3 ms·
I've been very reluctant to go 100% with the Dark Matter theories, preferring to think that Kepler's Law was somehow the root problem. Note, I had no real basis
by cmroanirgo 8y ago
I've been very reluctant to go 100% with the Dark Matter theories, preferring to think that Kepler's Law was somehow the root problem. Note, I had no real basis for these thoughts!
These findings do indicate that the Dark Matter theory is increasingly reliable, in that some galaxies are shown to have different densities (& thereby there's nothing wrong with Kepler's Law, and further proof that my "going with the gut" when compared with empirical science is just silly!)
These findings help reinforce that Kepler's Law are working well and seem to indicate that that dark matter is not necessarily tied with matter, but is hanging around in different densities in different galaxies.
> Ironically, the lack of dark matter in these UDGs strengthens the case for dark matter, the researchers say. It proves that dark matter is a substance that is not coupled with normal matter, since they can be found separately.
To me, it's a bit like how our planet is not uniformly the "same stuff", but we have deposits of Gold and Coal and Granite spread around the place in an uneven manner.
- narag 8y agoWhy specifically Kepler laws and not the other dozen ways in which our current understanding of physics could be incomplete? Actually Dark Matter is just a way of saying there's something (not necessarily a "substance") we still don't know: the old metaphor of light for knowledge.
- empath75 8y agoI think we can increasingly say that it it almost certainly matter if some kind. I don’t think it’s a state of pure ignorance.
- narag 8y agoDarkness is not an absolute concept either. As an example, your comment is somewhat dark to me ("it it" and "if some kind") but not pitch black :)
- snapdangle 8y agoWhy is it that no one in astrophsyics seems to understand that electricity has mass?