ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags dark matter

Reply
Old 16th April 2016, 10:48 AM   #201
Maartenn100
Illuminator
 
Maartenn100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,025
Perpetual Student, when people think for themselves, 'to believe', 'to hypothesize', 'to use their imagination', and 'to present unfinished hypothesis', is all part of the process of discovering or inventing a possible theory. There are no garanties. And thinking for yourself means: taking risks.

But when you only parrot the leading current consensus in science of our time, you don't need to think, to imagine, to believe, to hypothesize and to test, of course. You just have to copy past Wikipedia.
__________________
spacetime exists 'outthere'. It's all events together.
We, minds, experience moment by moment the unfolding of events. But that's not how the phenomena exist outthere. In spacetime all events already exist simultaniously. Only the interaction with a mind, establishes the experience of time

Last edited by Maartenn100; 16th April 2016 at 11:00 AM.
Maartenn100 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2016, 10:52 AM   #202
The Man
Scourge, of the supernatural
 
The Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 11,916
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
There are two options:

Consciousness is part of reality and has a lawful connection with the material world. Then it must be part of your theory of everything in the natural sciences. A TOE must describe it.

Or

Consciousness is not lawfully connected with the material or physical world (described in the natural sciences), then you need to accept the logical consequence that the mind is not part of the describable natural world.
(mind-matter-duality)

You cannot have it both to be true.

False dichotomy...


Another possible option; Consciousness is an emergent property of complex self-referential information possessing systems. As such a TOE need not describe it but simply can not preclude such an emergent property.


Simple rules can result in complex patterns and behavior. A theory of everything doesn't have to explicitly describe everything. That would eliminate the advantage of having just a single theory and would make it merely a description of everything.
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ
The Man is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2016, 11:08 AM   #203
Maartenn100
Illuminator
 
Maartenn100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,025
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
Consciousness is just what happens when lots of neurons get together. All "lawfully connected".
Originally Posted by "The Man"
Consciousness is an emergent property of complex self-referential information possessing systems

How many neurons are minimally needed, 'working together' (how), to create the lowest level of consciousness?
How did you find out?

(please, describe the experiments in detail)
__________________
spacetime exists 'outthere'. It's all events together.
We, minds, experience moment by moment the unfolding of events. But that's not how the phenomena exist outthere. In spacetime all events already exist simultaniously. Only the interaction with a mind, establishes the experience of time

Last edited by Maartenn100; 16th April 2016 at 11:10 AM.
Maartenn100 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2016, 11:13 AM   #204
Perpetual Student
Illuminator
 
Perpetual Student's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,850
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
Perpetual Student, when people think for themselves, 'to believe', 'to hypothesize', 'to use their imagination', and 'to present unfinished hypothesis', is all part of the process of discovering or inventing a possible theory. There are no garanties. And thinking for yourself means: taking risks.

But when you only parrot the leading current consensus in science of our time, you don't need to think, to imagine, to believe, to hypothesize and to test, of course. You just have to copy past Wikipedia.
The consensus cosmological model is based on the accumulation of observational evidence. Your opinions are based on imagination and belief, which is characteristic of religion. You are in the wrong forum.
__________________
It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong.
- Richard P. Feynman

ξ
Perpetual Student is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2016, 11:13 AM   #205
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 38,054
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
Consciousness is part of reality and has a lawful connection with the material world. Then it must be part of your theory of everything in the natural sciences. A TOE must describe consciousness.
Marbles are part of reality. They must be part of your theory of everything. But your theory of everything doesn't have to give marbles any special significance.

Perhaps you need some more marbles.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2016, 11:24 AM   #206
The Man
Scourge, of the supernatural
 
The Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 11,916
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
How many neurons are minimally needed, 'working together' (how), to create the lowest level of consciousness?
How did you find out?

