Fairie Dust

[SelfSim]

To keep the terminology consistent, shouldn't we call it "fairie dust plasma?"

Fairies are also endowed with awesome powers of Magic, no?
I think 'Magic Plasma' makes a closer approach to the true source causing the disturbance to any semblance of a logical argument here(?)
.. I mean without 'Magic', there would be no 'fairie dust' would there?

 

[The Barbarian]

Fairies are also endowed with awesome powers of Magic, no?
I think 'Magic Plasma' makes a closer approach to the true source causing the disturbance to any semblance of a logical argument here(?)
.. I mean without 'Magic', there would be no 'fairie dust' would there?

Well, yes, that's a good point. Justatruthseeker should therefore call his beliefs "magic", not "fairie dust."

 

[sjastro]

To keep the terminology consistent, shouldn't we call it "fairie dust plasma?"

My initial intention was to use the term "Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious Plasma" but was worried of being sued by Disney over a copyright term.

 

[sjastro]

The idea that Bremmstrahlung radiation is a mechanism for refraction has got to be one of the dumbest things I have ever come across.
In the context of classical physics each individual incident photon is refracted at a particular angle and there is a one to one relationship.
With Bremmstrahlung the incident photon leads to the creation of a range of photons at various energies all of which are emitted at various angles.
This takes the concept of magic plasma to new level.

 

[SelfSim]

Well, yes, that's a good point. Justatruthseeker should therefore call his beliefs "magic", not "fairie dust."

Interestingly when it comes to 'magic', I think as soon as something is describable via the scientific method, it is no longer magic, therefore its science that distinguishes magic.

Generally speaking, 'magic' is used in two contexts:
i) one is illusion, as in the illusion of magic (it relies on fooling the observer), and;
ii) the other is ignorance, as in: 'works like magic' (because I don't know how it works).
In the latter case, once science can explain it to me, then I do know how it works and it no it longer seems like magic.

In this discussion, in the context of cosmology, science does know how the concepts of DM and DE 'work' in models of the large scale universe and thus, it is no longer 'magic'. Where one is determined to remain ignorant of this knowledge however, all that remains is (i) and an individual desperately trying to not appear as being foolish. The irony is of course, that's exactly the only thing that's coming across .. which actually generates the perception of genuine foolishness.

 

[The Barbarian]

Since we have yet to actually have unequivocal observations of dark matter or dark energy, there's hardly a consensus on those things, although the current model makes them seem likely.

But the fairie dust that overturns gravity seems to be purely magic in conception.

 

[lesliedellow]

But the fairie dust that overturns gravity seems to be purely magic in conception.

He should present his discovery to NASA. They would be able to save quite a bit on rocket fuel.

 

[The Barbarian]

He should present his discovery to NASA. They would be able to save quite a bit on rocket fuel.

Yep. Maybe fairie dust has other uses as well. The next great advance might be magic.

 

[RealityCheck01]

We do have "unequivocal observations of dark matter or dark energy". It is the unequivocal nature of the observations that forced astronomers to add them to the Big Bang to make the consensus or Lambda-CDM model. The hope that has not yet been achieved yet is that dark matter particles can be directly observed. But there is no reason why the universe would contain dark matter particles that can be directly detected.

Justatruthseeker seems to think he has the power to make the universe do whatever he want it to do. That is fantasy or magic, not science.

This Is The Real Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter

Long story short: the latest experiment to search for dark matter directly didn’t find it, at least not yet. That’s been the story for every direct detection experiment ever performed, confirmed, and robustly tested, over and over again.

And that’s okay! Unless dark matter happens to be of a certain mass with a certain interaction cross-section, none of the designed experiments are going to see it. That doesn’t mean dark matter isn’t real, it just means that dark matter is something else than what our experiments are optimized to find.