4 ms·
In cosmology, the "Universe" typically refers to the observable universe which is far from infinite. There is nothing to "accept" about the terms "dark matter"
by Analog24 5y ago
In 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