Is the dark matter hypothesis even falsifiable?

[Michael]

Micheal, concerning the LIGO results, did they account for Doppler shift of those gravity waves? Since spacetime is expanding and they move at light speed, then they should be Doppler shifted as well, since the spacetime they move through is expanding.

But I guess that might be hard to tell from a chirp lasting what, 2 millionth of a second or whatever it was. Pretty small for colliding black holes, cough. Fairie Dust gets stuck in my throat sometimes you got to cough it out.

I'd have to reread the black hole merger paper again to be sure, but I'm pretty sure they included the concept of expansion in their calculations when they came up with the distance figure of 1.3 billion light years.

Don't worry however, they did make at least three major errors in their methodology which I pointed out my paper.

By the way SelfSim, I responded to your last post in the LIGO thread. I await your response with baited breath.

 

[Michael]

Sure they believe that, but they also believed the dust entering our solar system was 39 times less than it actually is. The in situ measurements say they haven't a clue as to how much dust they can't see.

As I said in a previous post the intelligent reader can deduce that if they can't see dust 30 times the density they said it was right next door, their is certainly no reason to assume their claims of the amount of dust millions of light years distant is any more accurate.

Your claims of accuracy have already been falsified by actual in situ measurements.

Just keep in mind that the abscuring dust was only a very minor part of the mass they missed in that particular study. The fact that extra dust absorbed half of the light of the galaxy also means that they could have underestimated the number of stars present by a factor of 2 to begin with. As I recall the authors of that paper simply increased the size of the largest stars (ones that emit enough light to reach Earth) to double the brightness, and it still worked out to a minimum mass estimation error of about 20 percent in stellar mass alone.

The later papers however demonstrate that their entire mass estimation methodology was way messed up. They use a formula to estimate the number of smaller and more numerous stars which are so dim that we cannot observe them from Earth compared to the number of larger and brighter stars which we can observe on Earth. They messed up that estimation by a huge factor of between 3 and 20 times depending on the size of the star and the type of galaxy. On top of all that, they underestimated the number of stars *between* galaxies that are shared by the cluster, and "oh ya", they found more mass than all of the rest of that other mass in 2012 in the from of a million degree plasma halo that sits right where their dark matter models "predict".

 

[Justatruthseeker]

And so apparently, (according to Michael himself), his attempts at propagating his distorted view on how he thinks LIGO's science should be conducted, (ie: his LIGO GW paper), has earned him yet another permanent ban, this time, for 'argumentative demeanour', from astronomyforum.net.

Its kind of reassuring to see that his paper fails the litmus test of 'passable science' on science web forums so resoundingly well!

One might then say that this then implies understanding of real science on web forums is still alive and doing well. Great to see!

And yet the ban wasn't for bad science as you say, but for arguetive demeanor. Since they had no answers to the actual science and couldn't refute it, they had to find some excuse to keep him from posting the truth.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Just keep in mind that the abscuring dust was only a very minor part of the mass they missed in that particular study. The fact that extra dust absorbed half of the light of the galaxy also means that they could have underestimated the number of stars present by a factor of 2 to begin with. As I recall the authors of that paper simply increased the size of the largest stars (ones that emit enough light to reach Earth) to double the brightness, and it still worked out to a minimum mass estimation error of about 20 percent in stellar mass alone.

The later papers however demonstrate that their entire mass estimation methodology was way messed up. They use a formula to estimate the number of smaller and more numerous stars which are so dim that we cannot observe them from Earth compared to the number of larger and brighter stars which we can observe on Earth. They messed up that estimation by a huge factor of between 3 and 20 times depending on the size of the star and the type of galaxy. On top of all that, they underestimated the number of stars *between* galaxies that are shared by the cluster, and "oh ya", they found more mass than all of the rest of that other mass in 2012 in the from of a million degree plasma halo that sits right where their dark matter models "predict".

Oh their mass estimates are in serious error. Not only the number of stars in a given galaxy but the halos of the Galaxy itself that contains twice the mass of the Galaxy.

