A team of astronomers recently discovered the palest galaxy, which contains the highest proportion of dark matter among the galaxies discovered so far
The Segue 1 galaxy is one of over twenty small satellite galaxies that surround our Milky Way. It is a pale galaxy, a billion times brighter than the Milky Way. But despite the low number of visible stars in Sage 1, the mass of this galaxy is several thousand times greater than the stars and visible matter in it. This means that the rifle is made of a mass known as "dark matter". "Sig 1 is the most extreme example of a galaxy containing only a few hundred stars, but a relatively large mass," says Marla Geha, professor of astronomy at Yale University and the main author of the study about Sig 1.
Gaha and her colleagues ordered about half of the satellite galaxies surrounding the Milky Way. These objects are so pale and contain so few stars that at first glance they can be confused with globular clusters - a tight mass of stars that also surround the Milky Way. However, by analyzing the light coming from the objects, using the telescopes at the Keck Observatory in Hawaii, the researchers determined that these objects are actually galaxies, but they are very pale.
When astronomers observed the ultra-faint galaxies, they expected them to have a correspondingly small mass. Instead, they found that their mass is between 100 and 1,000 times greater than the apparent mass. Invisible dark matter must be responsible for this difference.
Although dark matter does not emit or absorb light, scientists can measure its gravitational effect on ordinary matter and believe that it makes up about 85% of all the mass in the universe. The discovery of ultra-faint galaxies such as Sig 1, which are also filled with dark matter, provides clues to how these galaxies formed and evolved, particularly on the small scale.
"These dwarf galaxies tell us a lot about the formation of our galaxy" says Geha. "For example, different theories that try to describe how the galaxy formed predict different numbers of dwarf galaxies compared to large galaxies, so only a comparison of these numbers is meaningful."
Only recently have astronomers discovered how common such dwarf satellite galaxies are, thanks to projects such as the Sloan Digital Sky Scanner, which maps large areas of the night sky in better detail than ever before. In the last two years alone, the number of dwarf galaxies surrounding the Milky Way has doubled from about a dozen to the brightest galaxies discovered during the twentieth century.
Geha predicts that astronomers will discover more satellite galaxies surrounding the Milky Way as they continue to dig into the data. "This is a completely new field. It's a story we're just now starting to decipher," concludes Gaha.
163 תגובות
Yehuda:
Enough with this nonsense.
You can reject things that explain reality and embrace things that contradict you, but don't try to smear me with nonsense.
I don't ignore things and as you have already seen, I know how to calculate the consequences of the pushing gravity theory much better than you and I don't ignore the pressure differences. I do not invent reality or wave my hands to convince. All my words - including the many refutations I found to your words are well-founded and reasoned, and instead of expressing disgust, it's time for you to show some rest of your spirit and shake off the nonsense you cling to even though for many years they have been a support for you (a broken reed).
To Michael
In response 129 you stated:-
"Your particle gas is basically a form of dark mass so the fact that you oppose dark mass is actually ridiculous." end quote,
I strongly reject your words.
There is a huge difference between the dark mass and my particle mass.
While in the dark mass you maintain the feature of gravity and all explanations arising from it are due to gravity, in my idea of particles gravity is almost never created in the large scales and it does not play a role at all and what affects is movement resulting from the pressure differences in the gas of my particles.
This solves the motion of the galaxies, the aging and the accelerated expansion of the universe.
It amazes me that a smart person like you talks about particles but ignores the fact that they can create differences in pressure and movement.
As long as you keep gravitation in your dark mass and explain everything with it, this is absolutely not my idea of particles.
Maybe if you start not to ignore the phenomenon of the gas actually being moving and colliding particles, you will be able to analyze the dark mass differently and then you will see that gravitation is unnecessary.
Or then you will understand and accept my particle idea.
It will take some time, but, you are on the right track.
Happy New Year Michael
I wish with a smile
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Chen T:
Although I don't understand how you want to extract energy from a "restrained" black hole, the answer to your question is no. There is no plan to search in an accelerator for ways to restrain or preserve a black hole.
Hugin and Monin.. of Odin..
Instead of using the letter "l" as a preposition and conjunction, try using "at"
such as
"I respect your advice"
"coincides with mine for cross formations"
And many more scholars who have already realized that you are a student and teach everyone from your wisdom.
No need to exaggerate.
Melody T
Since I am not a follower of black holes, this is a question that would be more suitable for Michael.
to hug
You asked how I knew?
Well, it is due to the evolutionary development of the human male who is in his struggle for survival in order to spread his genes among the fair sex.
If you want, it's male intuition to glory. Yes, there is such a thing too.
And if you don't want to, then it is already written in the scriptures:- An ox knew his buyer and a donkey a manger for its owner.
So good night Hugin, and not to be angry with Michael, I'm sure he's trying not to lash out.
sweet Dreams
And of course happy, happy new year
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Yehuda
how did you know?
Michael and Yehuda: Is the accelerator supposed to discover some way to preserve a black hole? I mean can a black hole be restrained even theoretically? Imagine the enormous energy that could be generated if we had spacecraft guts and cars based on controllable miniature black holes.
Higgs
I didn't exactly understand what you were talking about.
To Michael
As far as I know, Hugin is currently busy with things several degrees more important and I don't want to disturb her in the slightest.
Good night Sabdarmish Yehuda
Yehuda:
I never talked about basics.
Hugin suddenly started talking about it for some incomprehensible reason.
That's why I didn't claim that there are 144 elements either.
Ask Hogin to explain (but don't expect to understand).
Hugin and Monin.. of Odin..
I will try as much as I can to avoid missing your mood with my advice.
If your majesty is good and my advice is good in your eyes, listen only to this and I agreed.
I put it in my heart that in all your typing and the abundance of lights of your words you did not use the word even once
One is two letters long in total. But in my opinion, as small as it is, its importance is great.
A word that includes all 22 letters of the Hebrew language. from beginning to end. You probably already guessed.
"A……T" meaning="you".
Admittedly, I remember one short man who, standing on his head, insisted with his hand on their right to exist
However, on the cliff of times, it is appropriate that these "shovels" do not take their place.
I will advise you if you agree to start and use this important word and the blessing will be upon you.
Try it and see its good effect on the readers of the sayings Ha'sfer from the spring of your keyboard and most of your names.
Haha organic elements
Michael
And you don't have a perfect table of elements to have 144 elements
It seems to me that they won't even reach a hundred and thirty and also all those above 120 will only exist for a fraction of time before they disintegrate. So enlighten me, where do 144 elements come from?
Michael
As a master principle of nature: the table of the total of all the elements should be 144 as perfect. So far we have not reached the rule of extraction-discovery.
Michael
72 + 72 = 144 (in summary) + 22 ?A-T.
In any case, happy new year, and use what you have according to your measurements in the right and good way.
Hugin
Hugin:
I don't know for sure which powers you mean.
The number of powers that are important to me is 164 and I make sure - I always made sure - to use them correctly.
Dear Higgs
Hello... I'm...
Always a local respects your advice if they are as good as the lemon scent.
And why didn't you just receive my blessing??
I wrote you "in super-morality" a special blessing for your improvement. What's wrong with that both for you and for the unknown particle at the same time?
You have a very central role in the campaign. (I'm really not being cynical - seriously)
A very happy and blessed new year to you, and to all critics of science.
Hoggin: In tomatoes and clear.
Hugin and Monin.. of Odin.. and all
Is there no way you could answer in a more respectful way?
Respect others and they will respect you.
And if you continue to ignore and focus only on your bubble, they will stop treating you.
And no more except that in the end they will send their poisonous keyboard arrows at you
And he will roll you in feathers and tar and send you after honor to dark glaciations and oblivion.
You must have discovered yourself that the site's residents are not can killers and have a dozen reasons why you would challenge them.
May it be in your heart that tomorrow is Rosh Hashanah and here are all wise Jews who will light up their faces to you
It will not cause you much harm if you also show your face with a smile and a smile.
Higgs: Your praise.
Hugin and Monin.. of Odin..
Why do you compete with preacher threats? not for you
Michael
He is Jehovah and you will do your work: you have received 144 powers to serve correctly.
Any incorrect use is a double-edged sword in any direction.
do well
Hugin
Higgs:
Response 113 is neither flirty nor flattering.
She is arrogant, abusive and stupid.
As I said - as long as her responses were content with condescension, crass phrasing and bland meaninglessness.
Michael
In my opinion, she simply complimented you in a flirtatious sense and was hurt by your response.
Higgs
I don't think that the Indian character is the source of inspiration for the characters that my place presents from time to time. In fact, they were presented on the site according to the nature of the events here and in immediate relation to the articles that were and their subjects.
Last night I presented in order to enable a grouping - for the sake of insights - and for later documentation (summaries of a mini-history later).
The *dark matter* has a central meaning to all our affairs.*
As I may have hinted to you many times - I do not play / although the game and the vast knowledge I have been trained and acquired are a major supporting part of the skills of the natives,
As a necessary role bearer for this critical hour.
So, Higgs will continue to gain points - it is likely that there are smart people who link things in a productive way only! (That's the only way to see the big picture).
*If any mysteriousness is interpreted from my words despite the enormous discovery in collaboration with you - so that you can see the huge picture, it is possible that there is no maturity yet to contain the essentials and filter to the chaff. Another thing that illustrates how much my work
Very complex, very branched and entraps on many levels.
Hugin: The firstborn of the barracks.
