beecee

Perhaps this is relevant here.....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dp4dpeJVDxs

This should prove interesting.

As seems to be the way with most that won't/can't accept the mainstream position, supported the by the evidence, and the scientific methodology, you need yo first go back to basics. Scientific theories and models are not proven...they are the best explanation that we have at any particular time, but obviously and certainly grow in certainty over time and their continued aligning with observational data.

If you check out the contents of his five posts so far, it appears that's exactly what he is here for.

Please take your unsupported rhetoric to speculations. This is mainstream physics and from memory preaching your non mainstream unsupported rubbish is against the rules. Or alternatively you could support what you say with reputable link/s

Yes, the M/M experiment as originally performed did fail in that it was supposed to detct the ether wind which it did not and neither has any improved reproduction of the experiment since. I'm not arguing against Kepler's Law. I'm saying we dont detect the earth's motion in its orbit or any acceleration due to the fact that we and the atmosphere are moving along with it and as you have already been informed. because the Earth is in free fall around the Sun as defined by all orbits. https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/268062/why-dont-we-feel-the-subtle-speed-change-of-earths-elliptical-orbit https://www.quora.com/Why-dont-we-feel-the-centrifugal-acceleration-of-the-Earth’s-revolution-around-the-Sun https://www.decodedscience.org/why-dont-we-feel-the-earth-move-acceleration-and-perceived-motion/12851 https://www.sciencealert.com/here-s-why-we-don-t-feel-earth-s-rotation-according-to-science

It certainly is evidenced and continues to be evidenced with the latest discovery/prediction of gravitational waves, and as evidenced as is the reality of magnetic fields and scientific models.

After reading some of the early correct comments, I sometimes wonder if noting the inane crazy comments of Trump, that Americans could wish they could change Presidents as easy as we change Prime Ministers.

No my friend, it is you who is obviously wrong...Simple physics knowledge tells us that we dint feel the Earth's orbital motion because we are moving along with it, at the same constant speed. The M/M experiment has shown many times that the ether does not exist.

OK, I accept that I was inadvertently forgetting about the EMFs...So then with this inherent inability, it would mean no cohesion and build up, so I see no reason why it would congregate around any BH. It would simply, or should simply just fall in not as claimed here..."so the darkmosphere rotates, more or less"...And of course there is no way we can tell a baryonic matter BH, from a DM BH, or one with a mixture of both. I would go back to the "claims" re spacetime and spacetime curvature as evidenced and required by GR.

Yes, I realise that. I was talking about both, since they both interact gravitationally. And probably the major part of baryonic matter is actually a plasma and gas. And I'm simply saying if DM interacts gravitationally, why would it not act like normal matter.

I disagree. As per normal baryonic matter, if enough was present and in larger scales, such as comets, stellar remnants etc, the matter is broken down and forms an accretion disk that spirals into the BH. Matter is for all intents and purposes mostly broken down to its basic constituents by tidal gravitational effects and accelerated attraction before the EH is reached or crossed, although to what extent depends on the size of the BH.

Yes, All particles, electrons, protons and Neutrons emit EMR. All have spin, and magnetic moments aligned with that spin. All particles are made up of quarks. The Neutron has 2 Down [1/3 negative charge] and 1 Up quark [2/3 positive charge]... Doing the maths, -1/3 + -1/3 + 2/3 = 0 [hence overall neutral. ] Proton: 2 Up quarks plus 1 Down quark....2/3 + 2/3 + -1/3 = 1 [positive overall charge] [A long time ago I read a very reputable book [although much was beyond me] called the "Quark and the Jaguar"by Murray Gell-Mann. CORRECTION: Where I said "All particles are made up of quarks." is wrong. Electrons are actually fundamental.

I should add that this extreme right movement in Australian politics, seems to have become lively and bouyed since the election of Trump in the US.

Again, can you take your mythical crap to the appropriate forum/ Oh and reported.

Are you really interested in all these questions you are asking? Or do you have a motive? or an agenda? I mean are you really interested in learning?

This is a political thread on whether Aussie politics at this time is democratic and fair with regards to the electorate. It is not about discussing foolish gullible mythical beliefs that has its own section under the religious banner.

They are descriptions of reality under the auspices of GR, just as real as a magnetic field. Something need not be physical to exist. OK, wrong word...again spacetime is the unified multi-dimensional framework within which we locate events and describe the relationships between them in terms of spatial coordinates and time. The concept of spacetime follows from the observation that the speed of light is invariant and also allows a description of reality that is common for all observers in the universe regardless of their relative motion. Intervals of space and time considered separately are not the same for all observers....And finally of course within GR, spacetime is described in terms of curvature in the presence of mass, be that baryonic mass or DM mass. If it acts gravitationally it must and should be "swallowed"by a BH. Predicted and explained by SR, but not by DM...at least not the way I see it. What I'm saying is that if it is going to replace GR, it must explain and/or predict more. If it just simply does what GR does, and predicts what GR predicts, GR stands as is. That is the accepted incumbent verified model. In other words it is superfluous. Don't get me wrong. If it even does as you claim, and matches GR in every respect, then you deserve hearty congratulations and even recognition. But as yet, I'm not convinced, but of course it aint me you need convincing...I'm just a poor old retired maintanaince Fitter and Machinist. Your above was in reply to specifically this................. I'm really at somewhat of a loss after the extensive Opening post, as to why the reluctance on the issue of GWs? And really, just using GR as a tool understates the reality that it extensivelly and successfully describes our universe with.

The Micheson/Morley experiment was conducted to show that the ether [the medium thought to be needed for light to traverse in] did exist. It failed and showed that no medium did exist. The experiment done at that time was the most accurate available. But of course like all scientific experiments, they are continually repeated. https://physicsworld.com/a/michelson-morley-experiment-is-best-yet/ Michelson–Morley experiment is best yet 14 Sep 2009 "Physicists in Germany have performed the most precise Michelson-Morley experiment to date, confirming that the speed of light is the same in all directions. The experiment, which involves rotating two optical cavities, is about 10 times more precise than previous experiments – and a hundred million times more precise than Michelson and Morley’s 1887 measurement. The laws of physics appear to be the same for all processes occurring in laboratories moving at constant speed and for any orientation – a fundamental concept known as Lorentz symmetry. It takes its name from the Dutch physicist Hendrik Antoon Lorentz, who was attempting to explain the null result of Albert Michelson and Edward Morley’s famous experiment. Then in 1905, Albert Einstein used Lorentz symmetry as a postulate of his special theory of relativity. Lorentz symmetry has so far withstood the tests of time, but in recent years physicists have begun to question whether it is indeed an exact symmetry of nature. They are motivated primarily by the development of string and loop quantum gravity theories, which try to make gravity compatible with quantum physics and allow for the possibility that Lorentz symmetry might not hold exactly. In order to develop these and other theories, physicists need to know if and when the speed of light is different in different directions. Michelson and Morley tackled this problem by splitting light into two beams that travel at right angles to each other, are reflected by mirrors and then recombined with each other to produce an interference pattern, which depends on different lengths of the two paths. A change in this pattern as the interferometer is rotated would suggest that the speed of light is different in different directions." more at link.

I don't accept that one needs to believe in any God, of any persuasion to be "good" Some "true believers" of one form or another are the biggest, baddest, most evil ratbags in the world: Some of them are decent nice good people: Some Atheists are the biggest, baddest most evil ratbags in the world: Some are decent, nice good people.

No more then the observed rotation of the earth has on the many man made Satellites orbiting, and the Moon.

I'm still of the opinion [for what it is worth as an amateur] that this is rather superfluous at best. You mentioned DanMP, that this does not dispute GR but aligns with it, and yet you claim that we live in a 3D universe, rather then a 4D universe, and that spacetime is invalid [the principal postulate of GR] or words to that effect. And while I'm glad your hypothetical is devoid of maths [as I am mathematically illiterate] I also accept that maths is the language of physics and a requirement of any potential theory/model.You also raise the issue of time travel. Time travel of course is evident by tiny amounts everytime an astronaut returns from the ISS. Forward time travel is totally demonstrable. https://plus.maths.org/content/time-travel-allowed In your extensive detailed rundown on your hypothesis, while claiming inspiraling BHs may be caused by DM, I fail to see any mention of gravitational radiation or ripples in spacetime. And what about observationally verified evidence of BHs? There would be no DM congregating around a BH as it would all be swallowed. How does that explain dormant BHs and the subsequent spacetime curvature? Length contraction as verified under relativity also is not mentioned. My own feelings and as I already mentioned, is that it appears superfluous at best, and contrived at worst, and in essence while perhaps explaining exactly what GR does, it does not explain anymore. And for any incumbent theory [GR] to be displaced, the new hypothesis needs to explain more and make further predictions, or falsify that incumbent model. Agreed. My first comment was in regards to his claim that GR was not logical. I was not aware at that time that English was not his first language. I agree that while anti GR "experts" and anti "science in general experts" are a dime a dozen here and elsewhere, that certainly DanMP does not at this stage appear to be one of that brigade nor his detailed rundown of his hypothesis.

Wow! I wasn't aware of life spans that long. Thanks for the clarification. Something else learnt today!

With what I have read, you seem to be saying that DM somehow is the cause of time dilation. I would add that in a particle accelerator there is no interaction with DM, and of course time dilation is only observable from another frame of reference...Everyone in any frame sees his or her time run at one second per second. And what about length contraction? I'm no professional but your DM relativity seems rather superfuous. ps: and yes certainly I should read all your lengthy post.