5 ms·
Just because you cannot detect something does not make you wrong nor does it mean it doesn't exist. What a ridiculous statement.
by MAGZine 7y ago
Just because you cannot detect something does not make you wrong nor does it mean it doesn't exist. What a ridiculous statement.
- speedplane 7y ago> Just because you cannot detect something does not make you wrong nor does it mean it doesn't exist. What a ridiculous statement. If you cannot detect something, it's can be equally ridiculous to say it exists.
- DagAgren 7y agoMany discoveries in physics have quite large timespans between being theorised to exist, and being actually detected. Was it ridiculous to say those might exist?
- chmod775 7y agoWell, most of the other theories back then would seem ridiculous and obviously wrong nowadays. That's the nature of theorizing when you have little information. Obviously we mostly remember those theories that turned out to be right.
- DagAgren 7y agoAnd how do you find out if they turn out to be right, if you dismiss them immediately as "ridiculous"? That is not how science works. There are other ways of judging if a theory is worth exploring than just a "it must be testable right now".
- layoutIfNeeded 7y agohttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot
- DagAgren 7y agoNot at all relevant, as we can see the effects of dark matter in many places, very clearly.
- layoutIfNeeded 7y agoSo you can detect it after all?
- Supermancho 7y agoWe're not sure it's matter, but let's just say 'dark matter' is a useful abstract label (like 'teapot'). We know that SOMETHING is perturbing our models that are useful (to simplify the analogy, let's just posit that newtonian orbits are casually affected, for example) by measurement. As much as an orbiting 'teapot' is ridiculous, it's also provable that something is unaccounted for, 'teapot' or 'dark matter', whatever the label. This does not mean that it's matter specifically (just a label), but is a phenomena.
- DagAgren 7y agoIndirectly, yes. Directly, not yet.
- layoutIfNeeded 7y agoDefine "directly". The definition of dark matter is that it's electromagnetically non-interacting, therefore observing it's gravitational effect is as direct as it gets.
- DagAgren 7y agoSince we do not know what exactly it is, defining "directly" is not really something you can do. But, for instance, electroweak interaction is being looked at, I gather?