According to this recent article by David Talbott, published on Rense.com, which goes back to another piece published a week earlier on BBC News, the fairly widespread speculation that something called "dark matter" is holding galaxies and indeed the universe together, appears to be just that - speculation.
What puts the dark matter speculation in doubt is the recent discovery of a huge cloud of hydrogen - galaxy size - which has apparently accreted into disk form and is rotating. Talbott, the co-author of "Thunderbolts of the Gods" says that
- - -
in this case, adding just a little dark matter would not suffice. According to Dr Robert Minchin, of Cardiff University: "From its speed, we realised that VIRGOHI21 was a THOUSAND TIMES more massive than could be accounted for by the observed hydrogen atoms alone." (emphasis ours)
Continues Talbott: One might have thought the investigators would pause in the face of such proportions. To get the results they were looking for, they posited a thousand times more invisible matter than visible matter, with the freedom to place the invisible stuff wherever it is needed for their gravitational equations to work. Is such a leap of faith permissible?
- - -
After sending the link to some scientists who do not think "inside the box", I received a few comments. Paramahamsa Tewari says: "That's a very interesting article by David Talbott. I have enclosed briefly my own explanation from the space vortex theory. Please send to others who may be interested."
According to Tewari, “DARK MATTER” is a misnomer for the invisible “VORTICES OF MASSLESS AND FLUID SPACE”. (see here as PDF)
Roger A. Rydin has a slightly different take on the matter - he wrote to Rense.com:
Your article, “Exposing the Myth of Dark Matter”, was very interesting to me. You conclude with, “It sounds as if a leap of faith produced an "exciting" scientific breakthrough. But this is the kind of "breakthrough" that causes plasma cosmologists to wonder aloud about the state of science today. They know all too well that it does not take "dark matter" to produce the rapid rotation of a vast hydrogen cloud. Even the weakest electric fields imaginable can routinely achieve such results over vast distances.”
I agree that electromagnet fields may have a great deal to do with rotational motion, and may be the answer for this large gas cloud. But it begs the question, how did this cloud come to be located in the Virgo Cluster? The Virgo Cluster is noted for several other anomalies, including: being the apparent center of the Cosmic Microwave Background; having the only known Blue Shift galaxies; and having something to do with the Great Attractor if this object exists at all.
Well, I have a new idea about the importance of Virgo, and how the gas cloud appeared there. It is contained in the attached paper that I am preparing for the upcoming Natural Philosophy Society meeting in May at the University of Connecticut in Storrs...
For all of you who cannot wait to know what Roger Rydin's explanation is, I must for now disappoint you - the paper is "in preparation", and we may have to wait a while yet.
posted by Sepp Hasslberger on Wednesday March 9 2005
updated on Friday June 26 2009
URL of this article:
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/2005/03/09/the_myth_of_dark_matter_can_science_change.htm
Related Articles
Cooperative Space Exploration - Linking up with NASA Free energy and new physics are discussed by a comparatively small group of passionate theorists and experimenters but there is little to link these researchers up with the "mainstream". Yet those some of those "wild" ideas could make all the difference in our future in space. True, there is the "Journal of New Energy" of Hal Fox, "Infinite Energy" magazine, which started out through the heroic efforts of Gene Mallove... [read more] February 28, 2005 - Sepp Hasslberger
Science Commons: Open The Flow Of Scientific Information Creative Commons has become a modern-day alternative to copyright which we inherited from pre-computer and pre-internet times. Ubiquitous copyright has become an obstacle to sharing and utilizing the immense amounts of information now at our fingertips. The idea is to form a "commons", that is, a freely accessible body of facts and ideas where barriers to the exchange and use of information have been removed or at least lowered from... [read more] February 21, 2005 - Sepp Hasslberger
New Physics: Debating Einstein, Matter, Time and Space My recent posting of Eit Gaastra's speculative work under the title Beyond Einstein's Relativity: Cosmology Dissident Says Big Bang Absurd has drawn quite some comments, which I would like to share. I also believe it might be useful if there were a forum, perhaps in the form of a site such as this one, for making alternative views to current cosmology known and for feeding back comments to the authors.... [read more] December 11, 2004 - Sepp Hasslberger
Space Vortex Theory: Einstein and Tewari's 'Cartesian Universe' Einstein’s Greatest Blunder is the title of a paper by Roger A. Rydin, Associate Professor of Nuclear Engineering Emeritus at the University of Virginia, who says that Einstein's general theory, for all its mathematical elegance, should never have been applied to cosmological questions. In the Introduction, Rydin says: The 1915 exposition of Einstein's Theory of General Relativity (GR), plus the 1929 empirical statement of Hubble's Law, were the basis of... [read more] May 13, 2004 - Sepp Hasslberger
Gene Mallove: Science Censorship is 'Invisible Evil' When in February this year, the Union of Concerned Scientists came out with a warning that "the Bush administration had systematically distorted scientific fact in the service of policy goals on the environment, health, biomedical research and nuclear weaponry at home and abroad", a long festering wound was touched, but unfortunately no cleansing process seems to be underway as yet. Examples for the distortion of science for purposes of either... [read more] April 30, 2004 - Sepp Hasslberger
A Universe of Scale - Stars edge closer Can communication be transmitted over distance without the need for electromagnetic radiation "travelling" to carry the message? Hartmut Mueller of the Institute for Space-Energy-Research in Wolfratsthausen, Germany, says it can. Mueller has developed a theory of global scaling, which states that matter and energy organize in accordance with principles of scale. The "nodes" or preferred points of concentration, may be distant in linear space, but adjacent in "logarithimic space",... [read more] September 21, 2003 - Sepp Hasslberger
Readers' Comments
A comment received by email from Lew Price:
... Don't know much about the other dark matter theory, but a couple of years ago I used the research of Mordehai Milgrom to find the math behind the dark matter question. I found that dark matter does not exist. Its apparent existence is merely the consequence of the accelerating expansion of the universe when one realizes that the universe is made of dynamic ether, and that the center referred to as the Big Bang is merely the center where this latest sudden appearance of concentrated dynamic ether began.
