A Darkness In the Sky A Darkness In the Sky / Items

Study plunges standard Theory of Cosmology into Crisis

Get Feed
Study plunges standard Theory of Cosmology into Crisis
Description
As modern cosmologists rely more and more on the ominous “dark matter” to explain otherwise inexplicable observations, much effort has gone into the detection of this mysterious substance in the last two decades, yet no direct proof could be found that it actually exists. Even if it does exist, dark matter would be unable to reconcile all the current discrepancies between actual measurements and predictions based on theoretical models. Hence the number of physicists questioning the existence of dark matter has been increasing for some time now.

“The only solution would be to reject Newton´s classical theory of gravitation”, says Pavel Kroupa. “We probably live in a non-Newton universe. If this is true, then our observations could be explained without dark matter”. Such approaches are finding support amongst other research teams in Europe, too.

It would not be the first time that Newton’s theory of gravitation had to be modified over the past hundred years. This became necessary in three special cases: when high velocities are involved (through the Special Theory of Relativity), in the proximity of large masses (through the theory of General Relativity), and on sub-atomic scales (through quantum mechanics).
Original URL
http://www.physorg.com/news160726282.html

Comments

  • Public Comments

    • Stephen Lahanas Stephen Lahanas
      6 months ago


      I've been wondering the same thing for about 10 years - being a non-scientist (I work in IT), I'm sometimes surprised by the level or doctrine or dogma that seems to surround many scientific approaches - even when the available evidence doesn't seem to support it.

      What is obvious (to me anyway) is that a lot of folks have gone out of their way to re-interpret evidence to fit their doctrine rather than questioning their doctrine based upon available and highly contradictory evidence. In most cases the simplest solution is the one most likely to be true - in this case the simplest realization is that current theories and formulas are wrong.

      The part that really puzzles me though is why instead of fearing this - those studying the issue aren't inspired by the possibilities this all implies...
      A Darkness In the Sky

      • JDP JDP
        6 months ago


        When a theoretical construct is highly explanatory and predictive (often including of a multitude of actual test results) in most of its elements, scientists are (probably) rightly predisposed to attempt to preserve it from "outliers" / "fringe elements" that it can so far not well explain or contain. Often in the history of science, this has proven to be the right approach, when those "outliers" turned out to be explicable (with a few "tweaks") or to be misconstrued (wrong data / interpretation of the actual data or its implications).
        A Darkness In the Sky

        • James Choate James Choate
          3 months ago


          The real problem here with the neo-Newtonian approach is that no clear replacement theory is available. It's one thing to say we live in a non-Newtonian (really non-Einsteinian) cosmos based on a list of anomalies, it's a whole other issue to provide an alternative that keeps the know effects consistent while folding in the problematic observations. And then this new theory has to be predictive. At this point there is no candidate for this.
          A Darkness In the Sky
    Add a Comment
Report This

Twine is about discovering, collecting and sharing the content that interests you. Learn More

Join Twine

Stats

First Posted By

JDP

First Comment By

Stephen Lahanas

Tags

Community Tags

Who's Interested In This?

Forgot your password?