(please, describe the experiments in detail)
Well, "'working together' (how)" is probably more prophetic than you might have intended. As the type and function of the neurons are as critical (if not more) than just the number. Basically though we can get an understanding of the types, functions and numbers from animals that we do consider to have varying degrees of consciousness. As for experimentation (excluding directed abuse) that would include looking at damaged or malformed areas and determining the effects as well as trying to produce artificial intelligent systems or artificially inducing responses in existing neural systems.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transc...ic_stimulation


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_helmet
__________________
BRAINZZZZZZZZ
The Man is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2016, 12:00 PM   #207
Daylightstar
Philosopher
 
Daylightstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: hic.
Posts: 8,035
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
That's the problem with conciousness: there is no way to include this constant into equations or describe it in scientific terms. Scientists cannot define it.

But, consciousness is a part of reality, and a description of nature without this 'constant' of nature, is an incomplete description of reality.

More over, I think that consciousness has a lawful connection with the measurable reality.

So, I believe, that you can never find a TOE (a theory of everything) without considering consciousness as part of your theory.
Because the measurable world (physics) is - somehow - lawfully connected with consciousness.

Avoiding this problem of consiousness in the natural sciences will be seen as the biggest mistake of these times by future generations of philosophers and scientists.
Hilites by Daylightstar

How do you know that this consciousness exists, Maartenn100?
__________________
homeopathy homicidium
Daylightstar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2016, 01:19 PM   #208
fuelair
Cythraul Enfys
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 54,584
Originally Posted by Daylightstar View Post
Hilites by Daylightstar

How do you know that this consciousness exists, Maartenn100?
Not sure M100 has much of it to test with. He also misunderstands. or pretends to, the problems of the kind of arguments he is doing and the lack of current technology that would allow the proof of what he is claiming to look for (other than inane playing/dabbling randomly in philosophy).

Possibly he lacks a proper scientific background sufficient to allow him to realize this. Oh, wait, I have discussed similar with him before and that has come up in same. I have suggested courses and fields of study he really needs to take if he wishes to be conversant and active in such fields. He has so far shown no signs of doing such or of any intention to do such.
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed.

Wash this space!

We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2016, 01:22 PM   #209
fuelair
Cythraul Enfys
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 54,584
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Marbles are part of reality. They must be part of your theory of everything. But your theory of everything doesn't have to give marbles any special significance.

Perhaps you need some more marbles.
I admit to being under the impression he may have well lost many of those with which he was born and has neglected replacing them.
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed.

Wash this space!

We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2016, 03:38 PM   #210
hecd2
Muse
 
hecd2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 686
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
That's the problem with conciousness: there is no way to include this constant into equations or describe it in scientific terms. Scientists cannot define it.

But, consciousness is a part of reality, and a description of nature without this 'constant' of nature, is an incomplete description of reality.

More over, I think that consciousness has a lawful connection with the measurable reality.

So, I believe, that you can never find a TOE (a theory of everything) without considering consciousness as part of your theory.
Because the measurable world (physics) is - somehow - lawfully connected with consciousness.

Avoiding this problem of consiousness in the natural sciences will be seen as the biggest mistake of these times by future generations of philosophers and scientists.
It seems that this collection of evidence-free and incoherent assertions has no place in a science forum.
hecd2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2016, 03:40 PM   #211
Darwin123
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,413
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
When spacetime (block universe concept) is a fact, then it's logically to conclude that 'the First existing Observer' establishes a first reference frame for space- and timecoördinates. Before that, there are no fixed coördinates for the objects in the universe.
That is not true. You are presenting another form of Zeno's paradox. There does not have to be a first reference frame. There can be an infinite number of reference frames for space and time coordinates between the first observer and any observer that appears after that.

The first observer merely provides the potential to observe something. The first observer can come into existence and an infinite number of events after that.

In the following experiment, researchers showed that the quantum collapse of a molecular wave (i.e., C70 molecules) was initiated by a laser beam that heated the molecular wave. The C70 molecules had been chilled so they could not emit radiation and so could not be located. Hence they acted like waves until heated.

The heating by absorption by the laser beam was the ‘measurement’. After the laser beam heated the molecules, photons were emitted at random times as thermal radiation. The thermal radiation provided the potential to locate the molecule. However, the emission of the photon also destroyed the interference pattern formed by diffraction of the molecular wave.