But they had to increase the brightness of the largest stars by a factor of two because the dust is at a minimum of 30 times what they believe. Although dust is such a poor word for charged matter, but the word plasma scares them.

When we send new probes out to the heliosphere with better detectors, we will discover even more "dust" than they currently detect.

Notice how they have avoided answering how 30 times the amount of dust they believed existed isn't scattering light and blurring images. They have no answer to the actual observations but to ignore them.

 

[Michael]

And yet the ban wasn't for bad science as you say, but for arguetive demeanor. Since they had no answers to the actual science and couldn't refute it, they had to find some excuse to keep him from posting the truth.

Bingo.

 

[Michael]

Oh their mass estimates are in serious error. Not only the number of stars in a given galaxy but the halos of the Galaxy itself that contains twice the mass of the Galaxy.

But they had to increase the brightness of the largest stars by a factor of two because the dust is at a minimum of 30 times what they believe. Although dust is such a poor word for charged matter, but the word plasma scares them.

When we send new probes out to the heliosphere with better detectors, we will discover even more "dust" than they currently detect.

Notice how they have avoided answering how 30 times the amount of dust they believed existed isn't scattering light and blurring images. They have no answer to the actual observations but to ignore them.

The bottom line is that they could choose to minimize the need to for exotic matter to explain various observations in space, but they can't even change the magic matter/normal matter ratio by any significant amount and not have the whole house of cards come tumbling down with respect to nucleosynthesis claims, and CMB observations. As a result, it's pretty much denial time for LCDM proponents. Negative lab results must all be ignored, and all evidence of their baryonic mass estimation technique problems have to be swept under the rug as though they were "unimportant".

If there was an actual way to falsify the dark matter hypothesis, it would be long dead by now. No observations actually support the concept, none at least that can't just as easily be explained by ordinary plasma.

 

[Michael]

With the recent 50 million dollar commitment to LUX-LZ, which won't even come online until 2020+, it's pretty clear that the mainstream is obligated to 'wait' for those results now. It's going to be a long next 3 or 4 years for the mainstream on this topic, and I can't help but wonder what happens if LUX-LZ reports NULL results. Will they *ever* admit making a very expensive mistake on this topic?

I see now why Birkeland was long dead and buried by the time the mainstream figured out that he was right about aurora. The mainstream moves at a snails pace, particularly when their collective prestige is at stake.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

With the recent 50 million dollar commitment to LUX-LZ, which won't even come online until 2020+, it's pretty clear that the mainstream is obligated to 'wait' for those results now. It's going to be a long next 3 or 4 years for the mainstream on this topic, and I can't help but wonder what happens if LUX-LZ reports NULL results. Will they *ever* admit making a very expensive mistake on this topic?

I see now why Birkeland was long dead and buried by the time the mainstream figured out that he was right about aurora. The mainstream moves at a snails pace, particularly when their collective prestige is at stake.

They will do what they have always done when it comes to the falsification of a theory that will destroy 96% of their cosmology. Ignore the results, ask for billions more in funding, and continue to add more epicycles.

What's one more null result when you already have around 12. It's getting close to the time where they find data in pure random noise with their algorithms.

 

[Michael]

They will do what they have always done when it comes to the falsification of a theory that will destroy 96% of their cosmology. Ignore the results, ask for billions more in funding, and continue to add more epicycles.

What's one more null result when you already have around 12. It's getting close to the time where they find data in pure random noise with their algorithms.

You might be right. LUX just returned NULL results in the middle of last year, yet early this year they simply ignored those NULL results from 2016 and they funded LUX-LZ into 2020+ to the tune of *another* fifty million dollars. When the mainstream doesn't get the results that they want, they just throw more good taxpayer money after bad. It does look like they're stuck on a denial-go-round, with no end in sight, and we're on the financial hook for it.

Dark matter has turned into a supernatural hypothesis of the gaps, and the gaps keep getting smaller and smaller all the time. The smaller the gaps, the more expensive the "test". If ten million didn't give them what they want, they toss in another 50 million down the same hole in the ground to see what happens next.

