19 Galaxies Are Apparently Missing Dark Matter. No One Knows Why.

Dec 3, 2019
2
0
10
Dark matter is a supersolid that fills 'empty' space and is displaced by ordinary matter.

The supersolid dark matter displaced by a galaxy pushes back, causing the stars in the outer arms of the galaxy to orbit the galactic center at the rate in which they do.

Displaced dark matter is curved spacetime. More correctly, what is referred to geometrically as curved spacetime physically exists as displaced dark matter. Curved spacetime is a geometrical representation of gravity. Displaced supersolid dark matter is the physical manifestation of gravity.

The supersolid dark matter displaced by the quarks the Earth consists of, pushing back and exerting pressure toward the Earth, is gravity.

Displaced supersolid dark matter is gravity.

The reason for the mistaken notion the galaxies are missing dark matter is that the galaxies are so diffuse that they don’t displace the supersolid dark matter outward and away from it to the degree that the dark matter is able to push back and cause the stars far away from the galactic center to speed up. The galaxies are too diffuse to displace the supersolid dark matter to such an extent that it causes the light to lense as it passes through the galaxies.
 
Dec 3, 2019
2
0
10
Or, given that multiple dimensions are proven, would it not be necessary that there is an interdimensional force that bounds them relative to each other and within their range. Perhaps, akin to what binds entangled particles beyond the limits of space is sufficient in larger black holes to entangle the stars in a consistent orbit. Will be interesting to see if this remains relative to galaxy size and can then be measured.
 
Dec 3, 2019
2
0
10
"No one knows why"? I know why, it's because "dark matter" and "dark energy" are made-up constants that need to be plugged into the scientists' equations to account for the data that they see. It's the same as "aether", which was made up to try and explain certain phenomena, before Einstein came along. Anyone who doesn't see this, has more faith than most religious people.
 
Dec 4, 2019
11
0
30
"No one knows why"? I know why, it's because "dark matter" and "dark energy" are made-up constants that need to be plugged into the scientists' equations to account for the data that they see. It's the same as "aether", which was made up to try and explain certain phenomena, before Einstein came along. Anyone who doesn't see this, has more faith than most religious people.
I fully agree. The problem is that people are so focused on "finding dark matter" rather than looking at whether the current theory of gravity requires modifications. Sadly, the only focus on a modified theory of gravity comes from "YouTube physicists" who have never published a paper and/or have no idea what they are talking about. This has tainted any examination of theory of gravity with a "lunatic fringe" tinge, probably preventing people with actual knowledge from venturing there.
 
Dec 4, 2019
6
1
30
I fully agree. The problem is that people are so focused on "finding dark matter" rather than looking at whether the current theory of gravity requires modifications. Sadly, the only focus on a modified theory of gravity comes from "YouTube physicists" who have never published a paper and/or have no idea what they are talking about. This has tainted any examination of theory of gravity with a "lunatic fringe" tinge, probably preventing people with actual knowledge from venturing there.
I'm a YouTube physicist. Tell me what's wrong with either of these. No one has so far.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epk-SMXbu1c
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24WyRKT8t4w&t=2s
 
Dec 4, 2019
6
1
30
I have recently written an essay on M110 that may help clarify this question: http://astronomy-links.net/M110.odd.galaxy.pdf
Hello, Clark -

Fascinating article suggesting a truly novel idea to interpret the formation of both young blue stars around M110 and the larger question of the origin of everything. I don't pretend to understand all that I should, but I am a bit troubled by the large emphasis on Dark Matter involvement. Kyle Oman and colleagues (“Missing Dark Matter in Dwarf Galaxies?”, https://arxiv.org/pdf/1601.01026.pdf) found dwarf galaxies apparently forming without Dark Matter. How would you explain that? Also, I thought String Theory suggests that all particles and radiation have vibrating strings as their basis, but aren't you suggesting something smaller that generates particles and energy? And, as you may have seen, I have a different novel idea that relies on String Theory branes as the centers of galaxies rather than Black Holes, and my explanation shows how young blue stars would form near those centers from strings popping up via a type of Hawking radiation. As you probably know, such young blue stars have been found by HST at the center of Andromeda and (probably) at the center of the Milky Way.

Our ideas may not be that far apart. I'll have to re-read your article at least once to try for a better understanding.

Cheers,

Howard
 
Dec 11, 2019
2
1
10
"No one knows why"? I know why, it's because "dark matter" and "dark energy" are made-up constants that need to be plugged into the scientists' equations to account for the data that they see. It's the same as "aether", which was made up to try and explain certain phenomena, before Einstein came along. Anyone who doesn't see this, has more faith than most religious people.
I wouldn't go that far. It's entirely possible to build working models based on concepts that aren't fully understood. These models can make accurate predictions. These models are in fact the"made-up constants" as you so dismissively put it. The big difference is, a new model can be made up that's more understood, and holds more accurate predictions. Just like Einstein did with Newton. Both models are true, and useful.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY