Re: Dark matter/energy - is it real?


"Erik Max Francis" <max@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:poidnR-6fuR5va_ZnZ2dnUVZ_sCdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Gravitation? You mean the very theory whose failure we are discussing
here?


You might as well try to salvage the luminiferous ether.

Are you really saying that you think whether a particle has mass or no
mass only invokes relativity? Do you really know anything about particle
physics?

No, because Fermi had missing energy. He could perform an experiment and
say this is where the neutrino went, even if he couldn't see it itself.

No, he couldn't. He had no neutrino detectors, he had no way of knowing
"where the neutrino went."


Sure he did. He could look at the vecors of the inputs, and the vectors of
the known outputs, and determine that things would be conserved if a
particle with this energy took off in that direction, even if he couldn't
see it.




He only knew that there were nuclear
interactions (radioactive decay in this case) where energy seemed to be
missing. He didn't know where it went, he didn't know why it wasn't
there, he didn't have a clue.

Your lack of understanding of the history of the postulation and the later
discovery of the neutrino is fairly telling here.


It seems I understand it better than you.





Me. Scientists had nailed down the properties of the luminiferous ether
too. A physicist can show me a neutrino. There is no evidence
whatsoever in any process in this solar system for the existence of dark
matter. There's supposed to be, what, 6 kilos of it for every kilo of
normal matter?

No physicist could show you a neutrino when they were postulated.


But he could show me the hole it left in the theory. This particle
rebounded that way because of a neutrino with X energy going in Y
direction.It wasn't detectible, but it's hole was. They knew what
properties it had long before they see them 'directly'.




Fermi
postulated their existence in 1931. It was 1956 when "Detection of a Free
Neutrino" was published. Right now, dark matter has been postulated. No
physicist can show you a dark matter particle today. Are you _sure_ you're
being scientific?


No one ever claimed that neutrinos made up 6x the mass of ordinary matter.

If there is so much of it, where is it?



None of this is evidence for dark matter. But it is extremely strong
evidence that you don't know what you're talking about.


All you seem to have is an analogy with the neutrino. What I am pointing
out that what you really have is an analogy with the luminiferous ether.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Lepton predictions and cosmological limits on neutrino mass
    ... you have the cosmologists telling the particle ... these are cosmologists talking to particle folks about ... >>the mass of a particle. ... The supernova measurment gives a limit for the electron neutrino mass. ...
    (sci.physics.research)
  • Lepton predictions and cosmological limits on neutrino mass
    ... One of the board participants pointed out, correctly, that while my neutrino ... this same calculation also suggests an approximate 13.5 MeV tau ... neutrino mass. ... If the particle folks were to get the ceiling down below 10 ...
    (sci.physics.research)
  • Phonon Fusion with Monopoles
    ... is based in the decay of the alpha particle. ... The extent of the hydrogen atom is what concerns the tachyon of ... a monopole as the klepton has a probability of developing from the neutron ... The positron neutrino has emerged from the alpha particle ...
    (sci.physics.fusion)
  • Re: The aether is made out of ordinary protons and electrons
    ... >>Try looking up the beta decay spectrum and neutrino oscillations! ... > particles to allow the particle to flow through the aether. ... > whereby m is proportional to the energy required to break the aether ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: infinity ...
    ... > Ross A. Finlayson wrote: ... In what sense does the measured mass ... > of a subatomic particle "converge", ... > is the neutrino, and there the question is still open. ...
    (sci.math)