There are many different technologies trying to do this, there is not a single way to do it, so physicists are trying all methods. I should perhaps do
a new thread about the subject of Dark Matter direct searches.
Thanks for making the thread...just started reading it:
Homie just meant Uranus was found from its gravitational pull, just like dark matter was. It's a fair analogy and at least on that quote made perfect
sense. He wasn't saying Uranus contained dark matter.
Actually I was referring to the video that KrzYma posted, which to paraphrase said that
observations suggested that dark matter existed where Uranus was found, and that Uranus was subsequently found, but they didn't believe that more dark
matter would be found just because observations predicted it.
Yes I was saying that Uranus was one form of dark matter before it was observed which is actually what the video said so I agreed with that part,
which as Eros explained is the baryonic type. There is estimated to be quite a bit of baryonic dark matter, but not nearly enough to account for
observations, which is why the "missing" non-baryonic dark matter has been postulated, with the acronym Eros mentioned of "WIMPS". There is also an
acronym for the baryonic type of dark matter objects called "MACHO" which is "MAssive Conpact Halo Objects", and undiscovered objects along the lines
of Uranus etc would fall into this category.
So I still find the irony in the video quite remarkable, that it cites an example of how observations have led to the discovery of dark matter in the
past, but they don't have confidence that the same methods that worked before will work again, namely observation, deduction, search...find, where we
have already found Uranus but are still looking for non-baryonic dark matter as Eros explained.
Agreed. Don't know how this would effect EU. But what it dark matter was just the "gravitational" pull of alternate/parallel dimensions. If either
other dimensions or parrellel universes are "close" to there counterparts. Could that account for the missing matter?
Well let's examine that.
First you'd have to postulate what you think the alternate dimensions (or universes) are and how they can interact with ours, and based on your models
you could try to devise some tests or observations that would refute or confirm the model. So I already like this idea better than EU on the basis it
doesn't contradict observation (because I don't know enough about the model to say whether it does or doesn't). I'm basically open to any rational
idea that will explain observations.
To see how the electric sun model is directly contradicted by observation, read this short excerpt:
The solar wind is a flow of protons and electrons, away from the sun, in all directions, both at the same speed. Now, if the first "major
property" of the electric sun model were true, we would expect the positively charged sun to repel positively charged protons, and attract negatively
charged electrons. That's what the third "major property" says is happening, but we see that reality is somewhat different. The observation of
electrons & protons both being "repelled" by the sun immediately negates any consideration of the sun having a net electric charge that can be
detected anywhere in the solar wind flow. If the sun had a net charge that was large enough, then it should repel one charge and attract the other,
depending on the sign of the sun's excess charge. But we don't see that.
So electric sun model says sun has net electric charge, and
observations that both electrons and protons are repelled by the sun make us wonder why the net electric charge wouldn't attract one or the other,
which would be needed for the electric sun model to be true.
The electric sun model makes sense to me. Just the way it is getting powered might be a process that is hard to see.
If it makes sense please
explain it to me. If the sun has a net electric charge, why are positive and negative charges both flowing away from the sun? Does this really make
sense to you? The electric charge is postulated at some HUGE number of volts depending on who you listen to. If you ever looked at Tesla's experiments
with high voltages, you might have noticed the current flows were not hard to observe.
So no I don't think it's hard to observe, we DO observe positive and negative charge flow away from the sun, and this is inconsistent with the
electric sun model. So, the model is contradicted by observation. At least with the "alternate dimension" model I can ask what the heck is that, where
is the model and how can we test it? But the electric sun model obviously doesn't match observation, and that's just the tip of the iceburg on how it
doesn't match, read the rest of the link for more.
edit on 28-2-2014 by Arbitrageur because: clarification