Notice in this case the scientists were not conscious of the location of the molecule. They could have set up an array to triangular on the thermal radiation. They didn’t go all the way and locate the molecule. They merely heated it.

Link and quote

http://members.ift.uam-csic.es/belli...7.711.2004.pdf
‘Decoherence of matter waves by thermal emission of radiation

Large molecules are particularly suitable for the investigation of the quantum–classical transition because they can store much energy in numerous internal degrees of freedom; the internal energy can be converted into thermal radiation and thus induce decoherence. Here we report matter wave interferometer experiments in which C70 molecules lose their quantum behaviour by thermal emission of radiation. We find good quantitative agreement between our experimental observations and microscopic decoherence theory. Decoherence by emission of thermal radiation is a general mechanism that should be relevant to all macroscopic bodies.’

Note that the observers were never conscious of the location of any one C70 molecule. Thy shot the laser at the molecule. The emission of photons occurred as small but measurable time interval after the laser passed through the 'C70 wave'.

Heating is a natural process. The C70 wave could have been heat by the cosmic microwave background (CMB). The process could occur on a regular basis in the natural world far from any observer. There is nothing special about this laboratory that makes it exempt from the 'pseudo-laws' of the unconscious universe.
Darwin123 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th April 2016, 04:33 PM   #212
Little 10 Toes
Graduate Poster
 
Little 10 Toes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,812
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
Ok, I rephrase it: the block universe (reality) exists only as a timeless, non-local undetectable matematical entity. Like every mathematical entity, it can be conceptualised by a conscious mind. But it exists independent from minds. (see also: theory of forms (platonism))
The exisence of an observer introduces a timeline.
If it is undetectable, how do you know it exists?
Little 10 Toes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2016, 02:22 PM   #214
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 19,984
Question Maartenn100: Cite your sources for the "mathematical entity" that is eternalismm

Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
Ok, I rephrase it: the block universe (reality) exists only as a timeless, non-local undetectable matematical entity.
Which is a total fantasy, Maartenn100. The block universe is eternalism (philosophy of time) and only exists as a philosophical concept. It is not a mathematical entry. But ion case you have evidence:
18 April 2016 Maartenn100: Cite your sources for the "mathematical entity" that is eternalism (philosophy of time).
Your imagination or fantasies are not a source!
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2016, 03:05 PM   #215
fuelair
Cythraul Enfys
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 54,584
Originally Posted by hecd2 View Post
It seems that this collection of evidence-free and incoherent assertions has no place in a science forum.
I am guessing you have not visited the Kumar threads yet!!!!!
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed.

Wash this space!

We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th April 2016, 03:09 PM   #216
fuelair
Cythraul Enfys
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 54,584
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Which is a total fantasy, Maartenn100. The block universe is eternalism (philosophy of time) and only exists as a philosophical concept. It is not a mathematical entry. But ion case you have evidence:
18 April 2016 Maartenn100: Cite your sources for the "mathematical entity" that is eternalism (philosophy of time).
Your imagination or fantasies are not a source!
Like Kumar, Maartenn works in a different temporal/spatial universe than the rest of us and the actual field specialists. Though there is no doubt they are indeed SPECIAL!!!!!!
__________________
There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed.

Wash this space!

We fight for the Lady Babylon!!!
fuelair is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 03:26 AM   #217
Maartenn100
Illuminator
 
Maartenn100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,025
LUX research: no dark matter

LUX's sensitivity far exceeded the goals for the project, collaboration scientists said, but yielded no trace of dark matter particles. LUX's extreme sensitivity makes the team confident that if dark matter particles had interacted with the LUX's xenon target, the detector would almost certainly have seen it.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2016-07-world-s...ector.html#jCp

http://phys.org/news/2016-07-world-s...-detector.html
__________________
spacetime exists 'outthere'. It's all events together.
We, minds, experience moment by moment the unfolding of events. But that's not how the phenomena exist outthere. In spacetime all events already exist simultaniously. Only the interaction with a mind, establishes the experience of time

Last edited by Maartenn100; 21st July 2016 at 03:38 AM.
Maartenn100 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 03:44 AM   #218
fagin
Illuminator
 
fagin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: As far away from casebro as possible.
Posts: 4,242
And your opinion is?

