Strange Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 nor is it discoverable by any other means, Did you miss all the other evidence that you have been given for dark matter? Is that why you have refused to provide an explanation? Do you need it listing again? What does it mean anyway, non baryonic matter? It means matter that is not made of baryons (protons and neutrons, for example). It also cannot be charged leptons. Dark matter has infected physics to the point where it is virtually impossible to find a paper that does not try to justify what it is. That will be because of the large amount of evidence. And because it solves a number of other problems in physics. Here is made up graph showing a very rough mass distribution, keplerian orbit vs. my flipped orbit. Instead of showing yet another made-up graph, why can't you do the quantitative analysis that has been requested? Is it because you are not able to? Or have you done it and found it does not support your theory? Formula used in my plot was 1/r^2 for the red line No it isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 Did you miss the part where I finally divided by 1 electron? This tread is pathetic, you guys are more concerned about what I know than what I say. Just flip the freak'n rotation curve upside down and voila there is your measured rotation curve. It's absolutely rediculous that I should be told to read up on dark matter when the stuff isn't required for my theory, nor is it discoverable by any other means, What does it mean anyway, non baryonic matter? Dark matter has infected physics to the point where it is virtually impossible to find a paper that does not try to justify what it is. Here is made up graph showing a very rough mass distribution, keplerian orbit vs. my flipped orbit. rotcurve.png and here is just one of hundreds of galaxy rotation curve plots, and guess what?....its flipped! RotationCurve_2403.png My solution doesn't require any of your learned science, as I said before it's junior school addition and subtraction. Galaxy rotation curves are a gaping big hole in physics, it's nothing like the subtleties of special or general relativity, those Keplerian curves are so far off the mark, that even a child can see it. I quote the subject heading again.. dark matter, get over it! Steven Formula used in my plot was (mass inside radius)/r^2 for the red line, and the sum of velocities from the red line for the green line (actually negative, but shown here as positive) Incorrect again. Galaxy rotation curves does include GR. It must do so to account for speed of particulates and speed of each particle mass. Whose maximum is c, Force of gravity is not instantaneous throughout the galaxy. That's another problem inherent I. Kepler and Newtonian mathematics. Rotation curves are calculated via the virial theorem, density waves, and the NFW profile along with GR and the ideal gas laws. It is not based accurately on a single formula posted in this entire thread. None of the formulas used throughout this thread account for the speed of information. The NFW profile is the isothermal sphere distribution surrounding the entire galaxy. This sphere has been mapped in both observational influence via x rays and mathematically. There is plenty of indirect observational EVIDENCE for dark matter. Via its indirect interactions. The speed of c and information is why I asked you to perform a redshift analysis on your model. If you had you would have learned that none of the Keplarian or Newtonian formulas correctly map the influence of gravity at a specific moment in time. Newtons unviserval gravitational formula has this basic flaw. This is what your basing your graphs on. A formula that in inherently inaccurate and not the one currently used today. Take for example the Sun Earth baycenter based on the shell theorem. The calculations is the barycenter right minutes ago. Not it's current location. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klaynos Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 ! Moderator Note Two lines that look similar doesn't meet the requirements of this forum.Please do not reintroduce this topic. If you feel at some later point that you can address the evidence requirements you may petition a moderator to reopen this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts