"Dark Matter": Blaming Newton

[Native]

Except that they had no concept, on the one hand of electricity as such, and on the other of cosmological gravity, cosmological time, a spherical earth, a rotating earth, meteors, orbits, eclipses, satellites, planets, comets, stars, deep space, galaxies and so on.

It is said in Native Cultures that they had/have the overall and basic conviction that "everything is connected". A statement, which modern cosmological science are having some huge troubles to compute.

Of course our ancestors didn´t speculate on several of your mentioned modern terms, but they knew Light was the prime cause of everything.

They didn´t care of gravity at all as they went on spiritual journeys away from the Earth which they observed as a round sphere.

"Time" as a term and concept didn´t exist in the ancient world as they tought everything was an eternal cyclical motion. (Hence they also had no ideas of a strange and very speculative Big Bang)

Of course our ancient ancestors had no concept of modern satellites . . . unless maybe as visionary premonition

But they had a concept of planets as "Wandering Stars".

And they also had a concept of the Milky Way galaxy as this was/is connected to the ancient cultural Stories of Creation in where the central LIGTH in the Milky Way created everything in our galaxy.

 

[Native]

BTW: Apropos your OP "Dark Matter": Blaming Newton
You also could blame Newton for not understanding "gravity" in an universal way.

Newton just focused on how an apple fell to the ground and forgot to look at the circle of creation and how an apple seed grows up to become a tree with apples on it´s branches.

That Is: With a Newtonian description of gravity: Gravitational motions on the Earth goes both ways.

 

[whirlingmerc]

Cosmologists observing galaxies have been aware of apparent aberrations with standard theories of gravity since at least the 1930s, and in this century exploration of the "dark matter" hypothesis has got most attention in the science press ─ if the explanation is extra mass that we can't see, what could the source of that extra mass be?

But an alternative to dark matter has never been off the table ─ that the problem lies not with unseen forms of matter, but with our standard theories of gravity itself.

Here's a link to a computer simulation of galaxy formation in which no dark matter is assumed but instead a particular variation of how gravity works is applied ─

According to the [hypothesis] the attraction between two masses obeys Newton's laws only up to a certain point. Under very low accelerations, as is the case in galaxies, it becomes considerably stronger. This is why galaxies do not break apart as a result of their rotational speed.​

and

the attraction of a body depends not only on its own mass, but also on whether other objects are in its vicinity.
​

The result of the simulation was encouraging ─

the distribution and velocity of the stars in the computer-generated galaxies follow the same pattern that can be seen in the night sky. "Furthermore, our simulation resulted mostly in the formation of rotating disk galaxies like the Milky Way and almost all other large galaxies we know," says the scientist. "Dark matter simulations, on the other hand, predominantly create galaxies without distinct matter disks -- a discrepancy to the observations that is difficult to explain."​

but not perfect ─

the [...] results [...] do not correspond to reality in all points.
​

So ─

"Our simulation is only a first step," emphasizes Kroupa. For example, the scientists have so far only made very simple assumptions about the original distribution of matter and the conditions in the young universe. "We now have to repeat the calculations and include more complex influencing factors. Then we will see if the MOND theory actually explains reality."​

It's more than simulation as the data matches. The modification to relativity with the differential suggested by Moshe Carmeli was supported by data taken by the person with the Ausie with the patent on the Atomic fountain clock Harnet

I don't believe in either dark matter or dark energy not necessary

 

[blü 2]

It is said in Native Cultures that they had/have the overall and basic conviction that "everything is connected". A statement, which modern cosmological science are having some huge troubles to compute.

Such broad generalizations seem to me long on connotation but very short on non-trivial denotation.

And since they don't especially illuminate the 'dark matter' question of this thread, perhaps we can leave them there.

 

[blü 2]

It's more than simulation as the data matches. The modification to relativity with the differential suggested by Moshe Carmeli was supported by data taken by the person with the Ausie with the patent on the Atomic fountain clock Harnet

I don't believe in either dark matter or dark energy not necessary

But the fun of it is that the anomaly's there and the explanation isn't.

So I'm curious as to how it will be resolved.

 

[shunyadragon]

But the fun of it is that the anomaly's there and the explanation isn't.

So I'm curious as to how it will be resolved.

Since science is descriptive only the anomaly is possibly due to the present limits of our knowledge.

 

[ecco]

MOND doesn´t have to explain either -

It´s really funny: Astrophysicists use COSMIC LIGHT to confirm their gravitational hindsight biases - and completely forget to include the natural laws of LIGHT REFRACTION.

