Maybe the sun was born in those galaxies surrounding milky way or was thrown out of Pegasus dwarf galaxy 4 billions years ago and now we think we are Milky waysers but the truth is we are the monsters in this galaxy.
which one of those dots are the Sun.. and how about our galaxys earlier mergers- where is those... and what if the sun dont belong to the milkyway-galaxy but are a star from a other galaxy merged with this one-We can call this primodial bithplace for the sun the Qulopuua galaxy
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
cool animation, but galaxies don't actually swirl like this. the outer most regions orbit the center along side the inner most regions. like a wagon wheel. you can thank dark matter/energy for this.
If dark matter/energy exists that is? I doubt it myself. We know gravity leaks right? So what if the rate of leakage is always in relation to the amount of gravity in any given area? That would throw off all the calculations that dark matter/energy are based on.
i don't know why you would doubt dark matter and dark energy.even mainstream science is on board with it, as its existence is the only way to explain aspects of our universe and its expansion rates. we haven't been able to detect them yet in main stream science but there are many things we except in science that have yet to be detected or proven in some manner. just as there are things we except that are later proven wrong.
I doubt it because there are better ways to explain things without the need for dark matter/energy. Gravity leakage is key to understanding most if not all the problems that dark matter/energy has been invented to solve. The way you are attempting to shoot me down without asking why I think what I think is a good example of how bad theories are supported for so long.
read better. i didn't say it was the only possibility. just that its the most excepted amongst mainstream scientists and that its the only known method of explaining "ASPECTS" of the universe and its expansion.learn to understand and retain what you read better. funny i cant find any peer reviewed and excepted science papers on your gravity leakage theory. just 1 guy offering a theory. a good one at that, but still only theory.
To say dark matter/energy is the ONLY way to explain things like universal expansion shows a lack of imagination and an inability to see the bigger picture. As you should know the fact that mainstream science accepts it does not make it a reality. Science should be a flexible way of asking the question, not a rigid belief system that forces an answer based on the majority of beliefs.
Are you seriously suggesting I should refrain from challenging the dark matter/energy theory? How would you expect understanding to move forward if no one challenges current understanding? The fact you seem to think I doubt dark/matter energy because there is no solid proof is very patronising and betrays your rigid thinking on the subject.
nope never said that...you'd be a fool not to. but your the one that said that dark energy and matter don't exist. i simply stated the fact that most of the scientific community is on board with the idea. maybe there wrong or maybe there right. maybe it is leakage, but i never said it was or wasn't you did. again learn to retain what you read better please.
I wasn't looking for an argument when I posted that comment, only discussion. But the subtext of you response was adversarial unless your comment was only to state the obvious. How do you know my theory is a good one? You haven't seen it in full. If a theory explains what is observed without the need to invent new factors then what does it matter how many have it?
@governmentcheese411 If it's science it MUST be detected and proven. Maybe getting back to the drawing board instead of coaxing egos would do alot better than making something up with such vague and easily twisted definitions and calling it science.
@governmentcheese411 When you said "there are many things we except in science that have yet to be detected or proven" when discussing Dark Matter with Deathpod. Science is absolutely based upon detecting and proving something before putting it out like it's a fact to be taught. Without that, it's speculation. So if the math doesn't add up then maybe there is something else wrong? But making up something and adding fairytale properties to it to justify not proving/detecting it is not science.
@smawshot no... i'm afraid it is not quite like that at all. there are a plethora of modern theories that are excepted the world over. plate tectonics is still considered a theory. einsteins laws of relativity is also considered a theory. quantum physics being the most theory based science studied to date and yet it is taught around the world. black holes were taught for decades before we actually proved they existed. this is what makes science so great. the ability to change and re-think ideas
@governmentcheese411 plate tectonics and relativity can be corroborated and tested. throwing out some magical energy and mass out there when our math and working models don't hold together to explain an phenomenon and then explaining it away as something undetectable and unprovable is not science. quantum physics is in the same loops and black holes aren't proven either. true science is great as it rethinks ideas and then puts them to the test.
@smawshot if they can... why haven't they been? exactly! because we can't travel the speed of light to test einsteins "theory" nor can we do anything but guess about plate tectonics. hence the reason they are both considered theories which shuts you entire argument down. science is NOT all facts as you say. more often than not. we're forced to re-write it faster than we can discover new things.
@smawshot black holes are not proven, lmao! omfg! do us a favor and go back to your school teachers and slap the fuck out of them for us all for the time you just wasted. black holes have long since been proven and even images of some exist. i dare you to doubt me on this, lmao! now quantum physics is not a science, lmfao! do you even know what the word means? i guess we better go tell some of the greatest research institutes on the world that quantum physics is not a science. smawshot says so.
@smawshot These very loose speculations taught are in need of that rethinking. If the wave function collapses, it's not the particles acting differently it's how we THINK they are acting is wrong. If our model of how galaxies hold together with gravity isn't showing how they hold together then it's obvious the model needs new THINKing. Making up magical excuses has never been, isn't now, and never will be science.
@smawshot i think you really need to try and actually read up on the subject you're damning so truly. dark matter wasn't just pulled out of someone's ass. the known models didn't work and the only conclusion that anyone could come up with that fit was dark matter or dark energy, period. so in fact, they are doing what you ignorant ass is telling them to do by striving for a better answer to fit into what we know and or think we know. btw simpleton, both dark matter and dark energy are proven.
@governmentcheese411 LOL nice try. Has the scientific method been applied to this theory and provided acceptable results? Does this theory provide any sort of measurement to allow for prediction aside from the obvious that is currently being observed? The answer is a resounding no. Ask why it's believed that dark matter exists and it all points to the fact that galaxies couldn't hold together under our working model of gravitation. Ask how it's tested and you get all these copouts about
@smawshot the only cope out is your ignorant ass. no one in the REAL scientific community will argue it. it is backed by the greatest minds known to man. can you beat that? HELL NO! so basically, we have an idiot that doesn't even know the definition of science condemning some of the greatest minds in human history, and all your claims are backed by.... NOTHING! the so-called copouts you speak of were a decade ago when the science was new stupid. update your research by about a decade.
@governmentcheese411 I don't care what minds support what. Great priests support many established religions and that doesn't necessarily validate anything they have to say either. But according to you that's enough. Sadly, you talk like you know what science is but still fail at that. But since you know so much please provide ANY evidence of the existence of dark matter. There is none, but you can insist all you want if it helps you sleep at night.
@smawshot lmfao! now that i shamed your ignorant ass in my previous comment. i see this ignorant shit. now you're comparing science to religion eh simpleton? wow! you're a true half wit if i ever did meet one, lmao! btw, i didn't insult you to sound correct stupid. i already knew i was right. i insulted you because you insulted both my intelligence with your mindless tripe and also because of your condescending comments when in fact you have no clue what you're talking about.
@governmentcheese411 If support implies validity, which you gunned for (read above), then you're a fucking tool. But since you possess this idea of what science is, then please explain to me how Dark Matter was EVER introduced scientifically. There was absolutely no method for its postulation aside from "well something's not right so something has to be there". No measurement or test for its existence. No repeated predictions. Everything in DM is based on the superstition of it's existence.
@smawshot you're still here. what a fucking nit wit. fuck you liar! i just gave you 3 links from national geographic, NASA, and JPL. all of which discuss the tests performed and the results you're so ignorant of. try actually reading for once dumb ass.
@smawshot this is just to funny... you get your info from a group of fools that believe the earth is only a few thousand years old and that fossils were put here by the devil to fool us all, lmfao! that is some real science you got there dim wit, lmao! why don't you just ask jesus :) though it seems to have been a couple thousand years. he might actually answer you, lmfao! you never know huh, lmao!
noah can fit 2 each of about 10 million species onto a boat, but dark matter... fuck that! lmfao!
@governmentcheese411 how it's properties make it invisible and undetectable. It's a spacefiller that is used instead of admitting to not knowing. You can buy that bag of BS and it makes no difference to me. And no, they aren't striving for a better answer if they take a half-baked fairytale with no proof whatsoever and incorporate into the education system. Until you could provide any evidence that dark matter is there, or anyone, then it isn't a part of science.
@smawshot once again you imbecile! many universities and science facilities around the world have positively proven both. you're a wash out you fool. google it and behold your ignorance..
@smawshot omfg! you're still here you simple fool. didn't i give you a research task to go fuck off to? here is your links fool. next time have your momma help you so i don't have to.
national geographic. com /news/ 2005/09/0928_050928_dark_matter.html
none of your links work anymore. interpretation and tweaking of an invisible, unseen, unreactive mass that does nothing but provide extra gravity to hold a galaxy together. wow. It's so much more abundant and it's matter but doesn't react with matter. go back to your retardation indoctrination seminars.
@smawshot creation com! so you're a religious nut huh? we are so done now for sure. no one as delusional as a fucking deist should be in a scientific debate. btw, if you had half a brain, you would know that most links wont post in here and you have to add spaces to them stupid. plus you need to add in the link start you fucking fool. here ill help your ignorant ass out. go to the nasa website and type dark matter. wow! see how easy it is for those of us with common sense.
@governmentcheese411 Oh here we go. Instead of addressing how the notion of Dark Matter was or wasn't ever introduced scientifically, instead of addressing how loose interpretation is what makes this HYPOTHESIS work at all you feel the need to act like you know what you are talking and others don't. How about providing a definition of what science is and showing how the dark matter notion follows it's principles. Nothing. But long as you are told what to believe or think it works for you.
@smawshot lmfao! you being a religious nut trying to coach anyone on the scientific method is laughable at best simpleton, and trying to twist things around won't work. it is plain and simple stupid. a piece of the puzzle didn't fit and theory was formed and after many years that theory was proven correct, period. you can sit here all day with your "buts" and "ifs" and "whys" and it wont change a thing. YOU ARE WRONG, PERIOD... now go back to your god delusion and leave me be.
