Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Science Forum

Science Forum

  1. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    15 May '14 14:34
    Look at this interactive map to show the structure of local stars and then expand out millions of light years to see the structure of how galaxies are laid out in space, the galaxies are arranged as if they were on lines of a disorganized spider web, the thinking being dark matter has attracted regular matter along its web like path and that is now where galaxies reside.

    Outside of the dark matter web, voids abound hundreds of millions of light years across with not much inside because most of the matter there was attracted to the dark matter web early on in the universe and this is what it is like now.
  2. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    15 May '14 20:23
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Look at this interactive map to show the structure of local stars and then expand out millions of light years to see the structure of how galaxies are laid out in space, the galaxies are arranged as if they were on lines of a disorganized spider web, the thinking being dark matter has attracted regular matter along its web like path and that is now where ga ...[text shortened]... e was attracted to the dark matter web early on in the universe and this is what it is like now.
    I understand the thinking is that there is a lot of matter that can't be accounted for so they make up the idea that there must be dark matter that can't be seen. The fact is they don't know and just have to make up this dark matter and such to make the mathematics work for their hypothesis.

    Creationists have another hypothesis that don't need dark matter and such.
  3. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    15 May '14 22:51 / 4 edits
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I understand the thinking is that there is a lot of matter that can't be accounted for so they make up the idea that there must be dark matter that can't be seen. The fact is they don't know and just have to make up this dark matter and such to make the mathematics work for their hypothesis.

    Creationists have another hypothesis that don't need dark matter and such.
    Which just goes to show you are an idiot. You don't understand advanced astronomy nor the gains that have been made in the last 30 years with Hubble and now even more powerful scopes. They learned to track the EFFECT of dark matter because it is there, it is real, we just can't see it BUT it is mass and generates gravity and therefore distorts the image of stars that appear behind it because there is a kind of ghost distortion of light by this gravity.
    This allows astronomers to chart where the dark matter resides even if they can't see it directly.

    For instance, if you had been paying any attention to astronomy over the last 60 years you would have maybe heard about one salient point discovered by a female astronomer: That galaxies are not rotating as if they were a disconnected bunch of stars and gas, they rotate (ours takes about 200 million years to make one circle) as if they were rotating on a plate.

    The gist of that is, this lady discovered there was more mass in the milky way than can be seen directly with telescopes.

    It turns out there is several TIMES more mass in almost ALL galaxies than can be seen with telescopes. Dark matter makes up about 84 percent of all the mass in the universe, that leaves only 15% or so for our kind of matter.

    That was a singular discovery, there is more mass in the milky way and almost every other galaxy seen than can be accounted for visually.

    Then the search began for candidates.
    The one they chose they called 'dark matter'.

    Matter that does not emit light, does not interact much with ordinary matter except for gravitation, it has real mass so it has real gravitational effects that can now be and has been charted to show where it is even if it cannot be seen.

    Just another instance of human intelligence mucking up your YEC bullshyte.

    You are just too obtuse, too old, out of touch with the advances in sciences you haven't followed and you have ZERO credibility or education to be judging men a hundred times your intelligence.

    Take a look at this article from Sky and Telescope magazine and try to get up to speed on such subjects before you make your stupid sweeping statements deriding the intelligence of humans.

    That is what you are doing at the bottom of it all, you cannot abide human intelligence actually figuring things out you YEC idiots will never understand.

    http://www.skyandtelescope.com/astronomy-news/dark-matter-spotted-in-the-milky-way/

