3 ms·
The only mysteries here are: 1. The certainty that an infinite entity (universe) can be determined to have a very specific percentage (80%) of something (dark
by gtsop 5y ago
The only mysteries here are:
1. The certainty that an infinite entity (universe) can be determined to have a very specific percentage (80%) of something (dark matter)
2. The fact that the big bang is still being considered and cited as the beginning (?) of the universe
3. That we have accepted terms such as "dark" matter and "dark" energy in science as if some witchcrafty comes into play, as if lord voldemort created the cosmos.
- junon 5y agoThe real mystery here is your point.
- gtsop 5y agoMy point is that contemporary physics is disoriented by hooking onto unftuitful notions
- junon 5y agoThat's a rather broad assertion. Can you elaborate?
- gtsop 5y agoLate reply, but just in case: It is indeed a broad assertion. If I could summarize it, I would say that physicists in general (from the prism of the public view) is oriented towards "initial" and "final" states of time and space rather than infinite processes. E.g "big bang" and "heat death" as the start and end of everything. At the same time physics has given an insane amount of effort on the gravitative qualities of the universe but not the repulsion ones. We've known for centuries that for each - there is a +. We've spent so much time on figuring out mass/gravity, the (+) . Where is the - in the universe? We detect a gravitational effect of unknown source: let's throw in there some imaginary dark matter (since we're so familiar with it's gravitational attributes) instead of making a hypothesis that an opposite force might come in play here. You get my point? Finate, measurable, terminal states and one-sided forces instead of infinite processes and interraction of completely opposite forces: that's the general oriantation of where i see physics going despite the myriads of hints the universe gives us to search in the opposite way.
- Analog24 5y agoIn cosmology, the "Universe" typically refers to the observable universe which is far from infinite. There is nothing to "accept" about the terms "dark matter" and "dark energy", they are colloquial terms that describe two unrelated phenomena that we have yet to explain (hence the "dark" part). Just because you have an incorrect assumption about what the informal names imply doesn't mean others do as well.
- modshatereality 5y agounobserved hypothetical variables used to explain a big assumption.
- Analog24 5y agoWhat are you talking about? "Dark Matter" and "Dark Energy" are terms used to describe to _obeserved_ phenomona that we can not explain. And I'm not even sure what a "hypothetical" variable is.
- modshatereality 5y agoThey have observed discrepencies in the calculations, meaning something is either wrong with the formula, or something unobservable actually does exist and manipulates the universe in such an (edit: so far) unexplainable way.
- gtsop 5y ago> Just because you have an incorrect assumption about what the informal names imply doesn't mean others do as well. All kinds of names are given by people to reflect the essence of the entity being named. The name I give to something reflects what I think of it or something about that thing. The use of the word "dark" here is being used to reflect (as you said) our inability to yet explain the described phenomena which, to me, sounds like medieval people talking of witches. These phenomena could have easily be named "Analog24's energy" or "gtsop's matter" like a thousand other forces, particles, laws. Hence, what we have to "accept" is a term that reflects the inability of the human intellect to discover something. It is just silly and I think it shows something about the mentality of contemporary physics I hope my point is clearer now