From the article:
"While the LUX experiment successfully eliminated a large swath of mass ranges and interaction-coupling strengths where WIMPs might exist, the WIMP model itself, "remains alive and viable," said Gaitskell, the Brown University physicist. And the meticulous work of LUX scientists will aid future direct detection experiments."

Etc.
__________________
There is no secret ingredient - Kung Fu Panda
fagin is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 03:49 AM   #219
Maartenn100
Illuminator
 
Maartenn100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,025
Science must be taken seriously: when the theory is been falsified by the experiment, one has to accept that one was wrong. Don't try to save your theory with fallacies.
__________________
spacetime exists 'outthere'. It's all events together.
We, minds, experience moment by moment the unfolding of events. But that's not how the phenomena exist outthere. In spacetime all events already exist simultaniously. Only the interaction with a mind, establishes the experience of time
Maartenn100 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 03:51 AM   #220
Maartenn100
Illuminator
 
Maartenn100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,025
My opinion?

The observed curvature of space outthere is a relativistic effect of spacedistortion because of the difference in timerate passage. (relativity of time or clocks by gravity).

The timedifference with our clocks is indeed very small, but the relativistic observed spacedistortion is not that small at all.
__________________
spacetime exists 'outthere'. It's all events together.
We, minds, experience moment by moment the unfolding of events. But that's not how the phenomena exist outthere. In spacetime all events already exist simultaniously. Only the interaction with a mind, establishes the experience of time

Last edited by Maartenn100; 21st July 2016 at 03:52 AM.
Maartenn100 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 03:56 AM   #221
Maartenn100
Illuminator
 
Maartenn100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,025
Here is my theory about 'dark matter' and 'dark energy':
the relativity of space
__________________
spacetime exists 'outthere'. It's all events together.
We, minds, experience moment by moment the unfolding of events. But that's not how the phenomena exist outthere. In spacetime all events already exist simultaniously. Only the interaction with a mind, establishes the experience of time
Maartenn100 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 04:02 AM   #222
RussDill
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 5,304
Lemme break this down. The cops think that their suspect is hiding in a certain neighborhood. They kick down the door of one of the houses, and find the suspect isn't there. They release the news that the suspect wasn't in this given house. Maartenn100 then goes on to post about how the cops are wrong and the suspect wasn't in that neighborhood after all. Oh, and that how he must be right.

The experiment only checks for one given energy range, not the whole neighborhood.
__________________
The woods are lovely, dark and deep
but i have promises to keep
and lines to code before I sleep
And lines to code before I sleep
RussDill is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 04:07 AM   #223
Maartenn100
Illuminator
 
Maartenn100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,025
That's not how science supposed to work, RussDill.
Science has to do the experiment and accept the fact that there hypothesis was wrong.
It's not science when you try to save your theory/hypothesis.
__________________
spacetime exists 'outthere'. It's all events together.
We, minds, experience moment by moment the unfolding of events. But that's not how the phenomena exist outthere. In spacetime all events already exist simultaniously. Only the interaction with a mind, establishes the experience of time
Maartenn100 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 04:14 AM   #224
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 19,089
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
Science must be taken seriously: when the theory is been falsified by the experiment, one has to accept that one was wrong. Don't try to save your theory with fallacies.
This is simply not true.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 04:16 AM   #225
Maartenn100
Illuminator
 