Higgs:
I, at least, am not offended by gossip, but accusations against me and stupid condescension are a special kind of gossip that I do not intend to accept.
Did you read the comment from which the debate started here?
As long as it was just a joke and even as long as it was only pretending to be lifted up from the people it was tolerable (from the root of suffering) but here it has crossed the line and I don't know why you think it's a "nice decoration".
Hugin:
Everything known to each of us he learned in one way or another, by himself or with the help of a teacher.
No one here learned anything from you. It is true that if we wanted to take a course in impersonation and conceit, you could be our teacher, but these are topics that are not of interest to the typical visitor of this site.
Hugin and Monin.. of Odin..
I actually think it's nice that you decorate the site, it adds interest without you, it's a bit dull lately.
A little Newegg horoscopes and angels, magicians and fairies won't hurt. According to your length and most of your responses, it is certainly possible to appreciate the effort you put in in good faith from your point of view at least.
There is no reason for others to be offended even if they think that this is nonsense, there is a place for all comments in my opinion. After all, without argument there is no interest and without interest the site will turn into an arid desert with no surfers.
Continue your enterprise including all the collection of your many names. But don't expect us to memorize them as if you were the Indian goddess of a thousand faces.
I think the exaggeration here is celebrating.
not cool.
Not in anyone's honor.
There are things you will have to learn on your own.
Hugin
Chen T:
Don't *know* anything about it.
It is hypothesized - according to the observations - in which you see that all parts of the universe are moving away from each other, that the entire observable universe - the one that can have an effect on us - began with the big bang.
There is a lot of speculation talking about different expansions where the observed universe is only a fraction of what is really there.
Michael, she doesn't deserve a serious response since she doesn't react like that. All the readers of the site know who you are and who she is.
A question for Yehuda, Avi and Michael: How do we know that the Big Bang was the beginning of the entire universe and not just a part of it? In other words, where did we get from the seven big bangs that were not already developed stars and galaxies? How do we know that there are no large and small reparations happening today?
Hugin:
And what am I dirtying, according to you?
Is it because I'm telling the truth?
Know that to me lies are dirt.
Michael
You mess up big time. Shame on you.
Chen T
If you have already entered the "dark matter" with the rest of us...know your place.
Hugin: In matters of Apollo-darkness-speaking spirits or not you should be.
All the best - have a good week
Happy New Year to the good nature.
is not that a loss?..
Hugin:
Enough with the nonsense.
I don't know anything about your place but I already know quite a bit about you.
I identify myself here on the website with my name and my name is a permanent name (on various occasions I even mentioned my family name here, as you know).
You identify here with a fake name and sometimes change it for various reasons.
In the current correspondence you have changed it several times to look like several people who all support your stupid attack on me.
This is not called honesty, but lying and impersonation.
When you talk about not calling from a secret number, it's just funny.
Since you brought up the topic, I'll expand here so others know what you're talking about:
Following your misunderstanding in which you thought I said about someone (Yenon who argued with any reasonable person, I think) that he denies the Holocaust, you sent an SMS to Roy asking him to tell me to call you at a certain phone number because things just make you angry.
I called this number from a confidential number (I just used *43) so that this matter of telephone conversations between us would not become a routine. Here on the site, at least, I can choose if and when to respond but I knew if I gave you my phone number I risked harassment. that's it. There was no lie here and there was no pretense here.
Your ridiculous claim that I tend to lie to myself is as pretentious and baseless as your other statements.
You have no way of knowing this and I, already an authority on the subject myself, tell you that this is not the case.
Your attempts to deceive the readership here by impersonating, on the other hand, any visitor to the site can see and happily - you cannot erase the decisive evidence of this, which you provided in this correspondence.
Yehuda:
I'm not shooting myself in the foot.
I brought up the analogy between the faint mass and particulate gas a long time ago in exactly the opposite direction, when I told you that your particulate gas is actually a type of dark mass and therefore the fact that you oppose dark mass is actually ridiculous.
What else?
The dark mass the physicists are dealing with is consistent with the observations and the dark mass you are talking about contradicts them. That's all the small difference.
Correction of an error in my last response:-
The escape velocity from Earth is 11.2 km per second. And not 11.2 tm/s
Where did the T get to God solutions!
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Hugin, Michael and Yehuda are respectable people who usually do not share the same point of view, but argue point by point in a matter-of-fact manner. I thank both of them for devoting their time to detailed answers because the way they argue often makes me wiser than the article itself.
You, on the other hand, feel that you are God's representative on the site of infidels and know what true wisdom is after you admit your ignorance.
Arrogance is not a moral act, and since you are well versed in the intricacies of Kabbalah, you may have heard that such an act does not bring you closer to God/ to the truth/ to a higher spiritual level.
So please, stop.
If you have nothing to contribute to knowledge and nothing to ask, spare us the speeches and preaching.
Regarding the particle accelerator, if it could harm and create a black hole, I would not be able to write these lines. I understood this from Michael and Yehuda and other experts.
Regarding science in general and the importance of the results: if there was a contradiction between scientific research and its results and the divine decree, the believers would surely be cavemen, lest they blaspheme his name.
Hence, I can only assume that your cave is well connected to the internet..
To Michael
As I always say, you are sometimes right.
I calculated the escape velocity from the galaxy which is apparently about 350 km per second relative to 11.2 tm per second from Earth so that your dark mass particles will have difficulty escaping from the galaxy but will be able to do so from Earth.
But you're shooting yourself in the foot!
You defined the dark mass as a huge collection of particles moving from place to place????
So you are actually defining the dark mass as gas! Just like my particle theory??? Let me know when you agree to also consider the pressure differences that exist in this gas, because then I think the Messiah will come.
As for Hugin's words, they are not easy and I am still delving into them and looking forward to enlightenment.
good week
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Michael
I think the one who should be ashamed is you.
The one who tends to lie to himself is you
Local does not hide-hippa.
A local does not call under a confidential number.
More visible local than anything you've ever known in your life
No local suspects Kosher.
learn inwardly.
Hugin: As a rule, fair play.
Hugin:
Well?
So it turns out that the lie embraces everything - not only the pretensions but also the impersonation.
It's a shame you allowed yourself to sink so low.
Why Roy?
Aren't you a truth seeker? We are! And big!
Learn something for a change.
Hugin / transparent sentence / thimble / pipsifson,
Please stick to the same username, especially when responding in the same conversation.
Thanks,
Roy.
Michael exaggerated
I also want/can't
Ami Bachar
We knew you would fall in the net/blessed is the reflective catch.
this is what I meant
Ami Bachar
Michael
That's the point!
That's the shtick!
Hugin:
Whoa whoa whoa
I'm tired
Ami:
Things that are completely unnecessary are also unnecessary in Gmail
I suggest to my father and the other decision makers on this site to team up with Gmail or another company and use their free platform in order to provide a personal correspondence service between the registered readers of the site. This can prevent oppressive and obviously irrelevant correspondence like the one we see here.
Greetings friends,
Ami Bachar
Michael:
You have to see the whole picture. The small consequences that unknowingly make or destroy the right measure for other precious things that you don't see at the moment.
Arguing with me is not helpful, although I'm glad you respond in any way. So slowly I and everyone else on the site understand more.
Do you really think it's convenient for me to be accused of things I never did in my life?
The history and deep dynastic secrets. I don't want to use concepts here on the site that are common in other circles, I imagine that people who pass by here are familiar.
You must understand that it is enough that someone with a name that overlaps with mine has cross formations and I do nonsense too
I am hurt by this in all the arteries of the upper soul that penetrate into me. There is a limit to my ability to absorb the lack
Evidence of ignorant people, even "intellectuals" and maybe even...it's enough that on the site there were comments between you sometimes to the point of downright shameful disgrace. Yes, I fight for those who shine with precious light.
I'm not saying that I'm not wrong - but my local works every day on testing and recalibration. On study and prayer
Special - so that I myself will not hurt someone else unknowingly.
Do you think it's just that - I wrote all kinds of things for you on the site too??? If you are not able to accommodate
In the light that you must, and try for a second to respect something deep and sublime at this time for your sake and your good. Your suspicion
In me and in others, you are currently sitting as a buffer between us. You must understand that I cannot help but respect your name with all my innermost being. You carry a name that is sacred to the masses. This is a frequency - this is holiness. Names are representations that require responsibility not only for themselves but for everything implied by their names. And behind the names are living and breathing human beings.
This is the Holy of Holies!! It is not just a matter of statistical calculation. We are not just thoughts, we are not just formulas
We are not just names. Everything and everything has a deep binding meaning beyond the casual assumption..
You insisted that a certain person on the site bring the results of an "experiment".. We don't do experiments on others!!!!!
It's a shame. A person should try for himself!!! And not look for hitchhikers to glorify himself!!! For himself only. That was it. It's over.
I don't like the accepted exploitation in the name of "science"..the "theory"..sacrifices for the sake of humanity..
It puts me off - always put me off -
You are not my experimenter here. And I am not flattering you. I recognize your inner nobleness more than you do
able to understand at this time. In fact, I recognize the inner noble value in everyone. For my sake (and my dear
,native
I also have a sharp eye for subtleties. And I must also be innocent. And what can I do and my words are indeed transparent as crystal-people
They see themselves through me - it's scary to the shadows - it's not scary when the heart is really clean. I'm sorry if the "phenomenal" intelligence inherent in me threatens you or others - but I have no intention of downloading
myself to please. Woe to me and to all that is dear if I give up this critical station in which we are now.
