2 ms·

all hypotheses fundamentally are a belief system, it does no good to assert otherwise. > you have been claiming that "dark matter hypothesis" No. I have clai

all hypotheses fundamentally are a belief system, it does no good to assert otherwise. > you have been claiming that "dark matter hypothesis" No. I have claimed that the class of dark matter theories includes those which reject the existence of "dark matter" under the (possibly incorrect) assumption that the historical term "dark matter theory" refers to any theory that explains galactic rotation curves, as coined by Zwicky and cataloged by Rubin. In general, "A theory of X" can certainly reject X, and replace it with something else.

pdonis 5y ago
> I have claimed that the class of dark matter theories includes those which reject the existence of "dark matter" And this claim is incorrect. "Dark matter" is a particular hypothesis for explaining the discrepancy in galaxy rotation curves (and other observations as well, such as features of the CMB that cannot be explained with a model that only includes the matter visible to us). It is not just another name for the discrepancy itself, or for any theory that claims to explain the discrepancy by any mechanism whatever. > under the (possibly incorrect) assumption that the historical term "dark matter theory" refers to any theory that explains galactic rotation curves And this is an incorrect assumption. That's what I've been saying all along. See above.