but you just describe how it act like you know what it made of.
Which just goes to show that you didn't read what I said. Just because we don't know what it's made of doesn't mean we don't know how it acts. We know it neither emits nor absorbs EM radiation, and that it has mass, and that it outnumbers 'regular' matter 9:1. But we don't know what it's made of.
But beside that to make a long story short the article go on to say that the motion of stars in galxies is REALIZED in general relativity equations without the need to invoke massive dark matter that nobody can explain by current physics
Nonsense. We are talking about gravitational effects on a literally astronomical scale; you really think that General Relativity (the theory of gravity itself) wasn't used in the models? You really think they used
Newtonian mechanics?
And it even say in a scientific american article that this dark matter has eluded EVERY EFFORT BY ASTRONERMERS AND PHYSICISTS TO bring it out of the shadows. Then it say a handful of us (that be the brave ones) suspect that it might not really exist and others are seriously beginning to doubt this possibily exists.
Yet there are countless more physicists who
do believe in its existance. But this number game is meaningless: our beliefs are irrelevant as to whether it exists or not.
Also, what article is this? I contend that you are pulling these 'facts' out of your аrse.
that them talking not me. I dont talk like that.
You have given no names. You have given no excerpts. You have given no dates, no sources, no
nothing. But no, they don't talk like that: I daresay they use correct grammar and syntax ('that them talking not me', indeed).
but that what I been saying from the start. as soon as that young man throw dark matter all up in my face I became sceptical and looked into it then I look at an old article mentioning it where it got it start and I got more skeptical thinking this man be blowing smoke in my face and dont really know what he talking about.
You went to no article. I posted several links with evidence for the existance of dark matter, and you completely ignored the post. You later talk of these unnamed 'articles', as if this gives you any credence. I contend you are pulling them out of your аrse.
