re: Dark matter and dark energy.

quote:

---

Yes, I'm aware of the "evidence" for dark matter, which is that currently accepted models for how gravity work show that, for galaxies and other supermassive objects to behave the way that they do, they should contain orders of magnitude more mass than what we observe them to have.

---

Yes, evidence in science is only that which is observable.

quote:

---

The examples that you included in your post are just variations on that theme.

---

These examples are the only evidence, indirect as they are, that an unknown entity scientists are labeling dark matter is exerting gravitational influence upon known matter. They seem to be quite strong, however, since they occur everywhere we look in the Universe.

It should be said at this point that the term "dark matter" is being used by scientists merely to designate an unknown entity. It does not imply that any properties other than the exertion of gravity is known or, god forbid, assumed.

A scientist doesn't use the word "assumed" because it implies a lack of evidence. Rather, he can hypothesize from observations. However, he must be ready to defend his proposal or face humiliation. The scientific community can be vicious and doesn't take kindly to anyone who seeks notoriety or self gain, especially at the expense of the scientific method. Religion and politics may tolerate grandiose personalities but science doesn't. Even the great Stephen Hawking is eroding his stature within the scientific community with some of the bullshite he's feeding the lay public regarding the perils of alien contact, for example. It's difficult to blame him for using his stature to make money, but that's the nature of the standards for scientists.

quote:

---

Now, since the models don't match with observed reality, there are only two possible conclusions that can be drawn: either a) the models are wrong or b) we aren't observing reality properly. Astrophysicists have chosen to go with answer "b" and have assumed the existence of an invisible, undetectable, undefinable substance called "dark matter" whose supposed properties are revealed solely by the amount of error in the models. The way we know how much "dark matter" a given galaxy supposedly contains is by solving the relevant equations of motion for it and then seeing how much they don't match with the galaxy's actual behavior. If that isn't the very definition of a "solution of the gaps," then I don't know what is

---

.

Science is eternally malleable. Every discovery causes more questions to be asked. Words such as "reality" and "conclusions" evoke a sense of absolutism. They can only be subjective and aren't useful in describing observations or principles.

Also, when you say, "Astrophysicists have chosen to go with answer 'b'and have assumed the existence of an invisible, undetectable, undefinable substance called 'dark matter' whose supposed properties are revealed solely by the amount of error in the models," you are implying that a majority of scientists are endorsing aspects of dark matter. This just isn't so.

First, no assumptions are being made. That's unscientific. Also, the only property that is proposed and supported by observation is a gravitational exertion by the unknown entity.

quote:

---

The other conclusion - that current gravitational models are wrong - is obviously scary for astrophysicists and so no one wants to propose it, especially because no one has yet come up with a better model that continues to work at supermassive scales (you don't make a name for yourself as a scientist by saying, "I just don't know.").

---

The mark of a great scientist is his ability to say, "I don't know." I can't imagine why you would think otherwise. Furthermore, anyone who wants to make a name for himself in science knows that he must first impress his peers with his knowledge and discoveries. That isn't easy, to say the least.

quote:

---

Since the two men who have done the most to shape humanity's current understanding of gravity (Newton and Einstein) are considered two of the greatest geniuses that ever lived, this is not particularly surprising. Men like that don't come along in every generation, or even every century. So, while we wait for the next paradigm-shifter, some very smart people will sit and play with their pet theories about how to fill the gaps in the models. The true genius, however, will be the man who doesn't fill the gaps, but eliminates them.

---

I have only two words as a response, Edward Witten. The world's leading string theorist, he makes Stephen Hawking seem like a high schooler by comparison.