I really don't see the point of them claiming to be 'testing' their hypothesis when they keep ignoring every null result and there is no logical way to falsify the claim. It's not even "science' anymore.

 

[Michael]

Captured: First 'Image' of the Dark Matter That Holds Universe Together

Sometimes I can't help but shrug over the silliness of the claims the mainstream makes about "dark matter" including this sensational headline:

Captured: First 'Image' of the Dark Matter That Holds Universe Together

Now of course it's impossible to "image" something that emits no light so this really is just a lensing pattern that could be related to ordinary matter too.

It's certainly not a "first image" of "dark matter". The image they provided in the article is really a composite "average lensing graph" of sorts which is composed of over 23,000 images:

Hudson and Epps combined or "stacked" more than 23,000 galaxy pairs, all located about 4.5 billion light-years away. This allowed them to create a composite image or map that shows the presence of dark matter between galaxies. Hudson told Seeker that the filament in their "image" is the average of all 23,000 pairs.

What we have here is a lensing "average" of where their baryonic mass estimates based upon light alone are *way* off. That's all this article or this study could ever hope to demonstrate. It certainly cannot demonstrate the existence of exotic forms of matter in galaxies that are 4.5 billion light years away.

 

[Michael]

Galaxy’s hydrogen halo hides missing mass

Here's yet another study from this year which demonstrates a sixth major flaw in our baryonic mass estimates of galaxies.

We've been continuously underestimating the amount of ordinary mass that is present in various galaxies. Period. That in no way translates to the existence of exotic forms of matter. It's simply a reflection of our own relatively limited technology and our *primitive* (and horrifically flawed) baryonic mass estimation techniques related to galaxy mass. Most of it directly relates to our underestimation of the effect of inelastic scattering on light from distant objects.

Every single lab test, as well as every single revelation of mass estimation problems in the mainstream model all suggest that the mainstream needs to revamp it mass estimation techniques of galaxies and quit using magical forms of matter as "gap filler".

 

[Michael]

Space's Deepest Secrets: The Curse Of Dark Matter.

I watched the most recent episode of Space's Deepest Secrets tonight, entitled The Curse of Dark matter. It was just released this year in May of 2017, but in terms of the content, it could have been written and produced a decade ago.

What was most striking about a 2017 show on cosmology was the fact that they made absolutely no mention at all about all the *failed* dark matter tests in the lab over the past decade. They said absolutely nothing about the negative results from LHC, nothing about LUX, nothing about PandaX, nothing even aabout Xenon100 results, nothing even remotely resembling a "historical" account of events of any sort. All we saw was an introduction to Xenon-1T and a handwave.

They even had the sheer audacity to go back to citing their falsified and tired old "Bullet Cluster" study while never once mentioning any of the six major mass estimation errors that were made in that study from 2006. They completely avoided any mention of anything negative related to their dark matter claims that has occurred over the past decade. Talk about a one sided "story". Holy cow.

Never did they mention the fact that the mainstream blew the brightness of galaxies in that Bullet Cluster study by a factor of two. Never did they once mention the fact that they also underestimated the number of stars in those galaxies by between 3 and 20 times back in 2006. They didn't mention the fact that they underestimated the stars that are located *between* galaxies in those clusters. They never mentioned the halo of hot plasma or that halo of cool hydrogen atoms that they've since found around our own galaxy. They literally ignored every single bit of evidence that didn't favor their exotic matter claim, so they basically ignored everything that we've learned over the past decade.

Where they ended up is exactly where they started over a decade ago, with no actual answers, a handwave about WIMPS, and not even an *accurate* portrayal of events over the past decade.

The show did of course get into the dark energy claims too, and of course they had the obligatory commentary about how the multiverse might be "giving" us dark energy and dark matter to our universe. The whole show looked like something that literally could have been produced a decade ago because nothing new has been learned over the past decade, or at least nothing *in their favor* has been learned over the past decade, so they just edited out every negative result over the past decade.