Maartenn100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,025
It's as simple as that.
__________________
spacetime exists 'outthere'. It's all events together.
We, minds, experience moment by moment the unfolding of events. But that's not how the phenomena exist outthere. In spacetime all events already exist simultaniously. Only the interaction with a mind, establishes the experience of time
Maartenn100 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 04:21 AM   #226
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 19,089
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
It's as simple as that.
No it's not. The hypothesis has not, as you deceitfully claim, been falsified.
You are deliberately distorting a report to support your deluded beliefs.
Again.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 04:22 AM   #227
RussDill
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 5,304
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
That's not how science supposed to work, RussDill.
Science has to do the experiment and accept the fact that there hypothesis was wrong.
It's not science when you try to save your theory/hypothesis.
And that is exactly what happened. The hypothesis that WIMPs exist within the energy ranges covered by the experiment has been rejected. Hooray. That's generally how a lot of science works. If you don't know what something is, you can slowly improve your picture by proving things that it isn't.

This experiment has narrowed down the possible energy ranges of WIMPs. Your statement is akin to me calling a random phone number, noting that someone other than Maartenn picks up, and concluding that Maartenn doesn't have a phone. All I would have done is confirmed a given phone number that isn't Maartenn's phone number.
__________________
The woods are lovely, dark and deep
but i have promises to keep
and lines to code before I sleep
And lines to code before I sleep
RussDill is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 04:37 AM   #228
Maartenn100
Illuminator
 
Maartenn100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,025
Ok, from your perspective, it's as you describe it.

I interprete this as: falsification of dark matter theory.

It's a matter of interpreting the results.
__________________
spacetime exists 'outthere'. It's all events together.
We, minds, experience moment by moment the unfolding of events. But that's not how the phenomena exist outthere. In spacetime all events already exist simultaniously. Only the interaction with a mind, establishes the experience of time
Maartenn100 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 04:41 AM   #229
Maartenn100
Illuminator
 
Maartenn100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,025
My alternative theory:

The 'missing mass'-interpretation is actually caused by an observation of relativistic gravity.

There is normal gravity and there is observed relativistic gravity. Like there is the local measurement of the spaceship and the measured lengthcontraction, observed from the other spaceship.

This gR (Relativistic gravity) is due to the difference in timerate passage of clocks between the position in a gravitational field of the observer and the location in another gravitational field of the observed object.


The difference in gravitational potential between the location of the observer and the location of the observed object, gives us the observation of relativistic curvature or relativistic gravity. (and relativistic expansion).
__________________
spacetime exists 'outthere'. It's all events together.
We, minds, experience moment by moment the unfolding of events. But that's not how the phenomena exist outthere. In spacetime all events already exist simultaniously. Only the interaction with a mind, establishes the experience of time

Last edited by Maartenn100; 21st July 2016 at 04:48 AM.
Maartenn100 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 04:42 AM   #230
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 28,819
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
I interprete this as: falsification of dark matter theory.

It's a matter of misinterpreting the results.

FTFY.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 04:44 AM   #231
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 28,819
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
My alternative theory:

The 'missing mass'-interpretation is actually caused by an observation of relativistic gravity.

There is normal gravity and there is observed relativistic gravity.
This gR (Relativistic gravity) is due to the difference in timerate passage of clocks between the position in a gravitational field of the observer and the location in another gravitational field of the observed object.

Can you show us the maths for that?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 04:47 AM   #232
RussDill
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 5,304
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
Ok, from your perspective, it's as you describe it.

I interprete this as: falsification of dark matter theory.

It's a matter of interpreting the results.
I'm not sure how this experiment would change anything for your worldview. This isn't by far the first dark matter experiment. There have been many, many, many dark matter experiments, each one eliminating a certain set of possibilities.

Please, tell me in your own words, what makes this experiment different than all the other dark matter experiments. What makes this one the falsification rather than the others?
__________________
The woods are lovely, dark and deep
but i have promises to keep
and lines to code before I sleep
And lines to code before I sleep
RussDill is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 04:49 AM   #233
Maartenn100
Illuminator
 
Maartenn100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,025
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Can you show us the maths for that?
Can you provide the math for your dark matter hypothesis?
__________________
spacetime exists 'outthere'. It's all events together.
We, minds, experience moment by moment the unfolding of events. But that's not how the phenomena exist outthere. In spacetime all events already exist simultaniously. Only the interaction with a mind, establishes the experience of time
Maartenn100 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 04:51 AM   #234
Maartenn100
Illuminator
 
Maartenn100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,025
Dark matter is a reference frame dependent observation, not an objective curvature of spacetime.
The amount of expansion of 'the universe' is also reference frame dependent.