Do you think I don't feel like going back to my favorite books? Will it work if I run away from responsibility?
There are stations in life that you cannot escape from the things you were born for and for. There are times when the tasks
are distributed to others, and there are times when, out of necessity, fate guides you to bear the responsibility. But you and everyone should know that in any case we are not alone. But we should be grateful for that. Unnecessary suspicion at this stage
A certain keeps away the real guardians who hold to strengthen and preserve you.
My words are not from my mouth. They are my inner self. They are based on a lot of experience and even at a price that I do not wish on anyone. Not everyone is capable and can get out of every situation - and maybe yes? Awe!!Awe!!!And if you knew how much.
It is possible that if I were an American*** I would talk to you in the landscape and watch *** of callers***
Sorry Michael!!! I'm a real person!! Rooted thoroughbred weekly weekly committed to everything
Ramach Gidi, my organs, my blood, and my being - the point is that my lineage is strictly prohibited from engaging in any politics. Therefore, you cannot see me in any organization!!! This does not mean that I am not found in all people
They do not know me in plain sight and in many places. Here and in the world. Everything is quiet. Although I am not exactly
The quiet nymph. Or the self-righteous modest ones.. and maybe in the end it turns out that's how things sound (the strange laugh of fate).
Go away Michael, I want to throw up from the self-righteousness that causes me to glorify myself - it repels me to the point of "sickness"
Disgusting" and thank God no one should choose me-I'm married-necessity supreme destiny-love-obligation clouds and abysses..
Sweeping. + children. Thank God.
I'm not ready for you to make inaccurate implications about me and others. Along with that, also things I say to you - through you
Not everyone on the site comes down on you. Yes, you have valuable things that I noticed their essence, but it is not enough for the totality required of you for yourself and others.
Maybe that's enough for this stage - I have no desire not to burn my being and no one in my words. Everything is too precious and sacred for me. To remove the chaff and the sting that needs to be removed in order to restore something deep
At the roots of our defective lives at the metaphysical-Israeli-universal-universal level.
Even if you don't understand - everything has a continuous connection - hugging and binding!!!
Hugin: In the hope that Yehuda also turns to the words of the deep for him too (I'm sorry Yehuda, this is a widespread reality) take my words also at a high level to a higher scenario - even if in the mutual biorhythmic affection inherent between us - a destiny greater than all of us is necessary... I did not create you and not myself ..we all are
Sweethearts - as painful and unpleasant as it sounds to the private ego.
It took me years to learn this pure logic - literally out of compulsion not to be a marionette of a deceptive fate. Mere intuition is regrettable. Mere logic is shit! Everything together and remain human
On a daily basis - and also in writing - and everywhere - this is the required thing. (These are lessons) There are people who are perfect - they are probably not here...
Hugin:
You preach and reprimand out of arrogance that in my opinion has nothing to rely on but... (three points!) May you be perfumed.
In my opinion, there is no truth in the things you claim to see beyond what we see and I think that even you should understand (if not in advance then at least after all the correspondence here) that unreasoned moral preaching and an arrogant attitude are not a substitute for saying true and meaningful things.
Michael
The things and my questions arise and emerge from your own words. And I try to go with you and develop with you the issues that are asked here.
You see in "light," the words you write. Is it possible that you actually live on the same planet and even have a homeland in which I live, exist, breathe - but in fact our realities are completely different as if we are actually under one sky - the geographical location of Israel - latitude /Known Longitude: Multiple Dimensional Dreams.
It is possible that different types of people see from the same place from the same state completely different degrees of being
You are bound by a screen of physical vision only. Or - and this is the "scary" thing to really see the "essence"
which is the headstone-source of being-inner mother-inner spirit-constant emanation-life energy-
Cradle of procreation-the core of things-primordial light spirit-supporting entity-unmediated/and intermediate intelligence.
All of this is out of hand as long as it is not clean and not mature enough to respect and appreciate, and when there is no respect for the essence of anything
It is not possible to "get" the intelligence of the attributed thing.
You are going too far: hiding behind formulas and numbers when you call it "logic".
Everything beyond the mental screen frightens you to death. You say: "I think - I exist".
It is true!very true !up to…………….the developmental level that you are betraying the source of your soul!the spirit
that brought you into the world! The spirit of eternity that you are a particle carried in it. An important particle, a "thinking" particle, a contributing particle, etc.
Michael: It is unpleasant to say - you have betrayed the spirits that brought you here - you have betrayed the infrastructure of the sources that have fed you generations upon generations throughout the vast history.
Excessive pride = blind to everything and essence.
Now, science???hahahaboona accelerates to discover the bang!!!the essence??????where do you live?
Where did you get to????You are the sting of the chaff.
Personally - I'm ashamed at all that my place is forced to be in your "virtual" partition hahaha
Such shame has never been born..shame and disgrace!!! Blindness!!! Rudeness!!! Beasts for the sake of it!!!
Despicable disrespect!!
To be clear: my place abhors spiritual masturbation as much as it abhors logical masturbation and all
Something that has no real respect and integrity for their superior-ancient-and future-subordinate moral value.
I am not an enemy of anyone in my day-to-day life.
This is a fake course of extremes in every direction. Words are written on the same frequency of extremism
These. And therefore each one will take only his own part of the total of the things that have just been said through my words to Michael.
I have nothing and nothing to do with the lives of the people on the site personally. As a senior freelancer I am doing my job
To tell you through this metal, the word of your spirit - your supreme soul - the spirit of your eternity from wherever you came here and wherever you go. I am not standing at any gate and preaching to you - what's more, my place is heaven on earth - and I have no intention of you destroying the core of the inner sun My
The one who has not yet realized that there is an inseparable connection with the nonsense you do and the universal global metaphysical aggravation caused by it is indeed the eternal criminal himself. And also harms his children and grandchildren..
Hugin: In the name of the arteries and veins that blow inside you - the core of your inner being - found in every particle. In your bones.
I must mention again: I do not have any special power! I do not trade in energy and spirit! I do not trade in anything!
Rani is rich! And when I wasn't rich - I was rich in my mind and spirit - I was always happy in my part. I always knew how to channel everything - I always knew how to say thank you! I always paid if I was wrong! And I always earned back
When I confessed! I can't run away from what I was born with! I love a good life! I love good people! And wisdom is powerful!
In order for you to wake up - for your benefit - for my benefit - for the benefit of the generations who want to live rightly, well and with noble values. And without
All kinds of diseases shown here on the site.
Humanity is facing a difficult test today!! My complacency or yours is out of place right now and never
No.
If you also need to pray - you will have to be independent in this too! No one should watch over you anymore! Prayer is not a trivial thing - it is the mirror for thoughts: what you ask is what you get.
What you like is what you will get. But the things will not come at the expense of putting others down.
That's it for now.
Happy New Year to the good nature.
Hugin:
I did not understand your words/questions
Yehuda:
These words related to the hypothesis that these are very fast particles (much more than 11.2 km per second) and therefore do not impress the Earth too much.
Michael
Energy, bio-energy, evaporated water, ethereal matter, orgone...transparent: sustaining and existing but invisible. Isn't it so?
He also meant Yehuda..assuming he would respond..to his responses.
My question is this: Which light-carrying particle will we detect? Which particle is transparent-invisible? Maybe C
HAVA What is this stuff?? I'm really asking. Is it allowed? Is it a particle? Gravity??
Hugin
To Michael
Regarding your words:- "If there was a given amount of dark mass in the center of the room at a certain moment, then a moment later it would not be scattered in the room, but its particles would pass through the walls in different directions and it would gradually spread throughout the entire galaxy." End quote.
There is some kind of contradiction in this statement. The force of gravity on the surface of the Earth is stronger than in the expanses of empty space around the galaxy.
The question:- Why doesn't the gravity on the earth grab the dark mass and the weaker gravity of the galaxy can grab it?
Shabbat Shalom
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Hugin:
Yes - if you can call it that.
Diffusion in the world of ordinary matter occurs as a result of propulsion involving collisions between particles.
Since, according to the prevailing hypotheses today, the dark mass has no interaction with normal matter or with itself, apart from the gravitational one, then its "diffusion" will only manifest itself in ballistic trajectories - that is - undisturbed movement that is only affected by gravity.
Therefore, it is possible that even if there was a given amount of dark mass in the center of the room at a certain moment, then a moment later it would not be scattered in the room, but that its particles would pass through the walls in different directions and it would gradually spread throughout the entire galaxy.
Michael
You mean dark mass diffusion?
Chen T:
The answer to your question is that we don't know, but it is likely that as Yehuda described - you will not feel it at all - by any acceptable means of sensing - no light, no touch, no charge - nothing. Only gravity.
Since not much is known about the dark mass, it is not even possible to say with certainty that it is possible to concentrate a small amount of it in a limited area - perhaps these are particles that move at very high speeds and are kept in a bounded environment only when their amount is high enough to prevent their escape?
As mentioned - we don't know.
There are indeed hypotheses that say that the dark mass is nothing but an ordinary mass that does not produce light (black holes, stars that have cooled down), but the latest observations indicate that this is not the case because one sees that one dark mass passes without interruption through another dark mass and through ordinary matter during the collision of galaxies.
If the illuminated galaxy reflects the lights embedded in the "physical" world, is it possible to define "dark matter" with the term: "metaphysical"?