@governmentcheese411 Whatever. You want to try to get into who I am to evade answering the question and then act like I have nfc. Until you explain how the scientific method was applied in the invention of dark matter then you continue to fail. Insisting doesn't generate results. You are just as indoctrinated as any biblethumper I have ever met.... News for you buddy, I am not one of those tools either. But keep insisting, because clearly that is the science you speak of.
@smawshot evade answering you, lmfao! so you're a lying christ nut to huh? you should fit right in then, lmao! what a loser, lmao! what part do you not get simpleton.
DM and DE were "theorized" nearly 3/4 of a century ago you fool. then after decades of not being able to test their theories. they got their chance and were proven right. how completely ignorant can you be to not see that. well, i quess going to places like creation.com to study science explains your blind ignorance.
@smawshot how about your ignorant ass explain how they didn't use the "scientific method". i dare you to. you can't because you have no clue of its use yourself. a theory was formed and when able to be. was tested and proven right, period. you can try and bend and twist all day simpleton, but you cannot deny the fact the it has been proven by several scientific groups around the world and all results have been studied and excepted, period. you lose, the end. prove them wrong or get fucked!
@governmentcheese411 The model of how gravity would hold the galaxies together didn't work = dark matter must exist. THAT is how it the idea was proposed. It's a HYPOTHESIS. Then you TEST the hypothesis for repeated results that agree which would have murdered the fantasy of dark matter from day 1. Instead, decades later looking at a galaxy it is suddenly "proven" by characteristics that are supposedly not a part of dark matter. Ignoring that GR isn't very reliable on such a large scale anyways.
@smawshot omfg! you're still here! lmfao. what a true fool. you just don't get it do you fool? it followed every part of your scientific method to the T. an oddity was found and a theory was formed. from that theory a hypothesis was formed and later tested and proven correct by different sources in different nations using different tools and methods, period. it is done. the scientific community is past it.
@smawshot so lets just take a look at where we both stand right now, aside from you appearing to be a child crying NO NO NO at what you obviously do not understand or refuse to believe. upon realizing a flaw in the accepted model of our galaxy. scientist from around the world came up with many possible answers. DM being the most accepted, and after years of debate. multiple sources in different nations using different tools and methods proved DM correct, and your proof otherwise is??????????
@smawshot btw, the source of your PHD and where you ten-year at along with the scientific institution you are presently employed at might help your case a bit, lmao! i doubt it, but why not. trolls are notorious for fictional lives and experiences. anyways, cry cry cry all you want my simple minded friend. there are thousands of "actual" scientists as apposed to umm... you, lmfao! that agree... you're a fool. again i ask. what is your answer to the anomaly?
@governmentcheese411 LOL. I find it funny all you can is people say so...but then again you also said "even mainstream science is on board with it, as its existence is the only way to explain aspects of our universe and its expansion rates. we haven't been able to detect them yet in main stream science but there are many things we except in science that have yet to be detected or proven in some manner. just as there are things we except that are later proven wrong." That sir, is NOT SCIENCE
@smawshot dude... i told your ignorant ass to kick rocks. what part of that didn't your stupid ass get. if you want to sit here all day and lie to yourself. that is fine by me. you're the only fool that doubts it making me feel just fine. there has been experiments done dumb fuck. multiple experiments that have proven it. you're done dumb shit. schools out. now do us all a favor and fuck off. you loose... the end. unless you can prove your ignorant claims... you remain the dumb fuck.
@governmentcheese411 Whatever, you still feel the need to reply. You have yet to cite any empirical proof whatsoever that could even kept the illusion of this magical energy alive in the scientific community even in the 1930s when it was first proposed. But say so because insisting must make you right, I could care how you feel, and you have shown how you can't think. So instead of stepping up and providing this evidence that can't exist you feel the need to insult .... priceless.
@smawshot omfg! it is small cock in here again proving his brain and penis share the same single digit sum. also proving you're a liar to simpleton. i provided multiple links for all to see that you're a dumb shit and a liar. the really funny thing is that the only source of info your ignorant ass has provided in this scientific debate is from "creation.com" lmfao! well cry cry cry some more simpleton. i more than proved you to be the fool. go back to your bible pestilent child.
@governmentcheese411 And then after that, you want to try to turn it on me as if you even have a clue. Instead of reading what was written about the topic and "discovery" you choose to reinforce your ego. You provide mainly US sources for your argument (NASA who is known for more fail than they live up to, and then NG and JPL who get their information from NASA). The same NASA that can look at photos and say they see something clearly different than shown in some cases. Thank you tool.
@smawshot actually half wit. if you would have read the article. your blatantly ignorant ass would have seen that they were just writing about the stories stupid. that is right dumb shit. you fail again! was it nasa, jpl, or NG that did the test? no stupid. they were just reporting on it. you can also go read popular mechanics, future tech, and a variety of other "non american" sources if you choose, but it wont change the outcome hate monger. you're still ignorant. go back to you fairytales
@governmentcheese411 Sorry, but the bullet cluster "evidence" is weak at best and sadly that is the best that can be done. Ironic that for the sake interpretation to support this assumption, dark matter is miraculously possessing properties that it is coined to not possess and only in this single instance. But I guess you call that irrevocable proof. But hey, you are fully entitled to your opinion and shallow insults if that's what makes you happy and helps you sleep at night.
@smawshot what part of fuck off you fucking ignorant liar did you dumb ass not get? please inform me so i can make rational adjustments you fool. the bullet test! what a fucking fool. neither of the links i provided you had anything to do with it you moron. one was from a series of tests done here in the US and the other was from a study conducted using hubble. your done. you can't even keep our comments straight. now fuck off half wit. go back to your bible.
@governmentcheese411 You choose to read and reply, I don't recall forcing you. And until you can understand what the SCIENTIFIC METHOD is and distinguish the difference between a HYPOTHESIS and a THEORY and a LAW are in scientific terms and requirements for each you will continue to prove your stupidity. The fact that you attempt to belittle and insult rather than elaborate on how any of this has been applied to dark matter only confirms that you lack higher brain functions.
@smawshot lmfao! here is dick drip again proving how incompetent he is. you're a liar and a troll, period. that is why i insult your ignorant ass you dumb fuck. i gave you valid links to nasa and etc. that shows all the research done on the topic and how they came to their conclusion, period. there for, the modern world says you're a fucking idiot. plus it was your dumb ass that commented to me first also. which further places the burden of proof on your ignorant ass.
@smawshot try actually reading for once you dumb fuck. not that it really matters. i have the modern world on my side. what do you got? oh i forgot, i'm talking to a dumb shit that gets his scientific knowledge from a fucking religious website, lmfao! like i've said simpleton. the facts are in and you're and idiot, period. can you rebut the present facts with a better one. hell no! so you've got nothing. NOTHING!
@smawshot it is obvious to even a laymen that you don't have a clue as to what your talking about and obviously can't offer ANY real science to the debate. so lets go through this step by step stupid.
1st step in the scientific method they did was to recognize the problem with the excepted models.
2nd step was to form a theory. ie. dark matter
3rd step was to test the theory as done with hubble and etc
4th step was to publish the results for peer review as they did.
@governmentcheese411 1. Thank you for proving your stupidity so let's go over this by the numbers to demonstrate.
1st step is an observation of an analomy --- you are correct and such was the problem with galaxies holding together under current gravitational models.
2nd step is to form a HYPOTHESIS (not a theory)
3rd step is to test the hypothesis for validity and repeated corroboration --- this is where it fails
@smawshot lmfao! get a dictionary you fool, but here we go...
1. i know :)
2. wrong stupid. a theory is a concept which has or can be tested to explain something. a hypothesis is the explanation for an observable phenomenon. so either way stupid... i'm right :)
3. again try reading the given data stupid. it was observed by several teams in different nations using both chandra and hubble. then the data passed peer review. game set match half wit. you're done.
@governmentcheese411 2. A theory isn't formed after recognizing a phenomenon retard. read your 2nd step, you typed it.
3. when the hypothesis of DM was tested, it didn't mesh. so it's way of passing peer review was that it was modified to match the observations and given flexibility to match a tirade of tests with varying results with magical properties assigned to it (which aren't tested either) in order to make it fit. Nice try.
@smawshot actually it is stupid. i copied from the dictionary. how would your ignorant ass form a theory without first observing the phenomenon? you can't stupid. you keep trying to deny DM yet you yourself have not answered how or why you think you know better than anyone of the scholars. nor do you even bother reading the info i forwarded to you dumb ass.
@governmentcheese411 btw, you keep acting as if it is one guys word here conducting these tests or that we've only done a single test. this theory has been tested multiple times by many people in different nations and they all keep coming up with roughly the same answers stupid. the underground facility here in the U.S. the observations done by hubble and the observations done by the chandra telescope.
@smawshot and yes stupid... they did crunch the numbers at first to make things fit. they had to stupid. no one knew how to look for it or how to detect it. have you ever tried to weigh a galaxy stupid? i didn't think so, and with knowing the existing models didn't work either. they did what ALL scientists do. they tried to work it out in the best manner possible. so that they can test against it more later. which they've done, and the results pretty much shut your dumb ass down.
@smawshot you see simpleton. what your dumb ass don't seem to understand is that often in science. we go based on what we can see until a better answer presents itself. hence why so much has been changed in science over the years. kind of like how science said that the sound barrier couldn't be broken and if we tried the pilots organs would turn to goo. as we learn more. we correct ourselves. is there a better explanation for our failed models? no! do you have one? hell no! so fuck off...
@smawshot one more thing half wit...you keep whining about how they have altered the models to fit DM like a only a fool would. hello stupid! how else do you think they're gonna create a new model without first rewriting the old one.
@smawshot i'll let you in on a little fact that you're obviously to stupid to have picked up on your own. all your little models, all you theories are all based on one principle. einsteins theory or relativity, but guess what! it is what it says it is, A THEORY! we can't prove that it is correct and have already found holes in it. so in fact stupid. your so-called sciencefaction models of the galaxy are all just theories too dumb ass. none of which can be called a fact. game! set! match!
@governmentcheese411 LOL it's all theory and can't be proven so we just go with what is said? Are you really that stupid? The part overlooked with DM is that AIs model of gravity according to GR didn't work. Rather than relooking at relativity a fantasy material was invented in order to keep the peace with the popular working model. GR works in alot of situations but not all. It surely doesn't mean we must invent a mythic mass to keep the model workign where it doesn't.
@smawshot go with what was said? show me where i said that stupid. you can't cuz i didn't liar. you act like this all came about yesterday or something. it has been being debated for half a century you fool. and now it has been tested by multiple sources using multiple methods and they keep coming up with corresponding data, period. that is it. you lose! game over! you can bitch and whine all day long, but it will change nothing stupid. the greatest minds in the world have spoken, PERIOD.
@governmentcheese411 Let's see. It is accepted in science so it's right. Sounds like what you are told to me. It is "proven" so it must be right when even today it isn't so. you just parrot out whatever dribble you are fed like the tool you are. When challenged to apply thought to the subject you rather choose to revert to the attitude of a 6 year old. Yeah, game over, match, I win, you lose and thus the law of the universe is determined ROFLMFAO. Have you even graduated high school yet?
@smawshot so let me get this straight simpleton. because i choose the side that contains decades of study by the greatest minds in the world that through several tests conducted at top research facilities. i'm the tool. even though i'm the only one here that has even posted a link to support my stance. oh wait... you did too. from a religious website, lmfao! you just don't get it do you fool? me and mainstream say it is real, period. until you can prove otherwise.... I WIN :)
Respond to this video... btw stupid, by factoring in DM. they didn't preserve the excepted model dumb ass. they destroyed it and created a new one. from day one, your so-called model didn't fully work. it just took many years of debate and many more years of waiting to test it to see the answer. do you actually think you can hold a candle to some of the folks involved in these projects? can you prove there wrong? hell no! so until you can. we're right and your dumb ass is wrong :)
@smawshot the really funny thing is that your dumb ass is doing the very same thing you accuse them of doing stupid. you're calling them wrong but with no proof. you call there tests wrong yet you're not even aware of half of the tests they've done obviously. in fact all that you've been able to produce was the ramblings of a religious website. the same fools that try telling people the world is only a few thousand years old and fossils were put here by the devil to trick us all. you're an idiot
@governmentcheese411 Wow, you have nothing left but to put words into my mouth? I didn't type out a secret code nor did I suggest any model. I said things that are "accepted in science" without proof or being detected are not science. It's speculation, fantasy, invention and an ego that doesn't want to accept not knowing. I linked a website, religious or not (funny you take people's word for absolute authority like many religious nuts do though) and instead of reading what was written .....
@governmentcheese411 concerning the topic, you just felt the need to jump around like the troll you are. You brag how much you know and little I do about science and you fubared the scientific method, and hypothesis vs theory .... things taught in the 3rd grade for crying out loud. But you KNOW you are right somehow which is just funny. If DM was actually given solid proof or detection then fine, but until then it doesn't belong in schools being taught as fact.
@governmentcheese411 and yes by factoring DM they did preserve the current model which was GR already knowing it was absolute in all calculations (hence we even still use Newton's formulas where GR says they are wrong and they work in some cases). Instead of looking at what these 2 paradigms are pointing to in common (which is thankfully becoming a popular topic today) DM was invented to keep the relativistic model of gravity holding galaxies together as the answer.
@governmentcheese411 Now, do you have anything intelligent to say for once or should I expect you to troll more insults as you bark out stupidity? I know how to deal with both children and adults so it's all the same to me.
@smawshot me troll around, lmfao! i've told you dumb ass to kick rocks about 10 times dumb shit so fuck you. i also provided valid links to back up my shit. at this point. i'm not even going to bother reading your ignorant comments anymore. you've already proven you have no clue and are basing you nonsense on 10 and even 20 year old data from a religious website. we're done. now fuck off simpleton.
@governmentcheese411 Yes troll. And if you really didn't want to bother, you could choose to not respond .... but trolls just can't resist. You linked ... wow.... you just assume what you're told is absolute. Practice intelligence and thought? No. Just link and say what your told. Fact stands that The Bullet Cluster is the strongest evidence for DM to date and but the fact that it shows properties of DM that aren't supposed to be there and unique to this example somehow don't shoot it down.
@smawshot ok small cock... then prove me wrong like i've asked your ignorant ass to do about 100 times. come on fuckleberry... PROVE IT AND CHANGE THE WORLD... but of course you'll show nothing. just more of your "i'm right and their all wrong bullshit". and you call me a 6 year old, lmfao! i actually feel slightly dumber for having this interaction with you simpleton :) i must say, thank god for pussy or i might have ended up like you poor ass.
@governmentcheese411 And yet you still fail to read anything and insist on "they say so, so it must be" and evade the challenge to provide any thought on the topic. I have already elaborated upon the failure of the HYPOTHESIS of DM and you have provided nothing more than childish insults as an attempt to avert attention away from being asked to provide thought to it aside from a failed attempt at explaining basic 3rd grade science. Good job. Tell me when you're prepared to address the topic.
@smawshot omg! that half wit is back. you just don't get it do you fool? it doesn't matter what they say or i think stupid. the burden of proof is on your ignorant ass and as of yet all i've seen was your retarded link to a religious website. if we're all wrong... then put up or shut up simpleton. prove we're all wrong. prove you know more than what you've read in some crack pot website simpleton. because unless you can... you've lost :)
@governmentcheese411 Again you fail at science. When a scientist postulates, the burden of proof is upon the hypothesis. DM has yet to meet that mark. You have yet to elaborate upon this but just keep repeating the same stupidity over and over. Explain how MOND can formulate the movement of stars in galaxies without the need for DM. Explain how satellite galaxies that shouldnt have any DM still retain the abnormal rotation curves. Explain the irregularity in quantity and clumping of DM.
@smawshot no fool, it only fails your worthless mark. and i haven't elaborated because there is no need too. it would be akin to proving the sky exists. because your simple mind can't except the findings doesn't make us all fools. just you :) and why bother proving anything to an obvious troll that likely knows he has failed and simply refuses to give up. i find it amusing to be honest. so by all means... keep babbling lmao!
@governmentcheese411 Explain how DM has provided no prediction, constancy, or evidence of its existence and is somehow still proven? Dare to provide any thought on the subject ... or at the least that you even have a clue what you are talking about because you have yet to do so.
@smawshot Or keep dancing around the subject as you continue to do. Act like no points were brought up ON TOPIC whatsoever. Hide from the challenge to delivery a hint of intelligence on your part as you have been doing repeatedly already.
@smawshot i've not danced around anything simpleton. you're a waste of time plain and simple. why do you keep avoiding my question which is for you to prove us all wrong stupid. like i said half wit. you got nothing and we both know it, period. you found what you thought was an interesting controversy based on what you've likely read in your little religious site, and are now trying like hell to appear as though you have a clue, lmao!
@smawshot there is nothing to hide from dumb shit. why would i? modern science is on my side. apparently you should have spent a few more years in school. you see simpleton, when you disagree with someone. the burden of proof is on you to prove them wrong. since we both know that modern science is on my side and that your little ignorant theory is confined to conspiracy and religious websites. i'd say that leaves you empty handed.
@governmentcheese411 And yes you are hiding. You called on me about how science works and I explained while you got it wrong. You called me out to know nothing on the subject as of recent times and I have provided. When called out to name and address a SINGLE thing about the subject you continue to evade it even now. You are hiding and attempting to be deceptive by turning the tables about me proving anything to cover it up, ignoring that there are studies out there doing it already.
@smawshot no i'm not you fucking lying fool! you commented to me first stating DM doesn't exist and how wrong me and the scientific community are. so after linking your ignorant ass to 3 different studies done by the worlds leading scientific institutes. your dumb ass claims their all wrong. so yes half wit. when all of modern science is on my side. the burden of proof then falls on you to prove us all wrong. which we both know you can't hence the reason you keep coming up with excuses :)
@smawshot i almost can't believe you could be this stupid. do you not see simpleton? it doesn't matter if i'm right or wrong. why? because either way... you can't prove it and thus gives you no argument. how can you state a fact without being able to prove it yourself dumb shit. so in fact, your dumb ass is trying to do what you claim modern science has done, lmao! what a fucking nit wit! plus you don't get to ignore my question and then ask your own stupid. so again, why should i bother :)
@governmentcheese411 I understand you gave up on being right after your failed attempt at explaining science. And I don't need to prove anything and here is why. Let's go back to the 3rd grade. A hypothesis being postulated must be proven, and DM as a hypothesis has yet to do so. Furthermore, there exists alternative ideas that do not need DM in order to function which have empirical evidence in support of it albeit incomplete. You have yet to provide a shred of intelligence otherwise.
@smawshot show us where i failed to explain science you lying dumb fuck! come on where? make up more shit why don't you half wit. face it simpleton... modern science has made its decision, period. and you're on the wrong side of the equation. so either you show us all proof that DM is wrong... or you fuck off! see how simple it is simpleton :) but of course all you've got is your ignorant religious site backing you, and we both know you have nothing. so now i'm sure you'll troll up some new shit
@governmentcheese411 "1st step in the scientific method they did was to recognize the problem with the excepted models.
2nd step was to form a theory. ie. dark matter
3rd step was to test the theory as done with hubble and etc
4th step was to publish the results for peer review as they did.
so what did they miss stupid"
That was your response to hypothesis, theory, and scientific method. You obviously cannot discern hypothesis vs theory and don't know the scientific method.