    Try to read the whole article and especially look at the customer comments AFTER the article. They bring up points that are worth discussing.
  4. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    16 May '14 06:51
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Which just goes to show you are an idiot. You don't understand advanced astronomy nor the gains that have been made in the last 30 years with Hubble and now even more powerful scopes. They learned to track the EFFECT of dark matter because it is there, it is real, we just can't see it BUT it is mass and generates gravity and therefore distorts the image of ...[text shortened]... look at the customer comments AFTER the article. They bring up points that are worth discussing.
    I am not an astronomer, so the fact that I may not know everything about advanced astronomy does not make me an idiot. When they learn what this dark matter is and can explain it so it makes sense, then I might believe them. However, right now I think they have many unknowns that they need to make up explanations for, so people think they know what they are talkig about.
  5. 16 May '14 08:16 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Which just goes to show you are an idiot. You don't understand advanced astronomy nor the gains that have been made in the last 30 years with Hubble and now even more powerful scopes. They learned to track the EFFECT of dark matter because it is there, it is real, we just can't see it BUT it is mass and generates gravity and therefore distorts the image of ...[text shortened]... look at the customer comments AFTER the article. They bring up points that are worth discussing.
    Well said. He is a bully and is just full of condescending crap but has the astonishing arrogance to think he knows better than all of us despite having NO understanding of science and NO scientific credentials whatsoever and NO real interest in science whatsoever. He is just a troll in the science forum and I personally think should be permanently banned from the science forum. He can take all his religious crap to the Spirituality forum where it belongs with all the rest of the religious crap there.
  6. 16 May '14 08:23
    Originally posted by humy
    Well said. He is a bully and is just full of condescending crap but has the astonishing arrogance to think he knows better than all of us despite having NO understanding of science and NO scientific credentials whatsoever and NO real interest in science whatsoever. He is just a troll in the science forum and I personally think should be permanently banned from ...[text shortened]... s crap to the Spirituality forum where it belongs with all the rest of the religious crap there.
    hey Humy have you managed to change lead into gold yet?
  7. 16 May '14 08:42
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I am not an astronomer, so the fact that I may not know everything about advanced astronomy does not make me an idiot.
    That you admit to not understanding astronomy, but still think your uninformed opinion matters, does
    make you look like an idiot of the highest order.
  8. 16 May '14 10:00 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    hey Humy have you managed to change lead into gold yet?
    What do you imply here? I never try to turn lead into gold.
  9. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    16 May '14 10:50
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    I am not an astronomer, so the fact that I may not know everything about advanced astronomy does not make me an idiot. When they learn what this dark matter is and can explain it so it makes sense, then I might believe them. However, right now I think they have many unknowns that they need to make up explanations for, so people think they know what they are talkig about.
    Well, if you don't believe in dark matter, you are left with the task of explaining why the stuff bends light from GRAVITY and nothing else. Good luck finding a YEC rationalization for that.
  10. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    16 May '14 18:52
    Originally posted by C Hess
    That you admit to not understanding astronomy, but still think your uninformed opinion matters, does
    make you look like an idiot of the highest order.
    I did not admit I don't understand anything about astronomy. I simply stated that I am not an astronomer and know little about advanced astronomy. I understand that some of the astronomers claim the universe is made of 84% dark matter, but they still don't know what this dark matter is after all their investigations.
  11. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    16 May '14 18:55
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Well, if you don't believe in dark matter, you are left with the task of explaining why the stuff bends light from GRAVITY and nothing else. Good luck finding a YEC rationalization for that.
    Since we are not astronomers, I guess we will just have to wait until someone can prove it all.
  12. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    16 May '14 19:40
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Since we are not astronomers, I guess we will just have to wait until someone can prove it all.
    Actually I DID study astronomy in college and what bends light, not refracts it, is gravity, perhaps you did not get that far in physics to find out about that salient fact.
  13. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    17 May '14 00:26
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Actually I DID study astronomy in college and what bends light, not refracts it, is gravity, perhaps you did not get that far in physics to find out about that salient fact.
    No, I never did any experiments on gravity bending light. At least I don't recall it. However, that was 50 years ago that I was studying Physics in college.
  14. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    17 May '14 11:01 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    No, I never did any experiments on gravity bending light. At least I don't recall it. However, that was 50 years ago that I was studying Physics in college.
    That would be because you don't DO gravity bending experiments in college unless you have access to a really good telescope. Those experiments are done observing light from stars near gravity sources.

    I gather you didn't also know it was Einstein who predicted such in the first place and the confirmation of it is what led to his Nobel prize, which wasn't for relativity but for figuring out Brownian movement since att nobody understood Relativity enough to want to take a chance vetting him that way.

    If you actually are interested in the subject, here is a WIKI showing what that is all about, gravity bending light.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_general_relativity

    But I forgot, you don't believe in relativity either... my bad, you can go back to your rocking chair now. Sorry for bothering you with such tripe.
  15. Standard member RJHinds
    The Near Genius
    17 May '14 12:34
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    That would be because you don't DO gravity bending experiments in college unless you have access to a really good telescope. Those experiments are done observing light from stars near gravity sources.

    I gather you didn't also know it was Einstein who predicted such in the first place and the confirmation of it is what led to his Nobel prize, which wasn' ...[text shortened]... r... my bad, you can go back to your rocking chair now. Sorry for bothering you with such tripe.
    I don't believe they can actually see light bending around this so-called dark matter regardless of what Einstein predicted. Did Einsten also predict dark matter?