If I use this definition in the same equivalency ratio: is the same ratio not valid in all that we are represented and built according to in nature -: for example: the ratio - water and/or on the surface of the earth is similar: seas - seas (= metaphysical 85% + land 15% -+Physical. And so is the ratio between liquids in the living bodies of man 15%+-elements-minerals and the rest 85%-+liquids that is again if we make a parallel to the same nomenclature it turns out that the liquids are: "metaphysical" and the other substances are defined as "physical lights" .
Now I have to ask if it is possible that the "dark matter" is after all actually "liquids"=swamps of the universe..deep water??water=heaven/sea???heaven.
Is it possible to find here the secret of the formation that was not taken into account seriously.
another question:
Isn't the helium emitted from the accelerator the upward-breathing wind that is in the liquid? If it isn't, after all, the net liquid "soup".?
Without the elements (phosphorus for example) and more and more Kahane and Kahane questions for testing.
Hugin: On a very difficult fundamental question. HO
H2OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Are there any sages-sober-supervised..who are ready to enlighten my eyes?
I have to admit: while printing, I try to correct typographical errors... the computer does what it wants... should I send it like this? A few days ago I wrote 3 comments - everything was deleted. I do believe that if
Something is prevented - this is indeed an obstacle to the good. And I see this as keeping according to a higher tuning. And this is also my blessed success every day in everything throughout my life.. This is how true people of light work and live. People of the spirit.
For those who haven't realized yet - I wasn't born today - I'm not the "new age" for a passing fad. This is my real life - it's always been like this - it always will be. I'm proud of my determination all the way despite my opponents and hidden enemies.
I don't stop asking and wondering.
I haven't finished the whole round of contexts and assemblies yet, so in the meantime I'm -also-here.
I used to be angry at the term: "world of correction"..Today I understand that when dealing with "metaphysical" rehabilitation..the world of correction is included in it.
Wishing everyone: 100% all consciousness. 100% internal potential extraction. 100% internal enlightenment.
and what else?
Melody T
Isn't that the whole story, you won't see or feel anything! Dark mass is transparent. Even if there was a lot of dark mass, ten times the mass of the room, you wouldn't feel it either. The only thing that dark mass creates is gravity, but a room or ten rooms is too small a mass for you to feel them.
In short, there is a dark mass in the room, or, there is no dark mass, you will feel nothing.
sleep in peace
Good night
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Question for the experts: If I am in a huge room where there is a very small dark mass. When I look at it, will it be transparent and shine through completely without seeing its borders at all, or will I see a black space in the center of the room with clear borders?
Congratulations on the 'Buchta'.
Michael
Can I talk to the millionaire..Hello..Michael..Is everything alright??
Ohhhh..at this moment you disgraced our people "with the blessing of friends""..Rothschild's..
Hugin: A billionaire in heart and soul:)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Ami:
Punctuation is important.
This is indeed $125,000 more than ever, but since there was no shortage before either, it is not such a fundamental change.
only. Michael, when you write an amount of money, you must mention the word "only" and especially when it comes to such amounts.
With the blessing of friends and now that you have 125 thousand dollars - more than ever,
Ami Bachar
only.
Hugin:
I never stopped responding.
I just do other things too.
Since the last break involved a net profit of over $125,000, I was actually happy about it
point:
Re-read what I wrote and you will see that I did not claim otherwise.
Since not all readers are familiar with all the concepts and since certain accepted concepts can be misleading if they are interpreted literally, there is room for more detail and that is what I gave in my response.
Michael. You're exaggerating a bit. "Red shift" is a concept that describes an extension of the wavelength. Or rather color.
Michael
Say that you secretly like it..aha
And by the way, I'm glad you responded again...to Hugin...
Hugin:
Now that the universe has stopped expanding, it's getting dressed.
The loop and fold are of the tie.
To Judah
You are talking about the temperatures of galaxies. But galaxies are hot suns and between them are vast empty spaces at absolute zero. So how do you measure the temperature of a galaxy?
Besides, you mentioned the background temperature of the universe - 2.73 degrees Kelvin. I believe that the correct term is the background radiation of the universe which is a spectrum of radio waves in the microwave field that is typical of the spectrum emitted by a black body at this temperature.
Nimrod:
Point's answer is correct in principle but may be misleading in details.
The exact answer is that the wavelength increases.
The phrase "red shift" can be misleading when you are in a range of wavelengths that are already much larger than the wavelength of the red color. In fact, to get some "color" you have to shorten the wavelengths and not lengthen them.
But I repeat: he meant the right thing because it is customary to describe the lengthening of a wavelength as a "red shift" because we are used to talking about the wavelengths that the eye sees.
I still maintain that the universe has stopped its expansion, and if it hasn't finished yet, then in two months
We will prove this. In my lips, we enter the "loop" effect and fold "time". Out of this came an exit effect
Controlled. It still needs to be seen whether the activity of the accelerator in Zern helps in releasing "load pressure" on the planet. It does seem that the scientists want to recreate an "explosion" or discover some kind of particles. But in fact
There is a deeper procedure here related to the entire balance in the solar system and the relationships that exist between all the factors and causes.
That's my opinion.
Hugin
Ami:
We don't know how big the entire universe is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Size_of_the_universe
plant hawk:
You started on the right foot.
You ask for help but to get it you attack the one who is supposed to give it to you.
Although I don't feel the need to apologize, you must understand that I also have a life outside of this site and I didn't answer because I was doing other things.
I am not and have never been involved in insulting Yehuda.
I'm just trying to prevent innocent people from being convinced by his false claims because I've seen that when I don't people actually become convinced (because everyone loves the Cinderella story).
Now to your question:
Your starting point is wrong.
The conclusion about the age of the universe does not derive from the age of the most distant galaxies we see.
Moreover, all known galaxies are younger than the estimated age of the universe and we see more and more distant galaxies as our means of observation improve.
Did it really occur to you that someone would define the age of the universe based on the sophistication of our means of observation? This is ridiculous.
So what?
The age of the universe is calculated by "running back" the current state.
That is, you check what the current distances are between the different galaxies and how fast they are receding and "drive" them back in time (of course only in calculation and not in reality) and check when all the distances were zero.
If you want to understand things in depth, you are welcome to read here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_universe
Nimrod,
Light in space propagates red-shifted.
Yehuda really.
After all, the one who swells here more than the universe is you.
What happens to light in such a spreading space? Will the light stretch? Will it twitch? or any other change, it is clear that the geometry of the universe has an effect on the answer (not that this geometry is obvious, as noted earlier).
What is the attitude of the scientists regarding the observation of stars in expanding space?
to the point
You're not a pioneer, you're not even a collector!
You are just someone who expresses himself, and you should not attach too much importance to your words.
"Yehuda, I will be the vanguard to attack you", how pathetic!
Go climb another tree.
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Yehuda, I will be the vanguard to attack you.
The answer you gave to the plant shows what exactly your "theory" about gravitation is worth, since your theory doesn't explain anything, you answer him with answers that give serious theories about gravitation. Soon you will explain to us how the pushing gravity pushes the triangles and curves them.
And for the plant, first of all, this is definitely a good question that many miss because they don't pay attention to the problems in the definitions they hear.
The size of the universe is determined by the age of the universe. And you need to separate the size of the universe from the size of the visible universe.
The size of the visible universe is simply the age of the universe times the speed of light. Indeed, the diameter can be treated as a double. But it should be noted that then certain assumptions are made about the geometry of the space. What is that? For example, there is no obstacle that space-time is spherical and then the universe deceives us and basically what we see from one direction connects with what we see from another direction.
Things are a little more complicated if you take into account the swelling of the space itself. Since space itself has expanded then the size is much more than the age of the universe times the speed of light.
Furthermore, the age of the universe is determined from satellite scans in the macro field. WMAP discovered ancient cosmological events of about 400 thousand years from the time of the Big Bang in the background radiation. And the determination that the age of the universe is 13.7+-0.2 is from the same WMAP scan several years ago.
And if all this still does not prevent that the size of the universe is infinite. And we only see what can be seen in our little bubble.
Following Zemach's question, I would like to ask:
What is the data that supports that the size of the universe is finite?
What is the limit based on?
to plant
Since no one is volunteering, I'll try to confuse you a bit.
First of all, everything you wrote sounds quite logical, and I agree with your words.
But we may be in the minority.
As the number of people I talked with, so were the reactions. So here is an interesting opinion I received from several people.
Well, because the space in which we exist is not so simple and uncertain that the sum of the angles in a triangle on the big scales of such a universe is 180 degrees, then, if you look very well in every direction but really well you will suddenly find that you are looking at your back. Why?, because the universe is not exactly what you and I think is right.
Now cover yourself up with a mask because soon they will attack us because of what I said..
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
hello there,
Is there anyone in the galaxy who can relate to my questions in 76?
Yehuda, Michael, take a short break from insulting each other and give me smart answers.
Thank you, thank you and happy new year to everyone.
Michael forgot about it. Yehud is a serial dodger. He tries to obscure his contradictions with a lot of unrelated text and explanations. And while it is visible, it displays fatigue and neglect.
This is exactly what happens in arguments with people of faith. The facts will not destroy their need to believe.
Michael has a point and the cool commenter
I received your learned responses with appreciation
I hope I didn't take up too much of your time
All the best
Sabdarmish Yehda
Yehuda, what is the relationship between V=g*t and the maximum speed that an object can get from a massive body?
One talks about the change in speed under the influence of a constant acceleration (perhaps also force), and the other is a figure that describes the maximum speed that the Earth can give to a body, or according to subtraction from a body, therefore 11.2 km per second is also the escape speed.
You cannot use the first formula because the force of gravity to the height of the earth is not constant and varies with the square of the distance.
Therefore if you were to use V=t*GM*∫(r^-2) dr and correct me because I am wrong, you would accept that you cannot reach an unreasonable state of free fall speed above 11.2 km/s.
In any case, changing the law of gravity will have no effect because the elliptical galaxy (I forgot what it's called) has very little dark matter in it, and changing the formula of gravity will theoretically create less matter in it than it seems, meaning a contradiction.
In any case, the example that best fits your description of formulas that are correct only in short ranges is really the formula v=t*g which can only be used in cases where the fall distance is negligible relative to the radius of the distance from the center of gravity.
Hello to all site experts,
I have a somewhat complex question that I can't find an answer to anywhere. I'm not a scientist, I'm just a hobbyist
who is very interested in astronomy and its derivatives. The question is this:
According to what we know today, the assumption is that the size of the visible universe is about 13-14 billion light years.
how do you know Because the Hubble telescope, when it looks towards A, is able to "see" galaxies, or quasars, which according to our measurements
We can determine that they are at the said distance (about 13 billion light years) and hence the determination that the size of the universe we know today is indeed about 13-14 m light years.
These assumptions raise two questions in my mind:
A. If the Hubble telescope is directed 180 degrees opposite to observation A, it will also notice celestial bodies
at a similar distance. Is it not derived from this the statement that the size of the universe we see today is about 26
28 billion light years?
Second question: those distant celestial bodies were "there" (in their place visible to us today) about 14 years ago
A billion years. And where are they today, if according to what we know today they are "moving away from us" quickly
A petition that is not that far from the speed of light? cannot be determined based on these facts
that the size of the universe is something like 28 billion light-years + the distance that those distant celestial bodies moved away "from their place"
visible in the last 14 billion years? (unless somewhere around the time the "collapse" began)
Simple logic says that this is indeed the case, but the accepted assumption says that the size of the universe
It is about 13-14 billion light years.
Is it possible to get an explanation in uncomplicated language, which will contradict my words (or confirm, and then I will receive a Nobel Prize...)?
Yehuda:
All I can say to you is: ughhhh!!!! fed up!!!
Believe me I know better than you about the possibility of small differences to create significant gaps and this possibility does not belong to this story.
The illusory vortices and pressure differences that contradict reality do not belong either and your willingness to talk about them without controlling the movement of individual particles no longer inspires amazement but despair.
Anyone interested is invited to read, in addition to the previous link I brought to the discussion on this topic, also the arduous and exhausting discussion in the following link:
https://www.hayadan.org.il/glast-in-orbit-1306088/
To Michael
You claim that this is a big change and not a small change
"The rotation speeds in each of them turn out to be a different function (not in a few places after the point, but in orders of magnitude) of the apparent mass.
The only conclusion that can even be reconciled with this is that there is invisible mass because otherwise you cannot explain why gravity works differently in two galaxies with the same amount of matter." end quote.
And so, you, for the thousandth time, think that a tiny change in formulas can't give a huge change in results in the 100 million fold range? So you are wrong.
It's a shame you read my response (69) only in passing because it is well explained.
And regarding your statement: "You cannot explain why gravitation works differently in two galaxies with the same amount of matter."
You are again wrong and misleading for the thousandth time. The answer is simple.
What will determine the speed of rotation in the galaxy are the pressure differences between its center and its outer side. These pressure differences are determined mainly based on the temperature differences between the center of the galaxy and its surroundings.
It is enough if one galaxy has a temperature difference of one part of a hundred thousand degrees, and in the other two parts of one hundred thousand degrees, for the other to move at twice the speed.
Let's not forget that the change in temperatures between the two galaxies is zero and that the temperature will continue and will certainly be close to the background temperature of the universe - 2.73 degrees Kelvin.
Again, I'm sorry that you read my penultimate response (number 69) only in passing, but that's your right and time is precious.
Despite all the differences of opinion between us
I appreciate you (still)
Good day, and with a smile
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Your latest post shows you don't understand what extrapolation is. There is no difference between assuming that Newton's laws are correct there, and assuming that the laws of light, the sizes of stars and empty space, are correct there and all the way there. And you don't notice it.
to the point
Is that what you have to say after my last response?
Will this give you insight into the quality of my last explanation?
Where did you even see that I mentioned Pushing Gravity in my last response?
If so, thank you, it was very pleasant to meet you.
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Yehuda:
I'm sorry I didn't have the energy to delve into all the things because after a quick skim over them I realized you still don't get the point.
We measure what is happening in other galaxies that are all of similar magnitudes and there is no difference in the measurement ranges we measure in them.
The rotation speeds in each of them turn out to be a different function (not in a few places after the point, but in orders of magnitude) of the apparent mass.
The only conclusion that can even be reconciled with this is that there is mass that is not visible because otherwise you cannot explain why gravity works differently in two galaxies with the same amount of matter.
This is the thousandth time I've said this.
I wonder how many times are necessary.
Yehuda,
Do you know how to solve the equations of general relativity, or are you just confusing your brain with pushing gravity?
To Roy Cezana and Michael.
What I am saying now may surprise you, but I agree with the words ofRoey Tsezana that:-
"The laws that apply in the solar system also apply to the galaxies."
The question is what are the valid laws?
It should be understood that due to uncertainties in measurements that always exist, we cannot be XNUMX percent sure that the formula we use is not slightly different from a superior formula in larger measurement ranges. And I will explain:-
Uncertainty in measurements is a fundamental fact that we cannot get rid of. With the help of precise instruments and controlled environmental field conditions, we will manage to reduce the uncertainty in the measurements, but we will never, and I repeat - never, manage to eliminate it completely!.
And since we can confirm the correctness of the physical formulas only with the help of measurements, uncertainty of the measurements penetrates into the formulas themselves as well.
Therefore, for every physical phenomenon there are infinitely many correct formulas, within the uncertainty of the measurements.
For example, regarding Newton's beloved gravitation formula, we can never know if the correct formula involves the square power of the distance R , or maybe R to the 2.00000016 power, or maybe R to the 1.999999999999999999 power. And don't you dare tell me that blah, blah, blah measurements were made, because even the gravitational constant G could not be measured with an accuracy of more than four digits.
And then we are in a problem - if there are so many possible formulas, then which formula should we use? William of Ockham solved this for us in "Ockham's Razor" which says:-
"If you have two options choose the simple one"
Note that this does not make the simple one more correct because all the options are correct but the simple one is better for reasons of convenience.
Therefore, it is clear that when we come to use Newton's formula, we will choose R to the power of 2. In the gravitation constant G, we will take it as a number with three or four significant digits, for example 6.670 and not some "crazy" number in the style:- 6.67000123498, which is also correct.
And here we come to the most important point! All this is true only within the range of measurements we measured. Beyond the measurement range, and especially if it is a measurement range of a hundred million times, that "simple" Newton's formula may turn out to be incorrect.
New measurements may prefer a different formula like the short ranges, which in the new ranges that were added, maybe give tenfold results?, maybe almost zero?.
So to come and say that the laws of nature are true in the entire universe is true, but which of the infinite possibilities?, is the fact that a certain formula is simple and correct up to a certain range, that should give it an advantage over all the others in the large ranges?.
Since this explanation is fundamental to understanding my way, bring another example
We all know the free fall formula V=g*T
g is the acceleration of gravity. T is the time, V is the speed. It is clear to all of us that this formula is correct and simple, but God forbid we use it in free fall for more than a few seconds only, beyond that the formula must be different because in free fall to the earth, the speed can never exceed 11.2 km per second.
Even the complicated formula that will give us an upper limit of speed of 11.2 km per second is correct within a few seconds but we prefer the simple one.
So I agree that the laws of nature are true in the entire universe, but the fact that you prefer the simple one over an infinite number of others is a mistake! Although it is accepted among the scientific community, I have proven that it may lead to strange conclusions, for example - ten thousand times the required mass instead of the measured one.
The explanation is not complicated, but I am satisfied if it helps. Michael will continue to claim that I did not answer his claims and I will prefer to continue with my issues. For those who want, I will continue and explain and answer their questions, and for those who don't, their honor is placed in their place.
And whoever thinks I'm disrespectful and just insisting, that's his problem.
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Yehuda:
And even here I showed why no change in the (universal) laws of gravitation will not give the necessary result (Mond and the pushing gravity illusion that has been disproved many times are just examples) because as mentioned - according to the findings there will be no universal laws of gravitation that will give the result without a change in local data such as the dark mass and data These (we don't see them at the moment - what to do?) are dark and therefore the only way to get rid of a dark mass (and keep the universal laws of nature) is to replace it with a dark lettuce.
I repeat - I am currently talking about any universal laws of gravitation and not necessarily about Newton's laws. So far you have only claimed that you are not ready to accept the validity of Newton's formula for large distances but you have not claimed that it should not be valid at exactly the same distances where it is valid (in your opinion) here, even in distant galaxies.
All of this has already been explicitly told to you before and you never found a way (other than ignoring) to deal with it. This was also stated in response 6 in this discussion.
In conclusion, I just want to say that in my opinion, your motivation for your statements, which are obviously illogical and have been refuted more than once without a response from your side, is solely your religious attachment to Pushing Gravity.
