Originally posted by KeplerScientists are using dark matter to explain things that are more elegantly explained by another principle.
Is it real or is MOND a better explanation of the strange behaviour of galaxies? Are physicists just making it up as they go along or is there some truth in this dark matter malarkey?
I have to declare an interest here, I am currently researching how stars move in galaxies and what might be causing them to move too fast. The favoured explanation is dark matter but there is currently no real evidence for the existence of dark matter.
I explain what I mean in the Science Forum if, and only if, it ever will be such a place.
Originally posted by KeplerThat isn't exactly true. Einstein wasn't a mathematician but he had great ease in Math. His first works on physics dealt with hard maths and though school he always had good grades in mathematical subjects. This myth keeps on being told I don't know exactly why.
Einstein was crap at math and did as little as possible if he could get away with it.
Originally posted by adam warlockSimpler in the sense that dark matter distributions have to be tailored to each case whereas MOND (and similar stuff) has one formula. Simple is not necessarily negative in English. Call a person simple and you may get a punch on the nose, say you have a simple solution to a problem and you may get promoted.
And I think that saying that MOND is more simple (simpler has a negative connotation from what I know of english) is really arguable. But if one takes into account all possibles candidates for darkmatter and no consensus being found I kinda agree with you.
Originally posted by KeplerYes. But I said "simpler" has negative connotions as opposed to saying "more simple". Like on the Einstein saying: "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
Simpler in the sense that dark matter distributions have to be tailored to each case whereas MOND (and similar stuff) has one formula. Simple is not necessarily negative in English. Call a person simple and you may get a punch on the nose, say you have a simple solution to a problem and you may get promoted.
I'm just saying what I remember from the MOND, darkmatter question. But I've never studied this so I'm sure you know more about this than I do. I was just trying to voice an impartial view to both sides of the question. I hope I didn't come across solely as a MOND critic. In fact I tried to show both sides weak and strong points.
Thanks everyone, I am pleasantly surprised. It is possible to discuss things in a sensible manner with like minded people in this place. I even threw in a small controversy (Einstein being bad at math, utter codswallop) to see how hot the flames got. Not even mildly singed. I conclude that a science forum might actually be a good idea although I still think it is unnecessary.
Originally posted by KeplerDon't worry, not much time has passed since the thread was started. Banter is inevitable.
Thanks everyone, I am pleasantly surprised. It is possible to discuss things in a sensible manner with like minded people in this place. I even threw in a small controversy (Einstein being bad at math, utter codswallop) to see how hot the flames got. Not even mildly singed. I conclude that a science forum might actually be a good idea although I still think it is unnecessary.
Btw, about Eintein being bad at maths, I had really heard this before and I never believed it. Sounds a bit fantastic that one of the world's greatest minds could've been bad at maths.
Originally posted by kbaumenBanter banter
Don't worry, not much time has passed since the thread was started. Banter is inevitable.
Btw, about Eintein being bad at maths, I had really heard this before and I never believed it. Sounds a bit fantastic that one of the world's greatest minds could've been bad at maths.
1 edit
Originally posted by kbaumenBanter is OK. I was more concerned with the usual abusive claptrap.
Don't worry, not much time has passed since the thread was started. Banter is inevitable.
Btw, about Eintein being bad at maths, I had really heard this before and I never believed it. Sounds a bit fantastic that one of the world's greatest minds could've been bad at maths.
Einstein was good at maths but tended to learn what he needed when he needed it. So the bit about learning tensor calculus after working out how general relativity should work is true.
1 edit
Originally posted by adam warlockOh, is there a Science Forum already?
Please, tell us now.
No, there isn't, you'll have to wait until then...
Go vote for a Science Forum! Thread 87283
Originally posted by FabianFnasI already voted. I just dont understand why you can't tell it now... 😕
Oh, is there a Science Forum already?
No, there isn't, you'll have to wait until then...
Go vote for a Science Forum! Thread 87283
Originally posted by KeplerHey, I singed you a bit. ðŸ˜
Thanks everyone, I am pleasantly surprised. It is possible to discuss things in a sensible manner with like minded people in this place. I even threw in a small controversy (Einstein being bad at math, utter codswallop) to see how hot the flames got. Not even mildly singed. I conclude that a science forum might actually be a good idea although I still think it is unnecessary.