- Thank you received: 0
No Beginning, No End
- Solar Patroller
- Offline
- Senior Member
Less
More
14 years 3 months ago #23962
by Solar Patroller
Replied by Solar Patroller on topic Reply from
Jim,
There are 2 problems with the dark matter/missing mass. 1 has to do with rotation velocity curves of spiral galaxies, which isn't tied up with expansion and the Big Bang, the other has to do with Keplerian laws, and is (see Cosmology's Missing Mass Problems at datasync.com .
Pluto,
Thanks for the link.
There are 2 problems with the dark matter/missing mass. 1 has to do with rotation velocity curves of spiral galaxies, which isn't tied up with expansion and the Big Bang, the other has to do with Keplerian laws, and is (see Cosmology's Missing Mass Problems at datasync.com .
Pluto,
Thanks for the link.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Solar Patroller
- Offline
- Senior Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
14 years 3 months ago #24290
by Solar Patroller
Replied by Solar Patroller on topic Reply from
My link doesn't seem to be working but you can find it through a search engine.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
14 years 3 months ago #23963
by Jim
Replied by Jim on topic Reply from
The examples regarding Kepler are examples of misuse of rules which is common practice in modern astrophysics. As you know the mass of a galatic structure does not conform to the rules set down for a system where nearly all the mass of said system can reasonably be assumed to be located at the center. Anyone can see the mass of a galaxy is not mostly at its center but is distributed throughout the disk. Therefore assuming the mass is located at one point leads to error which has been exploited by people who should know better to promote silly theories.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Solar Patroller
- Offline
- Senior Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
14 years 3 months ago #24102
by Solar Patroller
Replied by Solar Patroller on topic Reply from
Btw, the 1st 2 laws of planetary motion were stated some 650 years before Kepler by Alhazen in Treatise of Place and Avicenna in Theory of Inclination, and Einstein's famous formula was invented by Preston in 1875 in Physics of the Ether, and mass-energy equivalence, attributed also to Einstein, was already known to Newton in 1704 (Opticks).
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
14 years 3 months ago #23964
by Pluto
Replied by Pluto on topic Reply from
Hello
There is no missing mass.
Since matter cannot be created from nothing it cannot go to nothing.
Smile and live another day
There is no missing mass.
Since matter cannot be created from nothing it cannot go to nothing.
Smile and live another day
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
14 years 3 months ago #24291
by Messiah
Replied by Messiah on topic Reply from Jack McNally
It's not by mere coincidence that the language of science - mathematics - encodes its logic into a device called an equation; which requires its elements to be equivalent on opposite sides of the argument. Newton captured the essence of natural balance when he codified the law of physics that states every action precipitates an equal and opposite reaction. Natural balance rules the domain of cause and effect.
It is obvious that there exists an opposite equivalent for every conceivable quantitative value and a reciprocal for every vector in our three-dimensional world. If that same common law of natural balance covertly applies to the realm of qualitative values as it overtly does to the quantitative and spatial aspects of existence, then for every qualitative value there should exist an opposite.
The Standard Model of contemporary physics does, indeed, portray the physical world as paired sets of fundamental particles and anti-particles, fungible and structureless building blocks that include a handful of quarks and leptons and a small assortment of force carriers. But there seems to be a lot more matter than anti-matter floating around the cosmos and, in fact, particles and anti-particles aren't opposite existences, they are only elements in opposing condition, materials that react to each other by changing state and converting into energy on contact. If two independent particles were truly opposite existences they should mutually annihilate on contact. No mass or energy would remain. Instead of simply changing state from mass to energy, all of their properties would physically negate each other and they would totally disappear - cease to exist without a trace.
If within the architecture of each fundamental particle there exists opposing qualities and anti-qualities, then in the finite and relative context the equivalent of 'nothing' exists. And if you take it up a notch to the not so relative domain of infinity...
Cause and effect is a function of existence, not the reverse.
[url] www.theory-of-reciprocity.com [/url]
I'd procrastinate, but I can't seem to find the time
It is obvious that there exists an opposite equivalent for every conceivable quantitative value and a reciprocal for every vector in our three-dimensional world. If that same common law of natural balance covertly applies to the realm of qualitative values as it overtly does to the quantitative and spatial aspects of existence, then for every qualitative value there should exist an opposite.
The Standard Model of contemporary physics does, indeed, portray the physical world as paired sets of fundamental particles and anti-particles, fungible and structureless building blocks that include a handful of quarks and leptons and a small assortment of force carriers. But there seems to be a lot more matter than anti-matter floating around the cosmos and, in fact, particles and anti-particles aren't opposite existences, they are only elements in opposing condition, materials that react to each other by changing state and converting into energy on contact. If two independent particles were truly opposite existences they should mutually annihilate on contact. No mass or energy would remain. Instead of simply changing state from mass to energy, all of their properties would physically negate each other and they would totally disappear - cease to exist without a trace.
If within the architecture of each fundamental particle there exists opposing qualities and anti-qualities, then in the finite and relative context the equivalent of 'nothing' exists. And if you take it up a notch to the not so relative domain of infinity...
Cause and effect is a function of existence, not the reverse.
[url] www.theory-of-reciprocity.com [/url]
I'd procrastinate, but I can't seem to find the time
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.494 seconds