I think even your disdain for scientists stems from this.
Yehuda,
There has never been an argument (even among physicists themselves) that the dark matter explanation is not exactly the height of elegance: matter that we cannot see or perceive accounts for the vast majority of mass in the universe.
The problem is that this model is accepted because of two basic assumptions:
1. The laws that are valid in the solar system are also valid for the galaxies.
2. According to the same laws, dark matter does exist because we see its results, and they correspond well with the theories that exist around it.
I have already told you before that you can claim that 1 is wrong, and that is indeed what you are doing, but you should understand what the consequences are. When you do this and claim that the laws of physics are not the same everywhere in the universe, you are actually giving an opening to -=every=- an alternative theory. Leave your simple universe, and the idea of particles that defies every law of conservation of energy and momentum that we know. Go straight to the teddies I care that swell the sugary galaxy clusters, defecating in the black holes of the universe.
In short, the problem here is simple. We have a basic set of data, which does not guarantee us that the theories we have formulated are indeed correct everywhere, but it is all we have! When you try to investigate a certain subject, you must come from certain theories and try to disprove or confirm them. The most common theory today is dark matter, and whoever disproves it will gain world fame. But until the scientist comes along to disprove it, there is no point in clinging to the extremes of any alternative theory, because -=all=- or -=none of them=- may be true.
And so I repeat that the dark matter theory may not be elegant, but it is the only one that is compatible with all the laws of nature that we know, and does not require us to brutally distort the laws that we know. Until new laws of nature are discovered, that's enough for me. And once they are discovered, they will not be happier than the physicists who set out to chase the new and most beautiful theory.
point
It seems to me that you don't want to understand. I explained to you how to arrive at the size of the galaxy, not through extrapolation, by the cupids. If you didn't understand, I gave an example just to understand the explanation with the help of Magdalor.
But you don't want to understand, so understand what you want.
And maybe it's convenient for you to slander and say that I don't get to the end of the story?
My explanation has exhausted itself.
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Yehuda.
You don't seem to be getting to the bottom of it. If from your knowledge of a lighthouse you infer a distant planet, you are extrapolating. And that "you don't have a problem with it" is the problem and the contradiction in your words.
To Michael
I recommend you the book by Zafarir Kolat / The dark side of the universe. His opinion is yours on this subject of Dark Mass. In a book of 180 pages, he explains in an excellent way why, in his opinion, the dark mass is necessary. Contrary to what you "incriminate" about me, I will indeed go to the sites you send me and others to. I also went to the site you sent the cool commenter to and I have to admit that he did not add to what I know according to Tzafir's book. There is also a good explanation in Hagai Netzer's book, Noah Barosh/The Universe.
It's a bit insulting that you think my response on the subject of dark mass is baseless and you repeat it endlessly. I think you better take my comments more seriously because I am serious about them.
But what to do?, I don't agree with the dark mass idea.
I went one by one through all the proofs for the dark mass in Zafir Kolet's book and I saw that most of them derive from Newton's distance formula. Once you are freed from her "burden" there is no need for her and the dark mass.
It remains only to see if the idea of particles explains the aging and the accelerated expansion of the universe, and once I see that it is done, what do I have to look for dark mass?, what do I have to look for dark energy and the repulsive force of the void.? It's unnecessary and just "burdensome"
So we won't be able to convince each other, and I'll celebrate the beer alone in a year.
So I don't expect you to agree with my opinion, but I will continue mine.
Please don't underestimate my opinion, because I don't like to answer those who underestimate.
Good night
Sabdarmish Yehuda
to the point
You asked:-
Regarding the extrapolation, for some reason you stated that "Given: the Milky Way galaxy is 100 million times larger…." And why do you have that?
I answered you in response 23 and response 24 but added.
I have no objection to extrapolation, I just don't accept one that works on something that is a hundred million times the base. That is, from gravity in the solar system I will not be convinced of gravity at the edge of the galaxy.
But how do I determine the size of the galaxy, it is not done by extrapolation at all and it is done by the cupids. We know the structure of the cupid and we know the intensity of the light emitted from it. Now it is up to us to check cupids at the edge of the galaxy and according to the intensity of their light obtained I know how far away they are. I have no problem with that.
Just as I am in the sea far from Migdalur, the intensity of its light I know therefore according to the intensity of the light received by me I know how far I am from Migdalur.
If we did not measure the galaxy with this method but with the help of a method that results from an illogical extrapolation, I would not get the size of the galaxy.
It's already night
so good night
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Yehuda, you did not answer my question.
And your evasions evoke in me associations with the evasions of clerics.
I will come back again and briefly.
In response 19, you completely attacked the concept of scientific extrapolation in the context of galaxies.
And I pointed out a contradiction in your words (a serious and fundamental mistake).
Yehuda:
I don't drink alcoholic beverages and beer in general has always disgusted me.
I also don't know what will or won't be revealed in the accelerator and I'm not a fan of gambling, so for no reason I don't think it's appropriate to accept your offer.
To the cool commenter (Yehuda is also allowed to read, but he already had dozens of opportunities and he preferred to pass them up):
The dark matter is a very good explanation for a large variety of phenomena and it explains them all in a consistent way (ie - the same amount of dark matter is required to cause the results observed in the measurement of different things).
There is a lot of material here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter
and in the links from this link.
For the cool cool
The very fact that you say that the explanation of the dark mass is not who knows what, is already an achievement.
And besides the point I say:-
Let's wait and see
Good night
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Yehuda, you are confused.
You think in a completely different way than Michael.
Just because there's an explanation for who knows what (dark mass), doesn't mean you can replace it with a bad explanation (galactic storms)
To Michael
So after reading your comment number 55, it seems to me that you should win a beer, maybe even that will happen much faster, so what do you say, we get involved?
Good night
Sabdarmish Yehuda
To Michael
Further to your response number 47.
It's just important that you know that under no circumstances would I feel disrespected to be convinced and accept your respected opinion. I am a person who, as soon as he is convinced that he made a mistake, is ready to leave his previous erroneous opinions in check, apologize, and move, happily and happily, to new opinions.
Without shame, and without fear.
I even learned that people appreciate you for it!
but ,
but,
Sorry, no dark mass!
And by the way, Michael, how about we intervene over a glass of beer, that they, there in the shaft, won't find the two particles of the dark mass?. We'll give them a year, until next Rosh Hashanah, what do you say?
Good night
In appreciation
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Yehuda:
It's just exhausting.
I don't want to repeat the farce of the courts in which I bring reasoned and proven arguments and you wave your hands and expect us to solve the problems that you don't know how to solve in your Torah.
I don't think you forgot, but you probably hope that there are commenters here who don't know that we already had many discussions on the subject and you never learned to deal with the many refutations of your claims.
I do not understand this approach.
Do you want to base the conviction of people on the fact that they don't know that your claims have been disproved many times?
Remind you of this discussion?
https://www.hayadan.org.il/could-antimatter-be-powering-super-luminous-supernovae-1612072/
Or is it your inability to deal with a collision of only two bodies that is in resounding contradiction with the audacity you have in voicing your claims about astronomical numbers of bodies?
The articles you brought do not explain anything.
In both of them together, the word "Idush" appears exactly once, wrapped in meaningless hand gestures that only show that you don't understand too much in Fetta Morgana either.
That's why they don't even answer the questions I raised here.
I understand that it is difficult for you to part with your favorite theory, but I suggest that you at least behave fairly and do not try to create presentations whose ability to float in the air is based on the fact that those who remember that your words were refuted will forget to answer.
I did
It was an interesting lecture. The structure of the accelerator and how it works was explained. The hall was full to the brim.
We didn't let the lecturer go until the housekeeper turned off the lights for us.
good evening
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Prof. Mark Karliner from Tel Aviv University's School of Physics will give a lecture accompanied by photos, animations and video demonstrations on "Reconstructing the Big Bang - how and for what?"
The lecture, organized by the Association of Friends of the University, will take place on Wednesday, September 24, 2008 at 19:00 PM in the Bar-Shira Auditorium
I'm trying to get there
Bye.
to the cool responder
From time to time I come across enthusiastic commenters like you whose entire response (almost) is full of inaccuracies, and I have to work hard to "cool down" their enthusiasm.
But since I had a midday nap and I'm in good shape, I take on the task of "chilling"
We will go through all your comments in your response, one by one:-
Cool commenter:-Judas, I'm sorry, but I have to remind you that you can't compare winds to galaxies, because on earth there is a changing work of solar energy in a cyclical way. Which is not in the galaxy.
Yehuda:- Why not? We lack the energy of suns, super novae, quasars, neutrinos and countless other exotic particles in space?, and energy of the big bang?, I don't agree with you, cool commenter.
Cool commenter:- And even on Earth there are days that take a large part in winds in that when they evaporate then the vapors rise up and create pressure differences and winds.
Sabdarmish Yehuda:- So it's nice for the earth to have seas and oceans, but for winds it's enough if we have pressure differences in the gas, and that's there in space if you accept my idea of particles. And by the way, particles exist in huge quantities in the expanses of space even without Yehuda's permission, they simply completely ignore the pressures they create and the possibility that their quantity in space is large enough to create pressure differences and movement, why?, like that.
Cool responder:- In addition, a problem arises that according to what you say the pressure map of a spiral galaxy should look like a pretzel, since the high pressures should be at the edge of the galaxy.