The math for this is part of my website and most of what is there would apply even if the reader were not a believer in an ether. However, mainstream physicists have not arrived at such a logical conclusion yet. Milgrom theorizes that dark matter does not exist and that its apparent existence is a consequence of Newton's second law changing at certain distances from galactic centers. I do not believe it is necessary to change Newton's laws when the correct math shows otherwise.
Dark matter is just a political-philosophical consequence of the political-philosophical law of the "universal constancy of the speed of light" thrown around by corrupt scientists to protect organized interests on Einsteinian doctrines.
In fact, when the reality of the locally varying character of the speed of light is admitted as a complex function of the characteristics of the medium in which it propagates, there is no need for any dark matter because Mc^2 acquires a value for the universe much bigger than the political- philosophical one since it is know that c inside stars is much greater than c in vacuum.
There are several papers in this subject for technical treatments.
Regards
RMS
PS. I assume you are aware of the vast experimental evidnece for speeds bigger than c.
new phyiscs will not come from many opposing &/or partially complementary piecemeal theory clips on the internet but by one, maybe two extraordinarily creative individuals with a new compete synthesis that allows every one with an open curious mind to see clearly in mechanically visualized detail, The Truth. New complete theory by friendly group posting is not going to happen---good to see you hanging in there still upside down & very internet popular Sepp. Frank
Any true scientist who is willing to pause for a moment, take a look with open mindedness, can see and understand the obvious, but real statement that NATURE is trying to make to us. Nearly a decade before Einstein, Poincaré formulated his Space-Time. Einstein at first did not accept Space-Time. Physics seemed to be on the right track at that time. Then along came Einstein's Relativity. It is merely correction to the incorrectly formulated Classical Principles. Recall, Einstein said in his own words: "If the velocity of light is only a tiny bit dependent on the velocity of the light source, then my whole theory of Relativity and Gravitation is false." {Quotation of A. Einstein from a letter to Erwin Finley-Freundlich: August 1913}.
The Dark Matter, Dark Energies and all that other Dark stuff is also such an attempt to correct the misunderstood and misinterpreted observations of Nature. I invite you to take a look at my Extinction Shift Principle, Mathematical Proof with observational evidence, a Pure Classical solution to both Gravitation and Electromagnetism: www.extinctionshift.com
For decades now some very important fundamental principles of mathematical Physics have been incorrectly applied to the theory of gravitational lensing or just simply ignored. This has lead to an erroneous understanding the effects the gravitation of point-like masses should have on rays of light as suggested by the light bending rule of General Relativity. Important fundamental principles of mathematical Physics were hardly applied or not mentioned at all by the researchers of gravitational lensing.
A quick examination of the history of light bending will reveal that the only observable light bending effects on rays of light have been virtually those effects that are due to an indirect, not a direct interaction between the light rays and the gravitation. The thin plasma atmosphere of the sun represents such an indirect interaction between the gravitational field of the sun and the rays of light from the stars. There is convincing observational evidence from Astrophysics that a direct interaction between light and gravitation is yet to be observed. All indications show that the microlensing concept is merely a failed attempt to explain the lack of observation of macrolensing.
These articles are brought to you strictly for educational and informational purposes. Be sure to consult your health practitioner of choice before utilizing any of the information to cure or mitigate disease. Any copyrighted material cited is used strictly in a non commercial way and in accordance with the "fair use" doctrine.