I was disgusted at the complete lack of any sort of "fair and balanced" approach to the entire subject, and the complete lack of current information that was never presented in the show. What a waste of time and money and effort on all those 'tests' of the mainstream claims since they simply sweep all the negative results of those tests right under the carpet, and all they had over the past decade in terms of results were things that they had to sweep under the carpet.

I think the only really 'worth while" part of the watching that show happened at the very end when Michelle Thaller explained the real reason that the mainstream remains firmly stuck in the dark ages of physics. She literally stated:

"Wouldn't it be depressing to be in a universe where you could understand everything? I mean I don't like that idea. I love it that there are still real mysteries out there."

I think that specific quote pretty much sums up the basic problem with the mainstream in a nutshell. They don't *like* the idea of even living in a 'knowable' universe so they simply make up stuff which simply does not exist just to keep things "mysterious".

Make no mistake about it, empirical physics in the form of EU/PC theory *will* eventually allow us to live in a universe where a lot more is knowable than is known today. I don't find that depressing, I find that wildly exciting for physics.

Simply ignoring the failed history of dark matter and ignoring all those baryonic mass estimation problems in that Bullet Cluster study won't make those problems go away. It's one thing to 'spin' a decade of negative results, but it's another thing entirely to live in pure denial of the results of your own so called 'tests' of your claim.

It's pretty depressing to think that astronomers know nothing more about the universe than they knew in 2006. Time is simply standing still in astronomy today because astronomers don't like the negative results of their own tests, and all they have are negative results!

 

[Michael]

First Result from XENON1T Dark Matter Detector

First we get the obligatory sales pitch:

Dark matter is one of the basic constituents of the universe, five times more abundant than ordinary matter. Several astronomical measurements have corroborated the existence of dark matter, leading to a world-wide effort to observe directly dark matter particle interactions with ordinary matter in extremely sensitive detectors, which would confirm its existence and shed light on its properties.

Sure, lets start by ignoring the fact that that those "astronomical measurements" are physically incapable of distinguishing between ordinary matter and exotic forms of matter, and their infamous Bullet Cluster study was shown to be *riddled* with numerous mass estimation errors....

So what did they find?

"WIMPs did not show up in this first search with XENON1T, but we also did not expect them so soon!" says Elena Aprile, Professor at Columbia University and spokesperson of the project.

"The best news is that the experiment continues to accumulate excellent data which will allow us to test quite soon the WIMP hypothesis in a region of mass and cross-section with normal atoms as never before. A new phase in the race to detect dark matter with ultra-low background massive detectors on Earth has just began with XENON1T. We are proud to be at the forefront of the race with this amazing detector, the first of its kind."

Their mythical WIMP is supposedly 5 times more abundant than ordinary matter, but not a single detection in a whole month's worth of data collection. Who would have guessed?

Don't worry though, Xenon-1T is more sensitive and many times better than it's predecessors at finding absolutely nothing.

 

[RealityCheck01]

Oh their mass estimates are in serious error. ...

Justatruthseeker: Your post is not correct.

• Astronomers do not use the number of stars in a galaxy to estimate the mass of entire galaxies because astronomers know that stars are not the only mass in a galaxy.
• The halos of galaxies are already included in mass estimates of galaxies.
• Actual dust was found to convert light from stars into infrared light twice as much as estimated before. Thus some galaxies are intrinsically twice as bright. Astronomers use infrared light to estimate galaxy masses. That is especially true for the mapping of the distribution of normal and dark matter in colliding galaxy clusters via gravitational lensing (read Clowe, et. al. ‎2006).
• Astronomers are not scared of the word plasma. They have written 437,082 papers that include that word!

The situation is that we have only detected half of the normal, visible matter that exists in the universe. This is called the 'missing baryon problem'. There are observations in the last decade that should fill that gap, e.g. the Milky Way was found in 2012 to be enveloped in hot gas with a mass comparable to the mass of its stars. That will increase the amount of normal matter detected by a small percentage because 80-90% of matter in a galaxy cluster is in the intracluster medium, not in the galaxies.

 

[Michael]

The mainstream's "missing baryon problem" is a myth that has already been solved and that is easily explained by the neutral hydrogen halo that surrounds every galaxy.

https://cosmosmagazine.com/space/galaxy-s-hydrogen-halo-hides-missing-mass

There are also 5 *other* major mass estimation problems in that bullet cluster study. What they have in 2017 is an "overabundance of baryons problem" on their hands which falsifies their nucleosynthesis claims which rely upon a very specific ratio of baryonic matter vs. exotic matter.

Thunderbolts Forum • View topic - Lambda-CDM - EU/PC Theory - Confirmation Bias

FYI, it also turns out that we discovered in 2014 that the mainstream has been grossly underestimating the number of stars that exist in the intracluster medium which explains why so much of the mass of the clusters is found in the intracluster medium.

A Universe of Stars May Exist Outside Galaxies | RealClearScience

 

[Michael]

It's also worth noting that the results from the lab have falsified every "prediction" that has been made by exotic matter proponents which has been "testable" to date.

The billions of dollars with of lab results from LHC, LUX, PandaX, Xenon100, Xenon1T, ect, show no evidence whatsoever of exotic forms of matter and support the conclusion that the mainstream simply has a serious galaxy mass estimation problem, as many recent cosmological studies have already verified.

 

[Michael]

I'm still waiting to hear how the whole concept of 'dark matter' might actually be falsified or do it's proponents simply admit that the dark matter hypothesis is not actually "science"?

We have quite literally spent *billions* of dollars in search of exotic matter in the lab, and yet there is still no evidence whatsoever to suggest that the standard particle physics model is incorrect.

Since 2006, we've discovered at least *six* different major problems with the baryonic mass estimates that were used in the now infamous bullet cluster study. Since 2012, we've also found two different massive "halos" of unseen (before) matter in the form of ordinary hydrogen gas and high temperature oxygen plasma which would go a long way to explaining galaxy rotation patterns too.

In 2017, there is literally *no* evidence whatsoever to support exotic matter, and there appears to be absolutely no logical way to falsify the original claims either. The whole exotic matter hypothesis reeks of bad dogma, and it appears to be anything *but* science since there isn't any logical way to falsify the basic concept.

 

[Michael]

CAST project places new limitations on dark matter

Based on the published work, which draws on data collected from 2012-2015, the team has found no evidence of solar axions.

Nope, no dark matter snipes there.

 

[Michael]

Hey look, it's dark matter snipe hunt day:

Dark Matter Day is approaching
Dark Matter Day -

Dark Matter Day events are intended to educate the public about the importance of learning all we can about dark matter to develop a fuller picture of the unseen universe. Focusing more brainpower and scientific resources on dark matter's mysteries could lead to new ideas and new discoveries.

Translation: Since we've failed miserably to find any evidence of exotic forms of matter in the lab after spending billions of dollars, and we botched the baryonic mass estimates of galaxies, we desperately need to "indoctrinate"/brainwash the public some more, lest they start to notice the utter silliness of our absurd claim.

I suppose it's only fitting that dark matter day is on Halloween. It is in fact the single biggest scientific "trick" that has ever been pulled on taxpayers.

Sure, let's just ignore all the baryonic mass estimation errors that have been made in mainstream theory, let's just ignore those "halos" of hot plasma and cooler hydrogen gas that have been found recently, let's ignore the results of billions of dollars worth of lab "tests" of their theory, and let's pretend that none of that even matters. Wow. Talk about blatant pandering.

 

[Doveaman]

I suppose it's only fitting that dark matter day is on Halloween. It is in fact the single biggest scientific "trick" that has ever been pulled on taxpayers.

If we can't celebrate the discovery of Bigfoot the next best thing is to celebrate the search for Bigfoot.

And don't forget, celebrations are good for fund raising.