Yes this Dark Ghost keeps on kicking - as long as the "grave cosmologists" rejects to see the EM light

This is from the Dr. Dowyde who is prominently featured in:

About the author

Dr. Dowdye is an independent researcher and is Founder of Pure Classical Physics Research where he focuses in depth on the Truth and the Profound Fundamentals and Pure Laws of Nature, all first set in motion by the Devine Creator, the Almighty Lord God.



​

Also, Native, I seem to recall some months ago asking you to show a simulation of the solar system without gravity, and only with your EM. You didn't/couldn't. Now seems as good a time as any to ask again.

 

[Native]

And since they don't especially illuminate the 'dark matter' question of this thread, perhaps we can leave them there.

Why would our ancestors deal with a modern invention of "dark matter"? Their prime conception was/is that LIGHT = EM governs and create everything and if taking this as a fact, nobody needs "dark matter" at all as all motions derives from the overall EM fundamental forces.

 

[ecco]

Also, Native, I seem to recall some months ago asking you to show a simulation of the solar system without gravity, and only with your EM. You didn't/couldn't. Now seems as good a time as any to ask again.

.

I see that you still don't have a good answer. Not surprised.

 

[gnostic]

It is said in Native Cultures that they had/have the overall and basic conviction that "everything is connected". A statement, which modern cosmological science are having some huge troubles to compute.

Of course our ancestors didn´t speculate on several of your mentioned modern terms, but they knew Light was the prime cause of everything.

They didn´t care of gravity at all as they went on spiritual journeys away from the Earth which they observed as a round sphere.

"Time" as a term and concept didn´t exist in the ancient world as they tought everything was an eternal cyclical motion. (Hence they also had no ideas of a strange and very speculative Big Bang)

Of course our ancient ancestors had no concept of modern satellites . . . unless maybe as visionary premonition

But they had a concept of planets as "Wandering Stars".

And they also had a concept of the Milky Way galaxy as this was/is connected to the ancient cultural Stories of Creation in where the central LIGTH in the Milky Way created everything in our galaxy.

All you are doing is speculating what the ancient people know, might know, and tip-toeing around what they don’t know, which is a lot.

They can observe the motions of the sun, moon, planets, stars and only a tiny portion of the Milky Way, and can discern some patterns, but they have no real understanding of the nature of each one of them. They didn’t even know the sun is actually a star.

And yet you keep talking talking about the Milky Way, as if the ancient people knew a lot more about our galaxy than modern astronomers. They don’t.

 

[Native]

All you are doing is speculating what the ancient people know, might know, and tip-toeing around what they don’t know, which is a lot.

They can observe the motions of the sun, moon, planets, stars and only a tiny portion of the Milky Way, and can discern some patterns, but they have no real understanding of the nature of each one of them. They didn’t even know the sun is actually a star.

And yet you keep talking talking about the Milky Way, as if the ancient people knew a lot more about our galaxy than modern astronomers. They don’t.

How can tou even tell? Even if astronomical and galactic issues CLEARLY AND EVIDENTLY are mentioned in ancient myths, you just dismiss the entire plot with your usual ignorant approach:

Dismissing the mythical content and using modern inventions to underline your ignorant dismissions.

 

[shunyadragon]

How can tou even tell? Even if astronomical and galactic issues CLEARLY AND EVIDENTLY are mentioned in ancient myths, you just dismiss the entire plot with your usual ignorant approach:

Dismissing the mythical content and using modern inventions to underline your ignorant dismissions.

Yes, concerning the nature of the cosmos and our galaxy I dismiss 'mythical content.'

 

[Native]

Yes, concerning the nature of the cosmos and our galaxy I dismiss 'mythical content.'

Well, I just take you (too) to belong to the underlined category below - and if you do, you don´t even know what you don´t know

Creation Myth:
"A creation myth (or cosmogonic myth) is a symbolic narrative of how the world began and how people first came to inhabit it. While in popular usage, the term myth often refers to false or fanciful stories”.

Here is a lot more from ancient human cultures from all over the World to be dismissed - List of Creation Myths & Milky Way Mythology.

Have a Nice Day of dismissing

 

[shunyadragon]

Well, I just take you (too) to belong to the underlined category below - and if you do, you don´t even know what you don´t know

Creation Myth:
"A creation myth (or cosmogonic myth) is a symbolic narrative of how the world began and how people first came to inhabit it. While in popular usage, the term myth often refers to false or fanciful stories”.

Here is a lot more from ancient human cultures from all over the World to be dismissed - List of Creation Myths & Milky Way Mythology.