Sabdarmish Yehuda: - Sorry, but again not true. The pressure difference will be similar to a system of tropical storms on Earth or of cyclones, which is really not "bigla". And in us, a tropical storm looks like a scaled-down galaxy, but don't tell anyone.
Cool Reactor:- In addition to this it will create a gravity field that does not weaken in a quadratic ratio, but in some exotic ratio.
Sabdarmish Yehuda:- A. A gravity field is not created, but a pressure differential field. B. You are right that the differential pressure field is not proportional to the square of the distance but according to another ratio. A more linear relationship, and not particularly exotic.
Cool commenter:- And the most important thing is that a galaxy, in order to rotate, needs a power source, which everyone has gravity, and you lack it because particles can indeed contain energy, but they cannot exert a long-lasting force on the galaxy.
Sabdarmish Yehuda: - Maybe you meant the Coriolis force, but the pressure differences are enough to create a rotation just like in a bathtub the water rotates around the water outlet opening. And regarding power over time, why do you think that the energy emitted by a hundred billion stars in our galaxy for two billion years does not provide enough energy over time?
Cool commenter:- Maybe announce a new type of long term power, be as widely known as you want.
Sabdarmish Yehuda: There is no need for such force. Pressure forces are known, absolutely sufficient.
Cool commenter:- In any case, take your faith urgently in a bag and throw it near the synagogue, faith is only suitable for a synagogue.
Sabdarmish Yehuda:- You'll be surprised, but sometimes I want to throw everything away, why do I need this confusion? Well, I really expect people to abandon the old and blessed gravity?,
What fun if they find my dark mass particles in Sarn!, I will celebrate and invite you all to a beer!
Good day to you cool commenter!
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Yehuda, I'm sorry, but I have to remind you that you can't compare winds to galaxies, because on Earth there is a changing work of solar energy in a cyclical way. Which is not in the galaxy.
And even on Earth there are days that take a large part in winds in that when they evaporate then the vapors rise up and create pressure differences and winds. Which the galaxy does not have since it has no source of energy or particles that can rotate it.
In addition, a problem arises that according to what you say the pressure map of a spiral galaxy should look like a pretzel, since the high pressures should be at the edge of the galaxy. In addition to this, it will create a gravity field that does not weaken in a quadratic ratio, but in some exotic ratio.
And the most important thing is that a galaxy, in order to rotate, needs a source of power, which everyone has gravity, and you lack it because particles can indeed contain energy, but they cannot exert a long-lasting force on the galaxy. Maybe announce a new kind of long-term power, be as widely known as you want.
In any case, take your faith urgently in a bag and throw it near the synagogue, faith is only suitable for a synagogue.
Expansion has stopped - should you be more informed as an amateur-expert astronaut?
You need to bring facts.
To Michael
Regarding the question you sent me in response 42:-
"How do you choose which scientific discoveries will receive your blessing and which will receive unfounded disdain?". End quote.
The answer is simple.
All discoveries are acceptable to me!
The problem is that we both do not agree on what the discovery is.
In order not to get confused, we will take as an example, what you will probably call: "The discovery of the dark mass".
What do you think, in this case, is my discovery?
Well, for me the discovery is: - "the inequality between the force of gravity and the centrifugal force in the spiral galaxies", and what you happen to have discovered, the "dark mass", for me is just an unsuccessful attempt to explain the problematic nature of the discovery of the problematic movement of the spiral galaxies.
In the two articles I wrote, the links to which I gave in response 32, I showed that there are at least eight more options for explaining the discovery, some of which are at least as good as the dark mass.
The same goes for the discovery that you would surely call:- "The discovery of the repulsive force of the vacuum energy", and I would call it "The discovery of the accelerated expansion of the universe".
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
To Michael
Regarding response 6
You said:- "As Yehuda claims, that the force of gravity works differently in every galaxy and that the Saul galaxy rotates exactly according to Newton's laws and other galaxies rotate at different speeds.
It's obviously stupid, but it can be argued that way." End of quote.
So first of all it's nice that you understand that I mean attractive forces that are not gravity.
But, beyond that, you made a difficult claim and it is - what good did Judah do, if he also adds particles as needed to each galaxy so that it rotates at the appropriate speed, then how is this different from the method that exists today in which "dark mass as needed" is added to each galaxy for the purpose of rotation?
Well the difference is fundamental.
According to the particle method, a tiny variation in their density in space is sufficient for their rotation. Assuming that the density difference is the same as the tiny changes that exist in the background temperature of the universe (differences of about one hundred thousand degrees to a background temperature of 2.73 degrees Kelvin) and is even correlated with the hot or cold regions in the universe, then in my opinion this is enough.
To make things a little more understandable, let's take the example of the particle system we are familiar with, the Earth's atmosphere, where tiny temperature differences of a few degrees can create tiny pressure differences that will cause winds.
I repeat - with me, a tiny difference in the density of the particles is required, which should be logical and understandable and compatible with the background temperature of the universe.
On the other hand, in the existing gravitational explanation method to explain the movement of the galaxies, huge amounts of mass (obscuration) are needed, as we have seen in some cases up to ten thousand times.
Which demand seems more reasonable to you, Michael?
Which requirement would be more acceptable according to "Occam's Razor"?
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Yehuda:
As I have mentioned many times - I only "believe" in the laws of logic.
I think you believe them too but for some reason you are unwilling to use them when it comes to the dark matter claim.
I put forward reasons that quite clearly disqualify all the alternative theories you put forward and leave us only with the possibility of dark matter, therefore my choice of the dark matter claim over the claim of different laws of gravitation is not the result of a belief in anything except the laws of logic.
You don't believe in dark matter as a result of a belief mechanism.
That's a huge difference.
If you want to know what the effect of your words was on my degree of "belief" in dark matter (in the sense of the probability I attribute to its existence) - this "belief" only increased because following the discussion I read additional material to the one I was familiar with and was exposed to the vast array of evidence for its existence. The thought I devoted to the subject also increased my understanding of the fact that all other possibilities do not coincide with reality.
Again, this happens - not because I "accept without batting an eyelid the accepted scientific explanation" but because in every subject I examine the totality of the facts and come to a conclusion myself.
Ami:
It is clear that ordinary matter is uniformly distributed throughout the universe.
Otherwise there would be no stars, galaxies, clusters of galaxies and above all.... huge volumes with nothing in them.
To Michael
I will write this carefully: - What do you want me to say, that I deny the things I believe in? We are both thinking people and I really appreciate your opinions. Many times our opinions are equal.
Nevertheless, a strange thing happens that we are both very opposite in our opinions about dark mass and energy.
And not only that, we both agree even with various difficulties that appear in the analysis of the situation and despite reaching different and contradictory conclusions.
I know you think I'm just not ready to listen and if I just listened a little then I would be convinced. that I'm just stubborn, etc.
So my answer:- I tell you honestly that it is not so, and I do not believe in the existence of gravity (almost) in the large rocks in space, I do not believe in dark mass and energy, and I explain the movement of galaxies with the movement of a huge amount of particles in space.
My thinking is an unusual way of thinking, but actually everything ties together well.
I am aware of the problem of friction that a collection of particles in space can cause the movement of stars in galaxies, and maybe some other small problems, but the fact that you give up everything for this is a reckless act on your part.
Finally Michael, have you really not received a trace of doubt in the existence of the dark mass and energy?, are you really ready to accept without batting an eyelid the accepted scientific explanation?
good evening
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Michael,
Are you arguing that ordinary matter is not more or less evenly distributed in the universe?
In a general picture of the universe, will we find the normal matter in clusters in one half of it?
Thank you for your learned answer.
post Scriptum.
I really don't understand this study material.
Excuse me, gentlemen
Ami:
What kind of conclusion is this that claims that dark matter should be uniformly distributed?
Why don't you require it from the normal material?
Yehuda:
Regarding your words to the point:
How do you choose which scientific discoveries will receive your blessing and which will receive unfounded disdain?
Yehuda:
Although already in the past you did not find anything to answer my arguments, but that is no reason to ignore them.
Do you have anything to say?
Roy
My father has already suggested to Higgs that he write an article. Maybe we should get to know its contents??? Or maybe he has nothing
his own????
higgs,
If you name the more interesting article topics, I'll see if I can focus more on those topics in the future.
To Judah
Your destiny is my destiny.
Higgs boson is bored and hollow.
Laighs
We will drown him in a dark mass
sweet Dreams
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Roy Cezana
There have been some interesting articles in recent times, but unfortunately most of them were from dark matter
I am actually preparing an interesting series of articles in preparation for the launch of the mission to upgrade the mourning, which will be published on Rosh Hashanah. And even today there is an interesting article of mine on space issues, and an interesting article by Moshe Nachmani on the diagnosis of certain substances in the blood, and more.
Roy Cezana
One that was customary until a few months ago, around the beginning of the deterioration in the stock market, the subprime probably affected you as well.
to Nimrod and others
https://www.hayadan.org.il/dark-mass-severmish-0605075/
https://www.hayadan.org.il/sevdermish-on-gravitayion-part-2-1505078/
For your judgment
Please respond gently
Sabdarmish Yehuda
higgs,
Is there a different style of articles you would prefer to read?
The transparent sentence.
Shooting, hanging or balls?
Avi Blizovsky
Again, from the same porridge, too bad, the frequency of browsing here decreases and the level of yawning increases.
