What's wrong with physics?

[Subduction Zone]

What? Have you forgotten how *dark matter* was invented without using the strict scientific metod of revising a hypothesis and discarding this when contradicted by observations?

What contradicting observations? You appear to be misinterpreting some of the latest findings, but please, tell us what these observations are and why they refute dark matter.

 

[Native]

Because that isn't how the E&M force works. it is NOT the one producing rotations.

Do you deny this simple and obvious evidence too?

The E&M force described by Maxwell unified *electric* and *magnetic* phenomena, which were previously seen as separate things.

You´re inconsistent and not up to date here.
Hans Christian Ørsted often rendered Oersted in English; 14 August 1777 – 9 March 1851) was a "Danish physicist and chemist who discovered that electric currents create magnetic fields, which was the first connection found between electricity and magnetism. Oersted's law and the oersted (Oe) are named after him".

But Maxwell did NOT, for example, unify E&M with the weak force, the strong force, or with gravity. The first two were unknown when Maxwell worked.

So what? The EM is STILL just the EM and you cannot blame the EM for the lacking skills of scientist to get it all right, including your assumed *occult agency force*

I said:

If you and the entire consensus science cannot define, calculate or percieve the once unified E&M force to count everywhere and no matter where in todays science, it logically points to a serious scientific perception fault and to yet another reason to *What´s wrong with physics* according to this OP thread.

You:

Sorry, but the unification of those descriptions does NOT do what you seem to think it does.

What you think they do or don´t depends whether your points of view are based on real EM observations instead of on *occult forces*.

It does NOT give an accurate description of galactic motion, for example. You need to have gravity for that.

Oh, you mean the *occult agency force* which needs more *occult agency dark forces* in order to patch the *occult agency force* and it´s matemathical calculations which was contradicted in galactic realms in the first place?

II is stunning that the standing cosmological consensus STILL believe on ancient superstitious occult forces here in 2021. No wonder someone like Sabine Hossenfelder and others asks the relevant question:

*What´s wrong with physics*

 

[Native]

Native said: ↑
You forget the galactic history of the invention of *dark matter*

Science is an accumulative process whereas evidence builds on top of other evidence. Thus, one simply cannot base any conclusive argument whatsoever on "Well, several decades ago, ...".

Of course it is important to know of the first notions of a subject in order to get the whole story right. As it is now, this initial "dark matter" in galaxies is hypothesized all over in the observable Universe - only and just because the scientists don´t understand what is going on.

 

[Native]

Native said: ↑
Maybe you should look at the OP in this thread once again in where Sabine Hossenfeld criticise the standing scientific systems itself?
Maybe then you can understand what this OP it´s all about.

Just like what I predicted. That's one more theory of mine that was correct.

night912 said: ↑
2. Saying that I didn't understand what she said, does nothing to show that you understood what she was talking about.

So now you´ve understood that Sabine Hossenfelder criticise the standing physics? About time too

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

What "existing phenomenon" are you talking about? That´s just ONE of the problems Sabine Hossenfelder mention: The "illusive dark ghost stuff" has never been directly detected since it was invented.

Nobody claims it is.

But the detectable effects / manifestations for which it has been "invented", are there and have been measured. It's unaccounted for and requires an explanation. "dark matter" is just a placeholder name for whatever the heck it is that is causing these effects / manifestations.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Nobody claims it is.

But the detectable effects / manifestations for which it has been "invented", are there and have been measured. It's unaccounted for and requires an explanation. "dark matter" is just a placeholder name for whatever the heck it is that is causing these effects / manifestations.

It might be that there is nothing wrong with physics in practice. But rather that we might can't explain everything as a coherent theory as physical theory of everything. So if you accept the idea of falsifiable, then one form of falsification is that there is no coherent physical theory of everything.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Everything.

Think for instants of the Big Bang theory. It is usually illustrated by a begining of a huge explosion of light = E&M frequensies. After a while, '*gravity* is thought to take over and now, the initial LIGHT is forgotten and ignored as the real cause of formation and expansion.

Even their *gravity* is contradicted in this matter with the asumption that the velocity expansion in the universe is assumed to be increasing!?

And then they invented yet another dark thing, *dark energy*

It´s nonsense and intellectual speculations all over the places.

I love how you think you can just throw away a century of research in physics by the world's most brilliant people, with like 5 sentences.

 

[Polymath257]

View attachment 47856
Do you deny this simple and obvious evidence too?

No. But it doesn't prove what you want it to prove.

You´re inconsistent and not up to date here.
Hans Christian Ørsted often rendered Oersted in English; 14 August 1777 – 9 March 1851) was a "Danish physicist and chemist who discovered that electric currents create magnetic fields, which was the first connection found between electricity and magnetism. Oersted's law and the oersted (Oe) are named after him".