Have a Nice Day of dismissing

No problem dismissing them all as not physically factual simply based on the modern knowledge of physics and cosmology.

 

[Native]

No problem dismissing them all as not physically factual simply based on the modern knowledge of physics and cosmology.

Oh, so you base your cosmological understanding on a sudden miraculous creation from a mathematical singularity and on a ghostly dark matter which cannot be directly found?

Well, welcome into the Dark Age of Modern Cosmology

 

[shunyadragon]

Oh, so you base your cosmological understanding on a sudden miraculous creation from a mathematical singularity and on a ghostly dark matter which cannot be directly found?

No, Arguing form ignorance gets you nowhere. I base my believe on the known knowledge of science, which is sufficient to reject the physical description of ancient mythological cosmology. We know that the Milky Way is one of many galaxies in a vast universe. We know the earth is round and not the center of the universe.

 

[Native]

No, Arguing form ignorance gets you nowhere.

Native said: ↑
Oh, so you base your cosmological understanding on a sudden miraculous creation from a mathematical singularity and on a ghostly dark matter which cannot be directly found?
------------
What is ignorant in this?

I base my believe on the known knowledge of science,

Honestly, when dealing with cosmological matters, "science" don´t have any common consensus knowledge of "the creation" at all, so you only have your speculative "believes" left to hold onto.

We know that the Milky Way is one of many galaxies in a vast universe. We know the earth is round and not the center of the universe.

If you have studied the ancient Myths of Creation, you would have known that our ancestors didn´t think of the Earth as their overall cosmic center. This perception occured in later astronomical history.

Besides this, even modern cosmology STILL measures everything in cosmos with the Earth as the center.

 

[gnostic]

Besides this, even modern cosmology STILL measures everything in cosmos with the Earth as the center.

No, it is still isn’t view or measure Earth as the “centre” of universe; “centre” is the wrong to word to use.

More precisely we view the cosmos from our - or from the Earth’s “vantage point”.

There are no other possible vantage point to observe the universe from.

The most distant objects in space, are Voyager 1 & 2, but these have shut down many of the observation and measuring systems, and eventually these unmanned crafts will completely run out of powers and won’t be sending any more data back to NASA. And when that happened, those vantage points outside of Solar System will be lost

 

[Polymath257]

No, it is still isn’t view or measure Earth as the “centre” of universe; “centre” is the wrong to word to use.

More precisely we view the cosmos from our - or from the Earth’s “vantage point”.

There are no other possible vantage point to observe the universe from.

The most distant objects in space, are Voyager 1 & 2, but these have shut down many of the observation and measuring systems, and eventually these unmanned crafts will completely run out of powers and won’t be sending any more data back to NASA. And when that happened, those vantage points outside of Solar System will be lost

And on a galactic scale, the distances to V1 and V2 are absolutely trivial. Even if they had the best telescopes on them, they would *still* be looking from 'within our solar system' on such a scale.

 

[shunyadragon]

Native said: ↑
Oh, so you base your cosmological understanding on a sudden miraculous creation from a mathematical singularity and on a ghostly dark matter which cannot be directly found?
------------
What is ignorant in this?

As far as the fallacy of 'arguing from ignorance' claiming an issue of what is unknown about the origins of the universe, which has nothing to do with the scientific factual knowledge of our universe, with does not appeal to miraculous nor mythology..

Honestly, when dealing with cosmological matters, "science" don´t have any common consensus knowledge of "the creation" at all, so you only have your speculative "believes" left to hold onto.

Again appealing to the fallacy of 'argument from ignorance' by speculating on what science does not know. The current scientific knowledge in agreement concerning the physical nature of our universe rejects and demonstrates as false ancient mythical views of the nature of our universe.

If you have studied the ancient Myths of Creation, you would have known that our ancestors didn´t think of the Earth as their overall cosmic center. This perception occurred in later astronomical history.

Many did even earlier than astronomical history, as documented in their rock carvings even before writing.

Besides this, even modern cosmology STILL measures everything in cosmos with the Earth as the center.

No it does not, the center would be the origin of the universe as a singularity. The only thing the scientist do is observe the cosmos from the perspective of the earth, and not as the CENTER of anything. As more and more space vehicles travel into the cosmos even that is not true. They would view the cosmos from the perspective of the space vehicle and not the CENTER of anything. Recent evidence indicates that the galaxies are rotating around the original point of origin a possible center of our universe only. If you consider the possibility of the multiverse scientists do not consider there is a center of anything.