In this context, the reference frame is the field of gravity of an observer.

In this case it's not the relativistic speed of an observer, but the relavely weak or relatively strong gravitational field of an observer which provide him an amount of observed relativistic gravity somewhere else.
__________________
spacetime exists 'outthere'. It's all events together.
We, minds, experience moment by moment the unfolding of events. But that's not how the phenomena exist outthere. In spacetime all events already exist simultaniously. Only the interaction with a mind, establishes the experience of time

Last edited by Maartenn100; 21st July 2016 at 05:00 AM.
Maartenn100 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 05:02 AM   #235
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 28,819
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
Can you provide the math for your dark matter hypothesis?

It isn't my hypothesis. The people proposing it have provided the maths. And even if they had failed to do so, it would not provide any support for your hypothesis.

How about providing some support for it?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky

Last edited by Mojo; 21st July 2016 at 05:04 AM.
Mojo is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 05:08 AM   #236
Maartenn100
Illuminator
 
Maartenn100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,025
I must honestly say: I can't provide the math.
But it doesn't mean that what I'm trying to say is not worth considering at all. It's a theory under construction.
Be free to provide the mathematical bulding blocks.
__________________
spacetime exists 'outthere'. It's all events together.
We, minds, experience moment by moment the unfolding of events. But that's not how the phenomena exist outthere. In spacetime all events already exist simultaniously. Only the interaction with a mind, establishes the experience of time

Last edited by Maartenn100; 21st July 2016 at 05:12 AM.
Maartenn100 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 05:11 AM   #237
Maartenn100
Illuminator
 
Maartenn100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,025
So, in my theory: there is normal gravity, formulated by Einstein.
And there is observed relativistic gravity, observed by an observer from a relatively weaker or relatively stronger or equally strong field of gravity. This difference in gravitational field will cause an observation of an amount of gravity somewhere else, which is not corresponding with the calculated amount of gravity of the observed galaxy, planets and stars outthere.
__________________
spacetime exists 'outthere'. It's all events together.
We, minds, experience moment by moment the unfolding of events. But that's not how the phenomena exist outthere. In spacetime all events already exist simultaniously. Only the interaction with a mind, establishes the experience of time

Last edited by Maartenn100; 21st July 2016 at 05:12 AM.
Maartenn100 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 05:14 AM   #238
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 24,101
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
I must honestly say: I can't provide the math.
But it doesn't mean that what I'm trying to say is not worth considering at all.
Yes, actually, it does. Unless you can provide a superior mathematical description of gravitational effects that doesn't contradict any known evidence, you're not actually saying anything worth listening to. In fact, you're not actually saying anything.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 05:15 AM   #239
Maartenn100
Illuminator
 
Maartenn100's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,025
No, Dave, It's not about the numbers here, it's about the theory which explains the phenomenon.
When you want to do the math, feel free doing it.

For me it's not about the math, it's about the theoretical explanation to explain the phenomenon of the missing mass.
__________________
spacetime exists 'outthere'. It's all events together.
We, minds, experience moment by moment the unfolding of events. But that's not how the phenomena exist outthere. In spacetime all events already exist simultaniously. Only the interaction with a mind, establishes the experience of time

Last edited by Maartenn100; 21st July 2016 at 05:19 AM.
Maartenn100 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st July 2016, 05:18 AM   #240
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 28,819
Originally Posted by Maartenn100 View Post
No, Dave, that's wrong. Math is just the calculation of the numbers. It's not about the numbers here, it's about the theory which explains the phenomenon.

The maths is what shows that the "theory" explains the phenomenon. Without it all you have is handwaving.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky

Last edited by Mojo; 21st July 2016 at 05:19 AM.
Mojo is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:42 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.