Justatruthseeker

Neither. ”the man has become like one of us, KNOWING good and bad. people get confused on what that “image” was... Those bacteria that can now live solely on citrus have lost their ability to survive in other environments. They paid a heavy price by scavenging information from other areas to survive. Now it’s the only place they can survive... and the two billion year old bacteria we found was no less primitive than the bacteria today...

Then you wont mind showing me the calculations using GR that work correctly to describe galaxy rotation curves without adding Fairie Dust since none is needed inside the solar system? No, I expect you will mind, since you can not produce any such thing. Where? Every single laboratory experiment ever performed with plasma, that's where. But I understand people know little about that state of matter, even if it is 99.9% of the universe. You might want to study up on it. You wont need so much Fairie Dust.... Why would I doubt the existence of neutrino's, they are predicted by the Standard Model which is highly successful. It's your Fairie Dust that isn't predicted nor needed..... To name another example of fanaticism... And yet stars and clouds of plasma do not orbit according to your gravitational calculations. And what is spacetime made of? That's what you all keep saying. Yet every day observations falsify your beliefs and support the plasma universe.. Why now they are looking for "electric dark matter" since they can't find that Fairie Dust anywhere else.... not even searching "noise"..... https://www.livescience.com/62726-dark-matter-electric-charge.html It's only a matter of time. Just got to wait for the fanatics to die off...

Really? Then you wont mind showing me a single plasma experiment that uses the laws of gravity? Plasma is controlled by the electromagnetic forces, which overpower gravity. But that's why I don't have to put my coffee pot below the outlet for it to work.... See above. Please provide a single plasma experiment that used the laws of gravitation to describe it's behavior. Plasma is controlled by the electromagnetic forces which overpower gravity. I will await that experimental citation.... Says the man that ignores: 1) that 99.9% of the universe is plasma. 2) That in the laboratory we use particle physics and electromagnetic theory to describe it's behavior. 3) What is 99.9% accurate without that "fudge factor" suddenly needs that "fudge factor" when applied to plasma. 4) Who said anything about the electric universe? Does it scare you for some reason that you jump to this conclusion? I am confused as to what you think plasma physics has to do with that? 5) I am still awaiting your laboratory citation where gravity is used to describe the behavior of plasma. I shall of course be waiting till the end of time. It's not used on earth, let alone in the "micro-gravity " of space.....

It has everything to do with GR. It is GR that has been tested to a 99.9% accuracy inside the solar system without the need for that Fairie Dust. yet the second you attempt to apply it to the rest of the universe they suddenly have to add Fairie Dust. I'm not bashing GR. I think it is an incredibly accurate theory for describing non-ionized matter or .1% of the universe... Well I am at my daily limit, so to reply to beecee They've already been submitted and the un-qualatatively flat rotation curves obtained. As well as several other predictions that fit was was later discovered. https://www.plasma-universe.com/Galaxy_formation So we agree. To be polite as possible your denial is based upon pure bullshit. If you want to go that routine, don't be surprised if you get back what you first give. But you, your gonna ask me to put faith in something never observed, never tested in any laboratory, that you have to add to a theory that is already known to be 99.9% accurate without it. I believe the word bullshit that you used is indeed appropriate. Just be looking in the mirror when you apply it.... Now, do you want to try the civilized discussion or are you going to stay the fanatic course?

What more evidence do you need than what was once just 99.9% accurate no longer is the second you apply it outside the solar system? But sure, whatever you need

You mean by sledgehammering a theory to ionized matter that we have tested to be 99.9% accurate regarding non-ionized matter without it? Gravitational theory has already been shown to be 99.9% accurate describing planetary systems (non-ionized matter) or about .1% of the entire universe. But then they apply that theory to the other 99.9% of the universe (plasma) and suddenly what was just tested to be 99.9% accurate requires them to sledgehammer it to fit with ad-hoc theory to the tune of 96%. Perhaps if cosmologists used the correct physics for the correct states of matter, one might not need all those ad-hoc theories to make fit what doesn't apply? There is no evidence for Dark Matter. The evidence is that they apply gravitational theory, come up with the wrong answers, then add just enough magical Fairie Dust to make the math fit a semblance of reality. Theory that was just tested to a 99.9% accuracy without that Fairie Dust. Fairie Dust - Fabricated Ad-hoc Inventions Repeatedly Invoked in Effort to Defend Untenable Scientific Theory. Observational evidence shows they are ignoring the behavior of what really exists in halos around the galaxy. https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/chandra/news/H-12-331.html Not one laboratory uses anything but particle physics and electromagnetic theory to describe plasma behavior. But they continue to treat it as ordinary "gas" and to sledgehammer the wrong physics to it, despite those laboratory experiments. Sure, gravitational theories are great at describing non-ionized matter. Of course they believed at one time that 99% of the universe was non-ionized matter, and so began down the wrong course. Now we know that 99.9% of the universe is instead ionized matter, but they still attempt to apply the physics for non-ionized matter to that ionized state. Even if they know they can't from laboratory experiments. https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2008/10apr_moondustinthewind " "We've had some surprising results," says Abbas "We're finding that individual dust grains do not act the same as larger amounts of moon dust put together. Existing theories based on calculations of the charge of a large amount of moondust don't apply to the moondust at the single particle level." " And this is what we are discussing - a universe composed of 99.9% single charged particles - not clumps of matter. There exists no gravitational theory for the quantum level. Yet they are trying to sledgehammer the theory for clumps of matter to those single particles. Consistently get the wrong answers, which causes them to add that Fairie Dust to a theory 99.9% accurate without it. We don't need MOND, we don't need to revise anything. Just use the correct physics for the correct states of matter. One would need the same 96% Fairie Dust if one attempted to apply plasma physics to planetary orbits.... But when applied to plasma....

Of course, maybe if they just stop trying to sledgehammer the wrong physics for the wrong state of matter to 99.9% of the universe they won't need hypothetical dark matter anymore?

General relativity is only a good approximation for extremely limited scales, on the order of solar systems. It's applicable area of operation is .1% of the universe. This is easily demonstrated. The theory by itself is 99.9% accurate within the solar system without adding any other theory to it. But the second one attempts to apply what was just shown to be 99.9% accurate in describing planetary systems (non-ionized matter) to the rest of the universe (ionized matter) one suddenly has to add 96% ad-hoc theory to make what was just tested to a 99.9% accuracy without it to make it even fit a semblance of reality. So the question is really, are we using the wrong physics for the wrong state of matter to begin with in our attempt to describe the rest of the universe, and so end up needing that 96% ad-hoc theory leading to singularities?