It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Dark matter does exist. It is clear. This electronic universe movement has stonewalled when asked about the light that smears due to gravity that is not there. An entire galaxy of dark matter has been discovered. Sorry, you lose.
A British-led team of astronomers have discovered an object that appears to be an invisible galaxy made almost entirely of dark matter – the first ever detected. A dark galaxy is an area in the universe containing a large amount of mass that rotates like a galaxy, but contains no stars. Without any stars to give light, it could only be found using radio telescopes. It was first seen with the University of Manchester's Lovell Telescope in Cheshire, and the sighting was confirmed with the Arecibo telescope in Puerto Rico. The unknown material that is thought to hold these galaxies together is known as 'dark matter', but scientists still know very little about what that is.
The fact remains that an ether does not exist because sound waves do not permeate through space. To say anything about it not being observed places you in the same boat of that which you criticize. What different is your invisible ether to invisible dark matter?
Ether does not exist. If it does no affect matter, than it is indifferent to dark matter, thus making you no different, just calling it a different name.
Here are the facts. Zero point energy is a lie. Pretty much the only means to get it would be a device which uses gravity and is in a vacuum. When a perfect vacuum occurs, odd affects DO occur, such as phantom molecules. But they cannot be used for energy. It is very possible that Tesla discovered a means of making waves so small that they affect the frequency of items smaller than mass. There is nothing against the possibility that he may have created antimatter by means of affecting the frequency of regular matter and simply changing its spin.
Zero-point energy is the lowest possible energy that a quantum mechanical physical system may have and is the energy of the ground state.
You can be the smartest man in the universe. That does not change a damn thing that in the early 1900s, you would not be able to observe anything smaller than an atom nor affect anything to an observable amount.
Tesla was epic wins for sure. But don't turn him into some God of the universe that could observe some make believe ether that he cold tap into.
BTW, if he could observe it, it means that it can affect matter and photons, and therefore carry sound waves. You can't hear the sun, therefore don't make crap up.
In the late 19th century, "luminiferous aether" (or "ether"), meaning light-bearing aether, was the term used to describe a medium for the propagation of light.
We would already have free energy and personal space travel if it wasn't for Einstein and his corrupt criminal band of thieving followers.
Whilst I agree with you that many scientific theories will be shown to be false or incomplete, stating all Science is a lie is going way to far, and also shows little cognitive ability in recognizing the reasons as to why this is.
I doubt there are any scientists involved in a conspiracy to prevent true advancement, but there are many invested heavily in the current system, and their entire world view is formed by the current system.
Anyone who has read anything Einstein had to say, would know he was not an absolutist in any sense you imply.
Lastly, I doubt we would be much further.
Many of the problems stem from a lack of data (my own field of interest is archeology and anthropology). You just can't be sure which finds are in situ, the carbon dates are relentlessly recalibrated etc. It is all guesswork at best, as many of the scientists are often ready to admit.
But in regards to Physics and Cosmology, I would wager that our little mammalian brains are insufficient to truly understand reality. We currently do not even understand the brain. Not really, not in detail. Even what sleep is for is hotly debated and not well understood. Hence I laugh and scoff at the idea of Strong AI. You can't build what you don't understand.
And of course, the current paradigm is for a Universal Law, one that everything can be reduced to. But that too is just a human intellectual fancy, that the Universe is inherently "elegant", as though that were already an established law.
People trying to make reality fit Dogma will sooner or later always lose. You just seem to represent a different dogma.
Originally posted by mnemeth1
Originally posted by rhinoceros
I'm no physicist, but I know that you can't see a black hole. You can however observe them indirectly. That was the case with the picture I provided a link to. You failed to explain what was going on there. Them physicists say it's a super massive black hole and I see no reason to doubt them.
You believe in what you can not see and what can not be proven.
That is what you believe.
Black holes can not be proven to exist.
I would argue it is easier to prove that god exists than prove a black hole exists.
Let us take the statement "God is responsible for the movement of galaxies and stars" - This argument is simpler than saying black holes are responsible, thus Occam's razor says God is the correct answer.
The scientific probability of God moving the galaxies and stars is no more or less provable than saying a black hole is doing it.
Black holes can not be created or destroyed. They can not be replicated in a lab. They violate all known laws of physics. They can not be directly seen or detected by any means. They are more powerful than any force created by man. They are perfect.
Swapping the word black holes with the word God in the previous statement is perfectly valid. There is no scientific difference between black holes and God as an explanation.
Originally posted by Lasheic
reply to post by Threadfall
Trolling... the one profession where the worse you are at the task, the more convincing the ruse becomes.
Originally posted by Hendrix92TheUniverse
The LHC trying to find the Higgs Boson in an effort to explain dark matter and dark energy is a risky
and perhaps fruitless endeavor.
Cosmologists have love underestimated the effects of the electrical nature of the Universe and instead have tried to explain all observable motions by the force of gravity alone.
Redshift is not purely an indication of velocity, The "Wolf Effect" is one alternate cause and there are others.
Some galaxies are thought to be older than the estimated time of the Big Bang.
When someone invents something like dark matter or dark energy, it is a red flag in my opinion, so instead of digging the hole deeper, they should step back and dig in a different spot.
The more we know, the more we realize how much we don't know.
Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by Hendrix92TheUniverse
Dark matter is the new Aether. But it patches holes in a obvious broken model because that models predictions does not get verified by observation in any real way minus more patches and theoretical objects spun out of whole cloth without a shred of real justification.