Yes, *everyone* who studies E&M knows this. Orsted's work was incorporated into Maxwell's. There was also Faraday's work that showed that changing magnetic fields produce electric fields.

You seem to like this quote, but I'm not sure why you think it is relevant to anything. it is part of the *standard theory*, after all.

So what? The EM is STILL just the EM and you cannot blame the EM for the lacking skills of scientist to get it all right, including your assumed *occult agency force*

I said:

You:

What you think they do or don´t depends whether your points of view are based on real EM observations instead of on *occult forces*.

No, it depends on using the known equations for E&M and seeing if they agree with the observations if gravity is left out. They don't.

Oh, you mean the *occult agency force* which needs more *occult agency dark forces* in order to patch the *occult agency force* and it´s matemathical calculations which was contradicted in galactic realms in the first place?

II is stunning that the standing cosmological consensus STILL believe on ancient superstitious occult forces here in 2021. No wonder someone like Sabine Hossenfelder and others asks the relevant question:

*What´s wrong with physics*

And you think she would agree with your 'solution'? I can assure you that she is pointing out *known* issues that people are trying to deal with. What you propose goes farther away from a solution, not closer.

 

[Native]

Native said: ↑
What "existing phenomenon" are you talking about? That´s just ONE of the problems Sabine Hossenfelder mention: The "illusive dark ghost stuff" has never been directly detected since it was invented.

Nobody claims it is.

But the detectable effects / manifestations for which it has been "invented", are there and have been measured. It's unaccounted for and requires an explanation. "dark matter" is just a placeholder name for whatever the heck it is that is causing these effects / manifestations.

Yes, some *circumstantial measurings* have been made, but NOT looked at from other perspections but "gravity", which is just 1/4 part of the fundamental forces, and the weakest part too.

If cosmological scientists don´t include all forces, they inevitably will have to insert unexplained *forces and energies* where the other 3/4 EM fundamental forces are at play. And this is just what they do all over the places in the observable Universe.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Native said: ↑
What "existing phenomenon" are you talking about? That´s just ONE of the problems Sabine Hossenfelder mention: The "illusive dark ghost stuff" has never been directly detected since it was invented.

Yes, some *circumstantial measurings* have been made, but NOT looked at from other perspections but "gravity", which is just 1/4 part of the fundamental forces, and the weakest part too.

If cosmological scientists don´t include all forces, they inevitably will have to insert unexplained *forces and energies* where the other 3/4 EM fundamental forces are at play. And this is just what they do all over the places in the observable Universe.

Now do this: Cosmological science will not grow if *alternate ideas* aren´t taken interestingly and treated politely.

Me: What if we can't make a coherent physical theory of everything? I.e. they as your "they" can't do it, but neither can you?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Yes, some *circumstantial measurings* have been made, but NOT looked at from other perspections but "gravity", which is just 1/4 part of the fundamental forces, and the weakest part too.

The effects we are talking about, are gravitational forces.

If cosmological scientists don´t include all forces, they inevitably will have to insert unexplained *forces and energies* where the other 3/4 EM fundamental forces are at play. And this is just what they do all over the places in the observable Universe.

Silly, silly expert scientists with IQ's of barely 150...

I suggest you put them all out of their misery and just go and collect your Nobel already. Then organize a big symposium and invite them all so that you can lecture them with your superior intellect. You can explain them right down to the detail how dumb they are for missing what you apparently figured out so easily - even without those higher studies at places like Harvard and what not.




//end-sarcasm

 

[Polymath257]

Native said: ↑
What "existing phenomenon" are you talking about? That´s just ONE of the problems Sabine Hossenfelder mention: The "illusive dark ghost stuff" has never been directly detected since it was invented.

Yes, some *circumstantial measurings* have been made, but NOT looked at from other perspections but "gravity", which is just 1/4 part of the fundamental forces, and the weakest part too.

If cosmological scientists don´t include all forces, they inevitably will have to insert unexplained *forces and energies* where the other 3/4 EM fundamental forces are at play. And this is just what they do all over the places in the observable Universe.

And if *you* don't include *all* forces, your explanation will be broken as well.

In other words, you need to include gravity.

What you don't seem to understand is that cosmologists *do* use E&M in their explanations *where appropriate*. For example, in understanding the dynamics of gas and dust clouds irradiated by a hot star, the E&M effects become important and plasma physics is used.

Around neutron stars or black holes, the high temperatures naturally produce plasmas and E&M is included in our understanding of what is going on.

Galactic astronomers *routinely* measure the strength of the magnetic fields around our galaxy as well as others.

So E&M is NOT something that is neglected. It is used *when appropriate*.

But it simply doesn't produce the effects you seem to think it does on a galactic scale. For example, the galactic E&M fields are *way* too weak to actually affect the motion of stars in any detectable way. We know how strong they are and the effects of fields of those strengths.