@governmentcheese411 and science is not about making a decision you retard, it's about providing evidence to support the claim. again you fail at know what science is. science is NOT a debate, it's NOT a vote, it's NOT assumptions. and most of all, it is NOT accepting the unprovable and undetectable phenomenon you idiot. If DM is right and you are so sure, please stop evading the question and name the proof of its existence.
@governmentcheese411 WMPS are DM remain unproven, bullet cluster data display properties that aren't DM, dwarf galaxies that purported to not contain DM as the primary galaxies contain it display the erroneous rotation curves still, abstract and undefined clumping of DM, varying amounts of DM per galaxy defined AFTER measuring it's gravitational lensing effects and rotatation curve. Please, if you are right, then point out this SOLID PROOF that is out there. That is all you need to do now.
@smawshot and again no proof, lmao! just more mindless banter from a nit wit and his religious sites BS :) you sure like clinging to one study ignoring the fact it was done a few times now, and the fact that there were 2 other experiments done by different teams in different labs using a different method. all data collectively holds DM true. what do you got? more BS from the religious site you support that also states the world is only a few thousand years old. very scientific of you, lol...
@smawshot at this point "mr. science", lol, you have proven your willingness to lie and distort my comments and have only supported you ignorance with a "non-scientific" religious website. which pretty much leaves you without a pot to piss in as far as i'm concerned. you both a bore and a bother. thus i will now only re-spam you with this comment. simply because you've proven you're own mental inadequacies and are not worth anymore of my time. go back to your angels and demons simpleton :)
@governmentcheese411 nothing distorted and lies only on your part by trying to play it down. it's as easy to see by just scrolling up. I quoted your response when asked the difference between hypothesis and theory and how the scientific method works. and you still fail to see how undetectable and unproven qualify anything as science. i find it funny someone as indoctrinated and ignorant as yourself would comment on what site was linked, go figure you don't address anything mentioned on topic.
@smawshot at this point "mr. science", lol, you have proven your willingness to lie and distort my comments and have only supported you ignorance with a "non-scientific" religious website. which pretty much leaves you without a pot to piss in as far as i'm concerned. you both a bore and a bother. thus i will now only re-spam you with this comment. simply because you've proven you're own mental inadequacies and are not worth anymore of my time. go back to your angels and demons simpleton :)
@smawshotat this point "mr. science", lol, you have proven your willingness to lie and distort my comments and have only supported you ignorance with a "non-scientific" religious website. which pretty much leaves you without a pot to piss in as far as i'm concerned. you both a bore and a bother. thus i will now only re-spam you with this comment. simply because you've proven you're own mental inadequacies and are not worth anymore of my time. go back to your angels and demons simpleton :)
@governmentcheese411 The only person that has proven anyone to have no clue is you proving you don't. Care to take a 2nd attempt at explaining the scientific process and 3rd terminology? Care to articulate any thought upon the subject? Or do you just echo the same shit you hear without forcing your brain to operate? Do you even read what I am typing or just rant on the same bullshit because you know you have nothing thoughtful to say on the subject?
@smawshot actually no simpleton... i really am not reading much into your comments. why would i stupid. i've told you to fuck off about ten times and you keep coming back with more mindless banter. you're just to stupid to see that you lost before you even opened your mouth. you see dumb ass. as butt hurt as you may be. mainstream science has made its choice. thus making my stance correct. unless you can prove the greatest minds in the world are wrong... you've got nothing :)
@governmentcheese411 the predictions offered by Zwicky were already wrong from the beginning when it turned out that he needed to generate more dark matter in a galaxy than agreed with the model and formulas he used on the Coma cluster. So instead the method used to test it's predictions are practiced BEFORE the prediction is made. We "know" there is X amt of DM there by gravitational lensing and charting it out. Look, we "confirmed" X by gravitational lensing.
@governmentcheese411 The bullet cluster is the strongest evidence for DM to date and answered to no predictions or models. It was all after-the-fact conformation of the observation to fit DM that proves it. Under such an infallible premise there is no testing but instead just confirmation. Your links didn't work for me but rather lead to homesites in nearly 80 years this magical dust of the galaxies is a weak myth at best, kind of your ability to distinguish HYPOTHESIS and THEORY.
@smawshot omfg, of course the links didn't work for you. as usual with most fools unwilling to learn. no models or predictions. HELLO! are you really that stupid. try actually reading your info from a scientific site you fool and not a religious site. and btw, not only did hubble get involved, but so did chandra. the studies "were" compared to present models and compared to the accumulated data from both scopes and teams that studied them. then the results past peer review around the world.
@governmentcheese411 And just because it's the only conclusion someone could come up with doesn't make it correct or near correct by any means. Eye opener for you: If the only way to support the model being used is a baseless and completely unproven mythical force then maybe the MODEL needs to be rethought. But that's too much work and it's easier to progress into stupidity than take a step back and do the work that science demands to make it science.
@smawshot are you really this stupid? google it you fucking half wit. mean stream science has positively tested and proven the existence of both dark matter and dark energy. so i guess your whole argument just went out the window dumb ass. go ahead simpleton. google it an enjoy the education you should have demanded in school.
@smawshot So instead of petting egos of forethinkers that have given us models that don't work and bolstering our own by insisting we are correct in spite of blatant observations, calculations and evidence tellign us otherwise, science tells us we MUST must rethink some things. But admitting your wrong is like admitting your alcoholic I guess. It's a pridecrusher but it's the first step to progress.
Oh.. Thats cute, the old gravity based model of the Galaxy. If it wasn't so laughable it would be interesting. It's like watching the Wright brothers looking at an F22. They couldn't fathom the propulsion, the layout... The electronics. Well, gravity based theorists cannot imagine electro-magnetic effects. They should, cause another name for a Galaxy is 'Homo-Polar Motor'
We do not know why galaxies rotate and still do not fall apart (gravity/dark matter problem), so how was this simulation created in the first place?? Must have been based on tons of assumptions --> _HYPO_thesis...
Well at the moment they believe a supermassive black hole sits at the center of galaxies and there is radio evidence to support this. If the extra mass required was to come from dark matter then galaxies simply wouldn't clump together the way they do. But dark matter can certainly explain such things as the deceleration of the universe's expansion.
and yes you are absolutely correct.. alot of astrophysics is heavy with assumptions, but if the mathematics works then it's the best idea we have
Amazing how perfect of a clock it really is when you think about our processional rotation moves the equinoxes and the solstices in a perfect cross that point to the sun that points to the center of the galaxy that day...truly cool!
LOL our solar system revolves around the sun we move with it....it makes its own revolution around the galaxy and we've been in the "Night" cycle of it for around 13,000 years we will be entering galactic day on 12/ 21/2012 so the sun is still moving around the galaxy. our December Solstice Sun aligns with the dark rift that day and signals the start of a new solar year.
Yes, they predicted the alignment. and it will happen but it'll take the sun 20 years before it's actually fully into the solar day cycle but the sun and the earth line up that day with the center of the galaxy. it only happens every 26,000 years but the mayans thought that the dark rift was the birthplace of the galaxy and they believe our sun entering it is a sign of our death. so their calendar does end that day. But they're gone what did they know lol
I'm pretty curious if the simulation takes dark matter/energy into account. Stars do not orbit galactic cores the way planets orbit the Sun (with the inner planets orbiting in much less time than the outer planets).
And this video has WHAT to do with the title?
jib1000 1 month ago
Maybe the sun was born in those galaxies surrounding milky way or was thrown out of Pegasus dwarf galaxy 4 billions years ago and now we think we are Milky waysers but the truth is we are the monsters in this galaxy.
Qulopuaa 11 months ago 2
@Qulopuaa no
Shift4chizzle 2 months ago
the blatant illiterracy factor abundant in what seems like MOST comments, is shocking to me. freaking shocking.
bdogshredder 1 year ago
What are those bright dots moving towards the center of the galaxy at 0:04 ?
ArataMusic1 1 year ago
which one of those dots are the Sun.. and how about our galaxys earlier mergers- where is those... and what if the sun dont belong to the milkyway-galaxy but are a star from a other galaxy merged with this one-We can call this primodial bithplace for the sun the Qulopuua galaxy
Qulopuaa 1 year ago
just a random spinning disk!!!! Are you guys selling a idea or showing us the real thing
Qulopuaa 2 years ago
far related to what? out neighbors?
the galaxy center?
ConstantC4 2 years ago
Yeah, haha. It's fucking retarded.
Gearz86 2 years ago
The sun was in fact born in the saggitarus galaxy, but the milky ways gravity stretched it, and placed our sun where it is today.
ArataMusic1 2 years ago
im a frog
garyU6969 3 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
cool animation, but galaxies don't actually swirl like this. the outer most regions orbit the center along side the inner most regions. like a wagon wheel. you can thank dark matter/energy for this.
pxxner 3 years ago
If dark matter/energy exists that is? I doubt it myself. We know gravity leaks right? So what if the rate of leakage is always in relation to the amount of gravity in any given area? That would throw off all the calculations that dark matter/energy are based on.
Deathpod4 2 years ago
i don't know why you would doubt dark matter and dark energy.even mainstream science is on board with it, as its existence is the only way to explain aspects of our universe and its expansion rates. we haven't been able to detect them yet in main stream science but there are many things we except in science that have yet to be detected or proven in some manner. just as there are things we except that are later proven wrong.
governmentcheese411 2 years ago
I doubt it because there are better ways to explain things without the need for dark matter/energy. Gravity leakage is key to understanding most if not all the problems that dark matter/energy has been invented to solve. The way you are attempting to shoot me down without asking why I think what I think is a good example of how bad theories are supported for so long.
Deathpod4 2 years ago
read better. i didn't say it was the only possibility. just that its the most excepted amongst mainstream scientists and that its the only known method of explaining "ASPECTS" of the universe and its expansion.learn to understand and retain what you read better. funny i cant find any peer reviewed and excepted science papers on your gravity leakage theory. just 1 guy offering a theory. a good one at that, but still only theory.
governmentcheese411 2 years ago
To say dark matter/energy is the ONLY way to explain things like universal expansion shows a lack of imagination and an inability to see the bigger picture. As you should know the fact that mainstream science accepts it does not make it a reality. Science should be a flexible way of asking the question, not a rigid belief system that forces an answer based on the majority of beliefs.
Deathpod4 2 years ago
Are you seriously suggesting I should refrain from challenging the dark matter/energy theory? How would you expect understanding to move forward if no one challenges current understanding? The fact you seem to think I doubt dark/matter energy because there is no solid proof is very patronising and betrays your rigid thinking on the subject.
Deathpod4 2 years ago
nope never said that...you'd be a fool not to. but your the one that said that dark energy and matter don't exist. i simply stated the fact that most of the scientific community is on board with the idea. maybe there wrong or maybe there right. maybe it is leakage, but i never said it was or wasn't you did. again learn to retain what you read better please.
governmentcheese411 2 years ago
I wasn't looking for an argument when I posted that comment, only discussion. But the subtext of you response was adversarial unless your comment was only to state the obvious. How do you know my theory is a good one? You haven't seen it in full. If a theory explains what is observed without the need to invent new factors then what does it matter how many have it?
Deathpod4 2 years ago
accept
cobu2002 2 years ago
accept for????
governmentcheese411 2 years ago
"things we accept in science"
cobu2002 2 years ago
@governmentcheese411 If it's science it MUST be detected and proven. Maybe getting back to the drawing board instead of coaxing egos would do alot better than making something up with such vague and easily twisted definitions and calling it science.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot you wanna try and explain a little more in your comment? so after a year... we can get on the same page.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 When you said "there are many things we except in science that have yet to be detected or proven" when discussing Dark Matter with Deathpod. Science is absolutely based upon detecting and proving something before putting it out like it's a fact to be taught. Without that, it's speculation. So if the math doesn't add up then maybe there is something else wrong? But making up something and adding fairytale properties to it to justify not proving/detecting it is not science.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot no... i'm afraid it is not quite like that at all. there are a plethora of modern theories that are excepted the world over. plate tectonics is still considered a theory. einsteins laws of relativity is also considered a theory. quantum physics being the most theory based science studied to date and yet it is taught around the world. black holes were taught for decades before we actually proved they existed. this is what makes science so great. the ability to change and re-think ideas
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 plate tectonics and relativity can be corroborated and tested. throwing out some magical energy and mass out there when our math and working models don't hold together to explain an phenomenon and then explaining it away as something undetectable and unprovable is not science. quantum physics is in the same loops and black holes aren't proven either. true science is great as it rethinks ideas and then puts them to the test.
to be cont....
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot if they can... why haven't they been? exactly! because we can't travel the speed of light to test einsteins "theory" nor can we do anything but guess about plate tectonics. hence the reason they are both considered theories which shuts you entire argument down. science is NOT all facts as you say. more often than not. we're forced to re-write it faster than we can discover new things.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@smawshot black holes are not proven, lmao! omfg! do us a favor and go back to your school teachers and slap the fuck out of them for us all for the time you just wasted. black holes have long since been proven and even images of some exist. i dare you to doubt me on this, lmao! now quantum physics is not a science, lmfao! do you even know what the word means? i guess we better go tell some of the greatest research institutes on the world that quantum physics is not a science. smawshot says so.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@smawshot These very loose speculations taught are in need of that rethinking. If the wave function collapses, it's not the particles acting differently it's how we THINK they are acting is wrong. If our model of how galaxies hold together with gravity isn't showing how they hold together then it's obvious the model needs new THINKing. Making up magical excuses has never been, isn't now, and never will be science.
To be cont...
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot i think you really need to try and actually read up on the subject you're damning so truly. dark matter wasn't just pulled out of someone's ass. the known models didn't work and the only conclusion that anyone could come up with that fit was dark matter or dark energy, period. so in fact, they are doing what you ignorant ass is telling them to do by striving for a better answer to fit into what we know and or think we know. btw simpleton, both dark matter and dark energy are proven.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 LOL nice try. Has the scientific method been applied to this theory and provided acceptable results? Does this theory provide any sort of measurement to allow for prediction aside from the obvious that is currently being observed? The answer is a resounding no. Ask why it's believed that dark matter exists and it all points to the fact that galaxies couldn't hold together under our working model of gravitation. Ask how it's tested and you get all these copouts about
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot the only cope out is your ignorant ass. no one in the REAL scientific community will argue it. it is backed by the greatest minds known to man. can you beat that? HELL NO! so basically, we have an idiot that doesn't even know the definition of science condemning some of the greatest minds in human history, and all your claims are backed by.... NOTHING! the so-called copouts you speak of were a decade ago when the science was new stupid. update your research by about a decade.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 I don't care what minds support what. Great priests support many established religions and that doesn't necessarily validate anything they have to say either. But according to you that's enough. Sadly, you talk like you know what science is but still fail at that. But since you know so much please provide ANY evidence of the existence of dark matter. There is none, but you can insist all you want if it helps you sleep at night.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot lmfao! now that i shamed your ignorant ass in my previous comment. i see this ignorant shit. now you're comparing science to religion eh simpleton? wow! you're a true half wit if i ever did meet one, lmao! btw, i didn't insult you to sound correct stupid. i already knew i was right. i insulted you because you insulted both my intelligence with your mindless tripe and also because of your condescending comments when in fact you have no clue what you're talking about.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 If support implies validity, which you gunned for (read above), then you're a fucking tool. But since you possess this idea of what science is, then please explain to me how Dark Matter was EVER introduced scientifically. There was absolutely no method for its postulation aside from "well something's not right so something has to be there". No measurement or test for its existence. No repeated predictions. Everything in DM is based on the superstition of it's existence.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot you're still here. what a fucking nit wit. fuck you liar! i just gave you 3 links from national geographic, NASA, and JPL. all of which discuss the tests performed and the results you're so ignorant of. try actually reading for once dumb ass.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@smawshot this is just to funny... you get your info from a group of fools that believe the earth is only a few thousand years old and that fossils were put here by the devil to fool us all, lmfao! that is some real science you got there dim wit, lmao! why don't you just ask jesus :) though it seems to have been a couple thousand years. he might actually answer you, lmfao! you never know huh, lmao!
noah can fit 2 each of about 10 million species onto a boat, but dark matter... fuck that! lmfao!
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 how it's properties make it invisible and undetectable. It's a spacefiller that is used instead of admitting to not knowing. You can buy that bag of BS and it makes no difference to me. And no, they aren't striving for a better answer if they take a half-baked fairytale with no proof whatsoever and incorporate into the education system. Until you could provide any evidence that dark matter is there, or anyone, then it isn't a part of science.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot once again you imbecile! many universities and science facilities around the world have positively proven both. you're a wash out you fool. google it and behold your ignorance..
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 LOL let's try again retard. Provide EVIDENCE. Not just a claim with an insult to make it sound correct.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot omfg! you're still here you simple fool. didn't i give you a research task to go fuck off to? here is your links fool. next time have your momma help you so i don't have to.
national geographic. com /news/ 2005/09/0928_050928_dark_matter.html
nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2007/may/HQ_M07051a_HST_Dark_Matter_update.html
blogs. jpl. nasa. gov /?p=22
there dumb shit. nasa, JPL, and national geographic all say you're a dumb ass wasting my time. anything else simpleton
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 creation. com/has-dark-matter-really-been-proven
none of your links work anymore. interpretation and tweaking of an invisible, unseen, unreactive mass that does nothing but provide extra gravity to hold a galaxy together. wow. It's so much more abundant and it's matter but doesn't react with matter. go back to your retardation indoctrination seminars.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot creation com! so you're a religious nut huh? we are so done now for sure. no one as delusional as a fucking deist should be in a scientific debate. btw, if you had half a brain, you would know that most links wont post in here and you have to add spaces to them stupid. plus you need to add in the link start you fucking fool. here ill help your ignorant ass out. go to the nasa website and type dark matter. wow! see how easy it is for those of us with common sense.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 Oh here we go. Instead of addressing how the notion of Dark Matter was or wasn't ever introduced scientifically, instead of addressing how loose interpretation is what makes this HYPOTHESIS work at all you feel the need to act like you know what you are talking and others don't. How about providing a definition of what science is and showing how the dark matter notion follows it's principles. Nothing. But long as you are told what to believe or think it works for you.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot lmfao! you being a religious nut trying to coach anyone on the scientific method is laughable at best simpleton, and trying to twist things around won't work. it is plain and simple stupid. a piece of the puzzle didn't fit and theory was formed and after many years that theory was proven correct, period. you can sit here all day with your "buts" and "ifs" and "whys" and it wont change a thing. YOU ARE WRONG, PERIOD... now go back to your god delusion and leave me be.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 Whatever. You want to try to get into who I am to evade answering the question and then act like I have nfc. Until you explain how the scientific method was applied in the invention of dark matter then you continue to fail. Insisting doesn't generate results. You are just as indoctrinated as any biblethumper I have ever met.... News for you buddy, I am not one of those tools either. But keep insisting, because clearly that is the science you speak of.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot evade answering you, lmfao! so you're a lying christ nut to huh? you should fit right in then, lmao! what a loser, lmao! what part do you not get simpleton.
DM and DE were "theorized" nearly 3/4 of a century ago you fool. then after decades of not being able to test their theories. they got their chance and were proven right. how completely ignorant can you be to not see that. well, i quess going to places like creation.com to study science explains your blind ignorance.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@smawshot how about your ignorant ass explain how they didn't use the "scientific method". i dare you to. you can't because you have no clue of its use yourself. a theory was formed and when able to be. was tested and proven right, period. you can try and bend and twist all day simpleton, but you cannot deny the fact the it has been proven by several scientific groups around the world and all results have been studied and excepted, period. you lose, the end. prove them wrong or get fucked!
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 The model of how gravity would hold the galaxies together didn't work = dark matter must exist. THAT is how it the idea was proposed. It's a HYPOTHESIS. Then you TEST the hypothesis for repeated results that agree which would have murdered the fantasy of dark matter from day 1. Instead, decades later looking at a galaxy it is suddenly "proven" by characteristics that are supposedly not a part of dark matter. Ignoring that GR isn't very reliable on such a large scale anyways.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot omfg! you're still here! lmfao. what a true fool. you just don't get it do you fool? it followed every part of your scientific method to the T. an oddity was found and a theory was formed. from that theory a hypothesis was formed and later tested and proven correct by different sources in different nations using different tools and methods, period. it is done. the scientific community is past it.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 Your turn.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot so lets just take a look at where we both stand right now, aside from you appearing to be a child crying NO NO NO at what you obviously do not understand or refuse to believe. upon realizing a flaw in the accepted model of our galaxy. scientist from around the world came up with many possible answers. DM being the most accepted, and after years of debate. multiple sources in different nations using different tools and methods proved DM correct, and your proof otherwise is??????????
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@smawshot btw, the source of your PHD and where you ten-year at along with the scientific institution you are presently employed at might help your case a bit, lmao! i doubt it, but why not. trolls are notorious for fictional lives and experiences. anyways, cry cry cry all you want my simple minded friend. there are thousands of "actual" scientists as apposed to umm... you, lmfao! that agree... you're a fool. again i ask. what is your answer to the anomaly?
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 LOL. I find it funny all you can is people say so...but then again you also said "even mainstream science is on board with it, as its existence is the only way to explain aspects of our universe and its expansion rates. we haven't been able to detect them yet in main stream science but there are many things we except in science that have yet to be detected or proven in some manner. just as there are things we except that are later proven wrong." That sir, is NOT SCIENCE
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot dude... i told your ignorant ass to kick rocks. what part of that didn't your stupid ass get. if you want to sit here all day and lie to yourself. that is fine by me. you're the only fool that doubts it making me feel just fine. there has been experiments done dumb fuck. multiple experiments that have proven it. you're done dumb shit. schools out. now do us all a favor and fuck off. you loose... the end. unless you can prove your ignorant claims... you remain the dumb fuck.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 Whatever, you still feel the need to reply. You have yet to cite any empirical proof whatsoever that could even kept the illusion of this magical energy alive in the scientific community even in the 1930s when it was first proposed. But say so because insisting must make you right, I could care how you feel, and you have shown how you can't think. So instead of stepping up and providing this evidence that can't exist you feel the need to insult .... priceless.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot omfg! it is small cock in here again proving his brain and penis share the same single digit sum. also proving you're a liar to simpleton. i provided multiple links for all to see that you're a dumb shit and a liar. the really funny thing is that the only source of info your ignorant ass has provided in this scientific debate is from "creation.com" lmfao! well cry cry cry some more simpleton. i more than proved you to be the fool. go back to your bible pestilent child.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 And then after that, you want to try to turn it on me as if you even have a clue. Instead of reading what was written about the topic and "discovery" you choose to reinforce your ego. You provide mainly US sources for your argument (NASA who is known for more fail than they live up to, and then NG and JPL who get their information from NASA). The same NASA that can look at photos and say they see something clearly different than shown in some cases. Thank you tool.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot actually half wit. if you would have read the article. your blatantly ignorant ass would have seen that they were just writing about the stories stupid. that is right dumb shit. you fail again! was it nasa, jpl, or NG that did the test? no stupid. they were just reporting on it. you can also go read popular mechanics, future tech, and a variety of other "non american" sources if you choose, but it wont change the outcome hate monger. you're still ignorant. go back to you fairytales
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 Sorry, but the bullet cluster "evidence" is weak at best and sadly that is the best that can be done. Ironic that for the sake interpretation to support this assumption, dark matter is miraculously possessing properties that it is coined to not possess and only in this single instance. But I guess you call that irrevocable proof. But hey, you are fully entitled to your opinion and shallow insults if that's what makes you happy and helps you sleep at night.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot what part of fuck off you fucking ignorant liar did you dumb ass not get? please inform me so i can make rational adjustments you fool. the bullet test! what a fucking fool. neither of the links i provided you had anything to do with it you moron. one was from a series of tests done here in the US and the other was from a study conducted using hubble. your done. you can't even keep our comments straight. now fuck off half wit. go back to your bible.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 You choose to read and reply, I don't recall forcing you. And until you can understand what the SCIENTIFIC METHOD is and distinguish the difference between a HYPOTHESIS and a THEORY and a LAW are in scientific terms and requirements for each you will continue to prove your stupidity. The fact that you attempt to belittle and insult rather than elaborate on how any of this has been applied to dark matter only confirms that you lack higher brain functions.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot lmfao! here is dick drip again proving how incompetent he is. you're a liar and a troll, period. that is why i insult your ignorant ass you dumb fuck. i gave you valid links to nasa and etc. that shows all the research done on the topic and how they came to their conclusion, period. there for, the modern world says you're a fucking idiot. plus it was your dumb ass that commented to me first also. which further places the burden of proof on your ignorant ass.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@smawshot try actually reading for once you dumb fuck. not that it really matters. i have the modern world on my side. what do you got? oh i forgot, i'm talking to a dumb shit that gets his scientific knowledge from a fucking religious website, lmfao! like i've said simpleton. the facts are in and you're and idiot, period. can you rebut the present facts with a better one. hell no! so you've got nothing. NOTHING!
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@smawshot it is obvious to even a laymen that you don't have a clue as to what your talking about and obviously can't offer ANY real science to the debate. so lets go through this step by step stupid.
1st step in the scientific method they did was to recognize the problem with the excepted models.
2nd step was to form a theory. ie. dark matter
3rd step was to test the theory as done with hubble and etc
4th step was to publish the results for peer review as they did.
so what did they miss stupid
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 1. Thank you for proving your stupidity so let's go over this by the numbers to demonstrate.
1st step is an observation of an analomy --- you are correct and such was the problem with galaxies holding together under current gravitational models.
2nd step is to form a HYPOTHESIS (not a theory)
3rd step is to test the hypothesis for validity and repeated corroboration --- this is where it fails
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot lmfao! get a dictionary you fool, but here we go...
1. i know :)
2. wrong stupid. a theory is a concept which has or can be tested to explain something. a hypothesis is the explanation for an observable phenomenon. so either way stupid... i'm right :)
3. again try reading the given data stupid. it was observed by several teams in different nations using both chandra and hubble. then the data passed peer review. game set match half wit. you're done.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 2. A theory isn't formed after recognizing a phenomenon retard. read your 2nd step, you typed it.
3. when the hypothesis of DM was tested, it didn't mesh. so it's way of passing peer review was that it was modified to match the observations and given flexibility to match a tirade of tests with varying results with magical properties assigned to it (which aren't tested either) in order to make it fit. Nice try.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot actually it is stupid. i copied from the dictionary. how would your ignorant ass form a theory without first observing the phenomenon? you can't stupid. you keep trying to deny DM yet you yourself have not answered how or why you think you know better than anyone of the scholars. nor do you even bother reading the info i forwarded to you dumb ass.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 btw, you keep acting as if it is one guys word here conducting these tests or that we've only done a single test. this theory has been tested multiple times by many people in different nations and they all keep coming up with roughly the same answers stupid. the underground facility here in the U.S. the observations done by hubble and the observations done by the chandra telescope.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@smawshot and yes stupid... they did crunch the numbers at first to make things fit. they had to stupid. no one knew how to look for it or how to detect it. have you ever tried to weigh a galaxy stupid? i didn't think so, and with knowing the existing models didn't work either. they did what ALL scientists do. they tried to work it out in the best manner possible. so that they can test against it more later. which they've done, and the results pretty much shut your dumb ass down.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@smawshot you see simpleton. what your dumb ass don't seem to understand is that often in science. we go based on what we can see until a better answer presents itself. hence why so much has been changed in science over the years. kind of like how science said that the sound barrier couldn't be broken and if we tried the pilots organs would turn to goo. as we learn more. we correct ourselves. is there a better explanation for our failed models? no! do you have one? hell no! so fuck off...
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@smawshot one more thing half wit...you keep whining about how they have altered the models to fit DM like a only a fool would. hello stupid! how else do you think they're gonna create a new model without first rewriting the old one.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@smawshot i'll let you in on a little fact that you're obviously to stupid to have picked up on your own. all your little models, all you theories are all based on one principle. einsteins theory or relativity, but guess what! it is what it says it is, A THEORY! we can't prove that it is correct and have already found holes in it. so in fact stupid. your so-called sciencefaction models of the galaxy are all just theories too dumb ass. none of which can be called a fact. game! set! match!
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 LOL it's all theory and can't be proven so we just go with what is said? Are you really that stupid? The part overlooked with DM is that AIs model of gravity according to GR didn't work. Rather than relooking at relativity a fantasy material was invented in order to keep the peace with the popular working model. GR works in alot of situations but not all. It surely doesn't mean we must invent a mythic mass to keep the model workign where it doesn't.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot go with what was said? show me where i said that stupid. you can't cuz i didn't liar. you act like this all came about yesterday or something. it has been being debated for half a century you fool. and now it has been tested by multiple sources using multiple methods and they keep coming up with corresponding data, period. that is it. you lose! game over! you can bitch and whine all day long, but it will change nothing stupid. the greatest minds in the world have spoken, PERIOD.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 Let's see. It is accepted in science so it's right. Sounds like what you are told to me. It is "proven" so it must be right when even today it isn't so. you just parrot out whatever dribble you are fed like the tool you are. When challenged to apply thought to the subject you rather choose to revert to the attitude of a 6 year old. Yeah, game over, match, I win, you lose and thus the law of the universe is determined ROFLMFAO. Have you even graduated high school yet?
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot so let me get this straight simpleton. because i choose the side that contains decades of study by the greatest minds in the world that through several tests conducted at top research facilities. i'm the tool. even though i'm the only one here that has even posted a link to support my stance. oh wait... you did too. from a religious website, lmfao! you just don't get it do you fool? me and mainstream say it is real, period. until you can prove otherwise.... I WIN :)
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Respond to this video... btw stupid, by factoring in DM. they didn't preserve the excepted model dumb ass. they destroyed it and created a new one. from day one, your so-called model didn't fully work. it just took many years of debate and many more years of waiting to test it to see the answer. do you actually think you can hold a candle to some of the folks involved in these projects? can you prove there wrong? hell no! so until you can. we're right and your dumb ass is wrong :)
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@smawshot the really funny thing is that your dumb ass is doing the very same thing you accuse them of doing stupid. you're calling them wrong but with no proof. you call there tests wrong yet you're not even aware of half of the tests they've done obviously. in fact all that you've been able to produce was the ramblings of a religious website. the same fools that try telling people the world is only a few thousand years old and fossils were put here by the devil to trick us all. you're an idiot
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 Wow, you have nothing left but to put words into my mouth? I didn't type out a secret code nor did I suggest any model. I said things that are "accepted in science" without proof or being detected are not science. It's speculation, fantasy, invention and an ego that doesn't want to accept not knowing. I linked a website, religious or not (funny you take people's word for absolute authority like many religious nuts do though) and instead of reading what was written .....
smawshot 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 concerning the topic, you just felt the need to jump around like the troll you are. You brag how much you know and little I do about science and you fubared the scientific method, and hypothesis vs theory .... things taught in the 3rd grade for crying out loud. But you KNOW you are right somehow which is just funny. If DM was actually given solid proof or detection then fine, but until then it doesn't belong in schools being taught as fact.
smawshot 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 and yes by factoring DM they did preserve the current model which was GR already knowing it was absolute in all calculations (hence we even still use Newton's formulas where GR says they are wrong and they work in some cases). Instead of looking at what these 2 paradigms are pointing to in common (which is thankfully becoming a popular topic today) DM was invented to keep the relativistic model of gravity holding galaxies together as the answer.
smawshot 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 Now, do you have anything intelligent to say for once or should I expect you to troll more insults as you bark out stupidity? I know how to deal with both children and adults so it's all the same to me.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot me troll around, lmfao! i've told you dumb ass to kick rocks about 10 times dumb shit so fuck you. i also provided valid links to back up my shit. at this point. i'm not even going to bother reading your ignorant comments anymore. you've already proven you have no clue and are basing you nonsense on 10 and even 20 year old data from a religious website. we're done. now fuck off simpleton.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 Yes troll. And if you really didn't want to bother, you could choose to not respond .... but trolls just can't resist. You linked ... wow.... you just assume what you're told is absolute. Practice intelligence and thought? No. Just link and say what your told. Fact stands that The Bullet Cluster is the strongest evidence for DM to date and but the fact that it shows properties of DM that aren't supposed to be there and unique to this example somehow don't shoot it down.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot ok small cock... then prove me wrong like i've asked your ignorant ass to do about 100 times. come on fuckleberry... PROVE IT AND CHANGE THE WORLD... but of course you'll show nothing. just more of your "i'm right and their all wrong bullshit". and you call me a 6 year old, lmfao! i actually feel slightly dumber for having this interaction with you simpleton :) i must say, thank god for pussy or i might have ended up like you poor ass.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 And yet you still fail to read anything and insist on "they say so, so it must be" and evade the challenge to provide any thought on the topic. I have already elaborated upon the failure of the HYPOTHESIS of DM and you have provided nothing more than childish insults as an attempt to avert attention away from being asked to provide thought to it aside from a failed attempt at explaining basic 3rd grade science. Good job. Tell me when you're prepared to address the topic.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot omg! that half wit is back. you just don't get it do you fool? it doesn't matter what they say or i think stupid. the burden of proof is on your ignorant ass and as of yet all i've seen was your retarded link to a religious website. if we're all wrong... then put up or shut up simpleton. prove we're all wrong. prove you know more than what you've read in some crack pot website simpleton. because unless you can... you've lost :)
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 Again you fail at science. When a scientist postulates, the burden of proof is upon the hypothesis. DM has yet to meet that mark. You have yet to elaborate upon this but just keep repeating the same stupidity over and over. Explain how MOND can formulate the movement of stars in galaxies without the need for DM. Explain how satellite galaxies that shouldnt have any DM still retain the abnormal rotation curves. Explain the irregularity in quantity and clumping of DM.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot no fool, it only fails your worthless mark. and i haven't elaborated because there is no need too. it would be akin to proving the sky exists. because your simple mind can't except the findings doesn't make us all fools. just you :) and why bother proving anything to an obvious troll that likely knows he has failed and simply refuses to give up. i find it amusing to be honest. so by all means... keep babbling lmao!
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 Explain how DM has provided no prediction, constancy, or evidence of its existence and is somehow still proven? Dare to provide any thought on the subject ... or at the least that you even have a clue what you are talking about because you have yet to do so.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot Or keep dancing around the subject as you continue to do. Act like no points were brought up ON TOPIC whatsoever. Hide from the challenge to delivery a hint of intelligence on your part as you have been doing repeatedly already.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot i've not danced around anything simpleton. you're a waste of time plain and simple. why do you keep avoiding my question which is for you to prove us all wrong stupid. like i said half wit. you got nothing and we both know it, period. you found what you thought was an interesting controversy based on what you've likely read in your little religious site, and are now trying like hell to appear as though you have a clue, lmao!
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@smawshot there is nothing to hide from dumb shit. why would i? modern science is on my side. apparently you should have spent a few more years in school. you see simpleton, when you disagree with someone. the burden of proof is on you to prove them wrong. since we both know that modern science is on my side and that your little ignorant theory is confined to conspiracy and religious websites. i'd say that leaves you empty handed.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 And yes you are hiding. You called on me about how science works and I explained while you got it wrong. You called me out to know nothing on the subject as of recent times and I have provided. When called out to name and address a SINGLE thing about the subject you continue to evade it even now. You are hiding and attempting to be deceptive by turning the tables about me proving anything to cover it up, ignoring that there are studies out there doing it already.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot no i'm not you fucking lying fool! you commented to me first stating DM doesn't exist and how wrong me and the scientific community are. so after linking your ignorant ass to 3 different studies done by the worlds leading scientific institutes. your dumb ass claims their all wrong. so yes half wit. when all of modern science is on my side. the burden of proof then falls on you to prove us all wrong. which we both know you can't hence the reason you keep coming up with excuses :)
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@smawshot i almost can't believe you could be this stupid. do you not see simpleton? it doesn't matter if i'm right or wrong. why? because either way... you can't prove it and thus gives you no argument. how can you state a fact without being able to prove it yourself dumb shit. so in fact, your dumb ass is trying to do what you claim modern science has done, lmao! what a fucking nit wit! plus you don't get to ignore my question and then ask your own stupid. so again, why should i bother :)
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 I understand you gave up on being right after your failed attempt at explaining science. And I don't need to prove anything and here is why. Let's go back to the 3rd grade. A hypothesis being postulated must be proven, and DM as a hypothesis has yet to do so. Furthermore, there exists alternative ideas that do not need DM in order to function which have empirical evidence in support of it albeit incomplete. You have yet to provide a shred of intelligence otherwise.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot show us where i failed to explain science you lying dumb fuck! come on where? make up more shit why don't you half wit. face it simpleton... modern science has made its decision, period. and you're on the wrong side of the equation. so either you show us all proof that DM is wrong... or you fuck off! see how simple it is simpleton :) but of course all you've got is your ignorant religious site backing you, and we both know you have nothing. so now i'm sure you'll troll up some new shit
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@governmentcheese411 "1st step in the scientific method they did was to recognize the problem with the excepted models.
2nd step was to form a theory. ie. dark matter
3rd step was to test the theory as done with hubble and etc
4th step was to publish the results for peer review as they did.
so what did they miss stupid"
That was your response to hypothesis, theory, and scientific method. You obviously cannot discern hypothesis vs theory and don't know the scientific method.
smawshot 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 and science is not about making a decision you retard, it's about providing evidence to support the claim. again you fail at know what science is. science is NOT a debate, it's NOT a vote, it's NOT assumptions. and most of all, it is NOT accepting the unprovable and undetectable phenomenon you idiot. If DM is right and you are so sure, please stop evading the question and name the proof of its existence.
smawshot 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 WMPS are DM remain unproven, bullet cluster data display properties that aren't DM, dwarf galaxies that purported to not contain DM as the primary galaxies contain it display the erroneous rotation curves still, abstract and undefined clumping of DM, varying amounts of DM per galaxy defined AFTER measuring it's gravitational lensing effects and rotatation curve. Please, if you are right, then point out this SOLID PROOF that is out there. That is all you need to do now.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot and again no proof, lmao! just more mindless banter from a nit wit and his religious sites BS :) you sure like clinging to one study ignoring the fact it was done a few times now, and the fact that there were 2 other experiments done by different teams in different labs using a different method. all data collectively holds DM true. what do you got? more BS from the religious site you support that also states the world is only a few thousand years old. very scientific of you, lol...
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@smawshot at this point "mr. science", lol, you have proven your willingness to lie and distort my comments and have only supported you ignorance with a "non-scientific" religious website. which pretty much leaves you without a pot to piss in as far as i'm concerned. you both a bore and a bother. thus i will now only re-spam you with this comment. simply because you've proven you're own mental inadequacies and are not worth anymore of my time. go back to your angels and demons simpleton :)
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 nothing distorted and lies only on your part by trying to play it down. it's as easy to see by just scrolling up. I quoted your response when asked the difference between hypothesis and theory and how the scientific method works. and you still fail to see how undetectable and unproven qualify anything as science. i find it funny someone as indoctrinated and ignorant as yourself would comment on what site was linked, go figure you don't address anything mentioned on topic.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot at this point "mr. science", lol, you have proven your willingness to lie and distort my comments and have only supported you ignorance with a "non-scientific" religious website. which pretty much leaves you without a pot to piss in as far as i'm concerned. you both a bore and a bother. thus i will now only re-spam you with this comment. simply because you've proven you're own mental inadequacies and are not worth anymore of my time. go back to your angels and demons simpleton :)
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 sure. confirm your age as 6 and knowledge of the topic as 0. and again reaffirm your cowardice to address the topic at all.
smawshot 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@smawshotat this point "mr. science", lol, you have proven your willingness to lie and distort my comments and have only supported you ignorance with a "non-scientific" religious website. which pretty much leaves you without a pot to piss in as far as i'm concerned. you both a bore and a bother. thus i will now only re-spam you with this comment. simply because you've proven you're own mental inadequacies and are not worth anymore of my time. go back to your angels and demons simpleton :)
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 The only person that has proven anyone to have no clue is you proving you don't. Care to take a 2nd attempt at explaining the scientific process and 3rd terminology? Care to articulate any thought upon the subject? Or do you just echo the same shit you hear without forcing your brain to operate? Do you even read what I am typing or just rant on the same bullshit because you know you have nothing thoughtful to say on the subject?
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot actually no simpleton... i really am not reading much into your comments. why would i stupid. i've told you to fuck off about ten times and you keep coming back with more mindless banter. you're just to stupid to see that you lost before you even opened your mouth. you see dumb ass. as butt hurt as you may be. mainstream science has made its choice. thus making my stance correct. unless you can prove the greatest minds in the world are wrong... you've got nothing :)
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 the predictions offered by Zwicky were already wrong from the beginning when it turned out that he needed to generate more dark matter in a galaxy than agreed with the model and formulas he used on the Coma cluster. So instead the method used to test it's predictions are practiced BEFORE the prediction is made. We "know" there is X amt of DM there by gravitational lensing and charting it out. Look, we "confirmed" X by gravitational lensing.
smawshot 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 The bullet cluster is the strongest evidence for DM to date and answered to no predictions or models. It was all after-the-fact conformation of the observation to fit DM that proves it. Under such an infallible premise there is no testing but instead just confirmation. Your links didn't work for me but rather lead to homesites in nearly 80 years this magical dust of the galaxies is a weak myth at best, kind of your ability to distinguish HYPOTHESIS and THEORY.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot omfg, of course the links didn't work for you. as usual with most fools unwilling to learn. no models or predictions. HELLO! are you really that stupid. try actually reading your info from a scientific site you fool and not a religious site. and btw, not only did hubble get involved, but so did chandra. the studies "were" compared to present models and compared to the accumulated data from both scopes and teams that studied them. then the results past peer review around the world.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 will finish this later, got things that need getting done for now.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot there is nothing to finish simpleton. you got pwned, period. you have got nothing. go... stay... it don't really matter to me.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@governmentcheese411 And just because it's the only conclusion someone could come up with doesn't make it correct or near correct by any means. Eye opener for you: If the only way to support the model being used is a baseless and completely unproven mythical force then maybe the MODEL needs to be rethought. But that's too much work and it's easier to progress into stupidity than take a step back and do the work that science demands to make it science.
smawshot 1 year ago
@smawshot are you really this stupid? google it you fucking half wit. mean stream science has positively tested and proven the existence of both dark matter and dark energy. so i guess your whole argument just went out the window dumb ass. go ahead simpleton. google it an enjoy the education you should have demanded in school.
governmentcheese411 1 year ago
@smawshot So instead of petting egos of forethinkers that have given us models that don't work and bolstering our own by insisting we are correct in spite of blatant observations, calculations and evidence tellign us otherwise, science tells us we MUST must rethink some things. But admitting your wrong is like admitting your alcoholic I guess. It's a pridecrusher but it's the first step to progress.
smawshot 1 year ago
i agree!!!! get out of His House your not invited!!!!fuckin nasa.
rblwoaclu 3 years ago
Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.
-Albert Einstein
Divine562 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
yeah he was an asshole too.
rblwoaclu 3 years ago
Oh.. Thats cute, the old gravity based model of the Galaxy. If it wasn't so laughable it would be interesting. It's like watching the Wright brothers looking at an F22. They couldn't fathom the propulsion, the layout... The electronics. Well, gravity based theorists cannot imagine electro-magnetic effects. They should, cause another name for a Galaxy is 'Homo-Polar Motor'
Krackonis 3 years ago
Homo-Polar Motor sounds cool.
But are you saying that the galaxy is a gay northern engine???
Deathpod4 2 years ago
We are ALL Just Human after all is said and done!
joeskizzlespoon 3 years ago
Im actually a mountain goat.
icon54 3 years ago
Bahd KID! :D
joeskizzlespoon 3 years ago
uhh....wut?
455898334 3 years ago
plus the galaxy itself is moving extremely fast
mistermuffin420 3 years ago
LOL
n14e5o15 3 years ago
did I hear wrong? i thought all the galaxies are moving away from each other. away from the point at which the big bang took place
mistermuffin420 3 years ago
oh right. I thought you meant that it was rotating very fast. Obviously it is "sped up" as per the video description.
n14e5o15 3 years ago
oh lol
mistermuffin420 3 years ago
... pretty smart, though:
"Analysing the stellar populations in other galaxies could hold some clue."
Read the article.
critinker 3 years ago
huh? Something's wrong:
We do not know why galaxies rotate and still do not fall apart (gravity/dark matter problem), so how was this simulation created in the first place?? Must have been based on tons of assumptions --> _HYPO_thesis...
critinker 3 years ago
me agree
rochelimit55555 3 years ago
Well at the moment they believe a supermassive black hole sits at the center of galaxies and there is radio evidence to support this. If the extra mass required was to come from dark matter then galaxies simply wouldn't clump together the way they do. But dark matter can certainly explain such things as the deceleration of the universe's expansion.
and yes you are absolutely correct.. alot of astrophysics is heavy with assumptions, but if the mathematics works then it's the best idea we have
0173873 3 years ago
looks well cool
TheTester001 3 years ago
Uuuuh
robotcrab 3 years ago
that was 4 helium atoms,right?
mickalene 3 years ago
what the fuck.
cri015 3 years ago
umm...where the voice over that explains what's going on the video?
linux750 3 years ago 2
read the info >> ^
ReisendeEuropa 3 years ago
Amazing how perfect of a clock it really is when you think about our processional rotation moves the equinoxes and the solstices in a perfect cross that point to the sun that points to the center of the galaxy that day...truly cool!
darkstone243 3 years ago
I guess they didn't put any sound so it could be put as an animation along-side their article about it.
klumpeet 3 years ago
why can't you just put a voice over??!
bah, you make even the interesting stuff boring.
radskapoor 3 years ago 5
so are you saying, if this is true, the sun could move again?!?
desireddesire 3 years ago
it never stoped.
ccaptorchen 3 years ago
LOL our solar system revolves around the sun we move with it....it makes its own revolution around the galaxy and we've been in the "Night" cycle of it for around 13,000 years we will be entering galactic day on 12/ 21/2012 so the sun is still moving around the galaxy. our December Solstice Sun aligns with the dark rift that day and signals the start of a new solar year.
darkstone243 3 years ago
is this when the mayan callendar says it will be something?
Lhc
frvfilms 3 years ago
Yes, they predicted the alignment. and it will happen but it'll take the sun 20 years before it's actually fully into the solar day cycle but the sun and the earth line up that day with the center of the galaxy. it only happens every 26,000 years but the mayans thought that the dark rift was the birthplace of the galaxy and they believe our sun entering it is a sign of our death. so their calendar does end that day. But they're gone what did they know lol
darkstone243 3 years ago
shiet
Bullzzeyee 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
all these vids are SHIT
kieranprotsmith 3 years ago
First you all complain about the narrator's voice. Now you complain there is no narration. Quit whining and read the article linked in the sidebar.
mebeingadumbass 3 years ago 3
these really need narrative of some kind. i think i understood what was happening but its still not clear.
LHC results are going to be so amazing. i cannot wait for them
02sfraser 3 years ago
A "WTF?!" would be in order here.
Phonomorph 3 years ago
Lazy fuckers!!
: (
jimmy976uk 3 years ago
these videos need vocal explanations pls
skullsamurai 3 years ago
"Whoa! What a cheesy effect!"
- Bender.
Maracachucho 3 years ago
I'm pretty curious if the simulation takes dark matter/energy into account. Stars do not orbit galactic cores the way planets orbit the Sun (with the inner planets orbiting in much less time than the outer planets).
ssnatcherss 3 years ago
I think I saw something like this on cosmos...
noinlair 3 years ago
i hate videos like these
provoko 3 years ago
These are very old news, c'mon Carl Sagan mentioned it in "Cosmos"
cmsahe 3 years ago
I realize this is intended as an accompaniment to an article but a voiceover would be nice.
saintaureus 3 years ago
NEW SCIENTIST..you guys are starting to suck..seriously you guys are probably the laziest mo fo's on youtube!
hshabbir 3 years ago