4 ms·
> ...But, dark matter isn't something to be denied. Because it isn't understood yet, to the point where we can doubt its existence.... There is something not q
by Lordarminius 9y ago
> ...But, dark matter isn't something to be denied. Because it isn't understood yet, to the point where we can doubt its existence....
There is something not quite right with your logic and I am struggling to identify what it is :/
- shakna 9y agoMaybe I can expand. I can deny the Earth is flat, because there is an abundance of evidence that it is round. I can't deny that there are 650 elements, because as far as I know, other elements may be discovered. But I can certainly doubt it, and supply alternative theories. I can deny allegations of wrong doing, because they either happened, or didn't. But Dark Matter isn't assured yet. Denying it means it either exists or doesn't. But the truth may be a mix of MOND and something different but similar to Dark Matter. It isn't "fixed" into a yes/no situation.
- badosu 9y agoDark Matter is not just 'something we don't understand yet'. It has predictable effects on observations and adheres to some properties, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullet_Cluster https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullet_Cluster .
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- tynpeddler 9y agoThat's evidence, not proof. We still don't have enough evidence to say conclusively that Dark matter is as we currently imagine it. And of course the same can be said about MOND. Here's Milgrom's interpretation of the bullet cluster: http://www.astro.umd.edu/~ssm/mond/moti_bullet.html http://www.astro.umd.edu/~ssm/mond/moti_bullet.html
- badosu 9y agoI am not saying Dark Matter is something that actually exists that cannot be ruled out by other explanations (a revision of GR would be ideal IMO), just that this phenomenon makes the approach much trickier.
- kobeya 9y agoHe expressed it badly. The point I think he is trying to say is that dark matter can be neither proven nor disproven at this time with the information available. An intellectually honest person should remain open to both possibilities. You can say "I am not convinced of the dark matter hypothesis." But unless you have information the rest of us do not, you can't really say "I deny the dark matter hypothesis could be real."
- kradem 9y agoI [too] don't think it's about bad wording, yet pure bad logic. The article is positioned on the principle that was imagined based on wrong assumtions of other theory and which acceptance will dissmiss the other theory. I'm not even being close to think of being positioned on a side there, but afaic one could easily take one in this subthread. TL; DR yep, dark matter could be denied no matter of the state of its understanding - just bring the better explanation of those irregularities its existence explains!
- boomboomsubban 9y agoAcceptance doesn't dismiss theories, evidence does. A physicist shouldn't truly deny anything, just look at the evidence and say it is not the best theory. Even with a better explanation, we can't be sure more information won't see the return of dark matter. Milgrom should understand this well, he's suggesting the return of the cosmological constant.
- kradem 9y agoForget dark matter, use the analogy from the article: afaik nobody has ever proven ether is not existing. I know nothing about dark matter, but I could play a zero-sum game based on this article content - just the way anybody else could play - and outcome of that game is according to this article proven theory of this guy denies dark matter and dark energy theory. And that's all, we could prove bad logic here without waiting for the third season of Dark Matter to be broadcasted.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]