You like to point out gamma rays from near the core of our galaxy, not realizing that those are produced in a very high energy and strong field situation. And they are NOT ignored by standard astronomers: in fact, they give good clues to what is going on near the core. But, again, they are irrelevant to the motion of stars thousands of light years away.

What you pretty consistently fail to understand is the difference in strength of different E&M fields. You point to known effects around neutron stars, for example, where the E&M fields are immense and then claim the same effects apply on the galaxy as a whole, where the fields are incredibly weak. Those differences are relevant.

The E&M field produced in a current by an ordinary battery is MUCH larger than that of the galactic magnetic field.

 

[Native]

Native said: ↑
View attachment 47856
Do you deny this simple and obvious evidence too?

Polymath257 said: ↑
Because that isn't how the E&M force works. it is NOT the one producing rotations.

At least it proved you´re argument plain wrong.

No, it depends on using the known equations for E&M and seeing if they agree with the observations if gravity is left out. They don't.

Have you tryed this? Have others tryed it? (And don´t give me MOND once again).

And you think she would agree with your 'solution'? I can assure you that she is pointing out *known* issues that people are trying to deal with.

Yes she´s dealing with the endless problems of modern cosmology and physics, much of these self made problems.

What you propose goes farther away from a solution, not closer.

Said by one who think superstitious forces rules the Universe Remember: You know per "scientifical" definition only of the 4 % of the Universe.

 

[Native]

The effects we are talking about, are gravitational forces.

Yes, if all E&M forces are left out, you only have the *occult agency of gravity* left which need lots of other "dark stuff and things" to "work".

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Yes, if all E&M forces are left out, you only have the *occult agency of gravity* left which need lots of other "dark stuff and things" to "work".

what is it about gravity that you find so "occult"?

 

[Polymath257]

Native said: ↑
View attachment 47856
Do you deny this simple and obvious evidence too?

Polymath257 said: ↑
Because that isn't how the E&M force works. it is NOT the one producing rotations.

At least it proved you´re argument plain wrong.

Have you tryed this? Have others tryed it? (And don´t give me MOND once again).

Yes, of course. Have you? I can get you the numbers on the strength of the electric and magnetic fields for the galaxy if you want.

The basic problem is that most matter is electrically neutral. That means that neither electric nor magnetic fields have a large effect. As an example, take a refrigerator magnet (far, far stronger than the galactic magnetic fields) and see what effect it has on a piece of paper nearby.

Yes she´s dealing with the endless problems of modern cosmology and physics, much of these self made problems.

Said by one who think superstitious forces rules the Universe Remember: You know per "scientifical" definition only of the 4 % of the Universe.

But we know that pretty well.

 

[Polymath257]

Yes, if all E&M forces are left out, you only have the *occult agency of gravity* left which need lots of other "dark stuff and things" to "work".

And it is *still* needed if E&M forces are included. The problem is that most matter is *neutral* for the E&M forces.

Do you deny that? If so, take a refrigerator magnet and try to change the motion of anything *other* than a piece of iron (I'm guessing you don't have any other ferromagnetic materials around). Say, a piece of plastic. Or water. Or a piece of paper.

Most materials don't interact strongly with electric or magnetic fields. And you can determine that yourself with a few magnets and a bunch of ordinary materials.

 

[Native]

You like to point out gamma rays from near the core of our galaxy, not realizing that those are produced in a very high energy and strong field situation. And they are NOT ignored by standard astronomers: in fact, they give good clues to what is going on near the core. But, again, they are irrelevant to the motion of stars thousands of light years away.

This is a typical answer from a *gravitationalist*: "There are huge EM forces at play at galactic centers, but they don´t have anything to do with the formation in galaxies".

Excuse me but you have to do better than such ignorant and disconnected statements.

The E&M field produced in a current by an ordinary battery is MUCH larger than that of the galactic magnetic field.

May I remind you that your *occult agency force* is by far the weakest one? How much of your weak force is needed in order to rotate galaxies compared to the stronger EM forces?

 

[Revoltingest]

The problem I see with physics is that it just can't
get things right the first time. It took so long for Newton
to come up with gravitaiton. Then they had to invent
new things like "precession" to explain observed phenomena.
And then the speed of light turned out to be wrong, depending
upon how it was measured. All that led to someone inventing
"space time".

Physics is a failure because it just can't ever get anything right.
Just a series of swings & misses...requiring continual tweaking
to get theories to fit reality. (Note that tweaking differs significantly
from twerking, which is yet another unexplained phenomenon.)

But we have an alternative...
Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity With New 'Intelligent Falling' Theory

 

[Native]

The basic problem is that most matter is electrically neutral.

Try to convince the atoms of that.