It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

First glimpse of dark matter

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 06:14 AM
link   


US scientists have reported the detection of signals that could indicate the presence of dark matter.


A team announced on Thursday detecting two events with characteristics "consistent with" what physicists believe make up the elusive matter.

The main announcement came from the Department of Energy's Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory near Chicago.

The scientists were keen to stress that they could not confirm that what they had seen was definitely dark matter.

"While this result is consistent with dark matter, it is also consistent with backgrounds," said Fermilab's director, Pier Oddone.


Source BBC news




posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 07:13 AM
link   
reply to post by sapien82
 



The scientists were keen to stress that they could not confirm that what they had seen was definitely dark matter.

"While this result is consistent with dark matter, it is also consistent with backgrounds," said Fermilab's director, Pier Oddone.


I'm a little disenchanted with the current standard model and it's varied assumptions and inventions in order to make it work with what is observed. Dark matter and energy being the newest concoctions required to make that model fit observations. It also appears to be oh so convenient that it is either very hard or nearly impossible to directly observe and detect dark matter and energy. If it fails falsifiability, then it isn't scientific at all and so far, that's exactly what dark matter is. All smoke and mirrors aligned in perfect sequence so today's scientists can hold onto a dying and unworkable theory rather than try and develop one that accounts for what is observed. Yet anyone who tries to rewrite the maths to account for these observations without inventing convenient magical matter, they're called blasphemous heretics and pseudo-scientific imbeciles.



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 08:16 AM
link   
Yeh i see what your saying , Its really hard unless your very up to date with modern particle physics to actually understand this or even if your a maths genius to grasp the concepts .

I agree that its weird they make up ( theorise) that something possibly exists just to fit the maths !

However alot of modern phyicists have done this only later to have been proven correct through experimental data.



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 08:25 AM
link   
reply to post by sapien82
 



However alot of modern phyicists have done this only later to have been proven correct through experimental data.


While true we also have to look at the contrary. These new "theories" are developed with the intent to make that model workable with observations but only if those theories can not be directly falsifiable themselves. Science is about falsifiability, not about speculation and conjecture.

-One of my favorite phrases lately. Correlation does not imply causation. That really explains Dark matter and energy in great detail!

You have to look at the current standard model with a bit of objectivity, it's based solely upon assumption and conjecture. If we assume X is true and we observe X to have Y effect, then Y must be true as well.



posted on Dec, 18 2009 @ 09:37 AM
link   
More likely Dark BS than Dark Matter!



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join