Midnight news, chewable material from the same porridge, surely more exciting religious debates, not a shame.
Instead of a curiosity site, it became a nice but terribly boring New Age style site.
fell victim to themselves.
The transparent sentence.
What happened to Hogin Mogin etc.
To Ami Bachar
The questions you asked were the first questions I asked on the subject and I did not find an answer to them, until one day I decided to abandon gravitation in cosmological distances.
I wonder when and if at all you will be brave enough to abandon gravity at great distances.
good evening
Sabdarmish Yehuda
It's very simple! The universe consists of four spatial dimensions, we can only see three of them, most of the mass of the universe (85%) is in the fourth dimension, it's like in a two-dimensional world two-dimensional beings try to estimate the mass of a ball that cuts the two-dimensional surface only at the point where it touches, It will be very surprising for them to discover that most of the mass of the ball is not visible to their eyes, their conclusion will be that there is dark matter in their universe that makes up most of the universe. Even in our world, most of the mass is in a spatial dimension that we are unable to perceive with our senses.
And regarding the 6000 years, if they claimed that time is a hundred million years, then it is possible that they were right, but 6000 years? We have evidence of the existence of the world for more than 6000 years
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
to the point,
Beautiful, beautiful, logical conclusion!
But still, there are also (many) things that I agree with the science community, so don't draw conclusions from the fact that I disagree with them about gravitation (at cosmological distances), which I don't agree with at all.
Good day period
Sabdarmish Yehuda
L. A. Ben-Ner
I don't think an aerial photography expert would agree with all of your conclusions. For example, we cannot decide that west of Tel Aviv there are still buildings and streets.
And an example from history:-
The second city that was supposed to be bombed with an atomic bomb was not Nagasaki but another (Naguya?), but the pilots did not drop the bomb on it because there were clouds above it and the few houses that were visible through the clouds, prevented the pilots from concluding that the target city was below them. You cannot take a hundred houses you saw, multiply them by a thousand or ten thousand, and decide that there is a city below you.
Of course, if the pilot was A. Ben-Ner, the bomb would have been dropped long before, on some poor Japanese village on the way.
How many centrifuges do the Iranians already have?
Good night
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Yehuda, you are shooting yourself in the butt.
Regarding the extrapolation, for some reason you stated that "Given: the Milky Way galaxy is 100 million times larger…." And why do you have that?, because that's what you read. And isn't there the same nasty extrapolation here, or was there some scientist who managed to reach the edge of the galaxy and update us from there on the real mess that passed.
Yehuda, your claims are very reminiscent of religious people's claims about science, for example about extrapolations that scientists make to calculate the age of the universe.
Those religious people conclude that there is no problem in agreeing that the universe has only existed for 6000 years.
.
And in general Noam, all science readers will be happy to know a professional mathematical opinion on the subject!
Hello everyone
How fun it is to come home after a busy day at work and stressful family visits.
And of course it's really fun to feel a bit of an aura of science and astronomy here on the science site.
So it's fun to respond and it's fun to confront!
Noam, you are a mathematician in your profession and I will start with you.
I have a question to you.
A formula is given that describes the movement of a chair in a room for a distance of three or four meters. We don't have any data beyond four meters.
Question:-Are we allowed to decide that the moon also moves around the earth in the same way? (a distance of 380,000,000 meters)?
I think that as a mathematician, you will agree with me that it does not make sense to deduce from one thing about something that is a hundred million times bigger. As a mathematician you will agree with me that extrapolating to such a distance would be foolish.
Let's move on to the next question:-
Data: - The Milky Way galaxy is 100 million times larger than the solar system. (One hundred thousand light years relative to one thousand light years}
Question Is it possible to draw conclusions from the laws of motion in the solar system regarding the laws of motion of the galaxy?
That is, if Newton's formula explains the movement of the solar system, does that mean that it also explains the movement of the galaxy.
And if, after all, we used Newton's formula and got results in the galactic distances that are one to ten thousand times the expected results according to Newton, would you continue to recommend these formulas?
Would you recommend claiming that the data and measurements you took are wrong and should be changed to match the measured results? I mean would you recommend increasing the mass to fit my new measurements?
Isn't it better to conclude that because of the large distance difference, most likely it is a movement resulting from two different phenomena?
What do you say, dear mathematician?
I would really like to know your professional opinion
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
post Scriptum. I promise to answer others as well
The clusters of stars and galaxies are attributed to the nations of the world and different peoples - hence the reflected difference.
If you look at things from a different angle, you may be able to measure the returning light and the opposite - the absence.
You must also check about the nation of Israel, which is attributed to the Caleb/Sirius group. And absorb the essence of it
All other nations of the world.
Physical observation alone does not help to see correctly at this moment.
The question is, if the non-dark matter is distributed in the visible universe more or less evenly, how can it be that the dark matter is distributed unevenly?
If the dark matter is just normal, black matter that simply does not reflect light, then it should be distributed similarly to the distribution of the non-dark matter. Then why in certain galaxies its concentration varies from a hundred to a thousand times the non-dark matter? ZA relationships between light-reflecting material and light-absorbing material are understandable to me, what I don't understand is the differences in the relationships between different galaxies. And more by orders of magnitude! Don't say a kilo here a ton there.
interesting.
Lenaam: Look for the series of articles by Sabdarmish Yehuda in the scholar. Very interesting and readable for the science enthusiast. There is a pretty good explanation of his approach there.
Greetings friends,
Ami Bachar
Dark matter makes up about 23% of the matter in the universe... and 73% is dark energy, so visible matter is about 4%
Yehuda Hello!
How do you put yourself in a position of controversy with hypocritical physicists?
Although you are right that a person like you could be the director of an astronomical research center-
But just as the CEO of the university would not think of telling the researchers if they are wrong in their research, so should you.
I am also a fan of astrophysics, but my professional is mathematics.
I will show you what people like us have to claim about today's astrophysics:
Just as at the end of the 19th century physicists were sure that they automatically understood everything,
until a number of persistent experiments turned classical physics upside down,
Thus the discovery of dark matter and dark energy which together make up over 90% of the mass of the universe
They are the first clue that our understanding of physics is very limited.
Perhaps the new particle accelerator, when it starts working, will continue to topple the glorious standard model.
Ami:
It is estimated that the total amount of dark mass in the universe is 85%, but in this particular galaxy the amount of dark mass is greater (it is not yet known how the dark mass is distributed).
Michael, it seems a bit far-fetched to me that gravity works differently in every galaxy, Yehuda I would love to hear why you think that way
to Judah,
Why is it so hard for you to accept the idea of dark mass? (Perhaps another idea will prove to be true) Why does this seem patently unreasonable to you?
Blessings, a bright day to all of us.
There are blood-hollow lights from the inside and they have no imprint in the sky. (a world of transient phenomena). Low needs, egoistic motives, hatred-jealousy, showing off for its own sake, the negation of the other, the negation of the creator-outgoing source, etc. For example: the world of refutations also creates refutations In the skies: and the collapse of an ancient holding light. (We saw this in the article about gamma rays).
Even in the study of physical phenomena - there is a quality and eternal source that has a great light even in the sky. Vishnam
Accompanying secondary adjuncts to smaller lights (those who believe in the original) and there is the absolute negation for each and every one has no light of its own but absolute obscurity and a void of primary or secondary light. These empty holdings create a suction that draws cold black holes in the heart and black holes in the heavens, as reflected below.
* Everything that serves the higher existence expresses the rings in the heavens - according to species, affiliations, families and peoples, so does the expression of the galactic clusters in the sky.
* As humanity split and broke apart, so too did the same splitting and distancing was reflected in acceleration
The expansion in the skies.
*The universe has an expansion limit - a defined potential mass. In order to allow it to regenerate it
You have to go through a metamorphosis. Quantum theory is a part included in the general total - the creator effect
Imaginary lights, as thought projections - reflected (like extraterrestrial angels, etc.) transformation of social thinking, release of stigmas, release of boundaries - uncontrolled breaking into earthly appearances, breaking tools and conventions - a distinct symmetry. Real and imaginary lights in a mix
In general. All these phenomena are also reflected in the lights we perceive in the sky in the same mixed ratio. But, after all the simulation mixed with everything, there also comes the fracture or the flexibility - depending on group (cluster) private readiness, etc..etc.
A person who lives only in the world of transient phenomena (artificial lights) and does not have a reflection of eternity-truth and a constructive and fruitful continuity that is beneficial to the continuation of the inherent universe, is ejected from the array of the cosmological order
Subject to eternal laws.
There are true lights - sealing suns in the heavens.
There are accompanying secondary lights - paler. / minor stars, etc.
When a plane flies over greater Tel Aviv, it sees many dense lights scattered over an area of about 50 square kilometers and around them other, smaller blocks of lights.
But even within the luminous blocks, there are islands of darkness.
From this the pilot (physicist) concludes that, in Tel Aviv itself, about a million and a half people live and in the satellite cities that surround it, another about a million and a half people live. And also that in Tel Aviv and its surroundings there is some relationship between the amount of luminous matter and the amount of dark matter.
When the same plane flies over Rabat-Ammon, it sees a similar picture except, in Rabat-Amon, the intensity of the lights is much weaker. What does the pilot conclude?
If the pilot is a physicist? He concludes that the size of the city indicates the number of its inhabitants (more or less). Whereas the magnitude of the illumination reflected from it indicates the ratio between the amount of luminous matter and the amount of dark matter that make it up. That is to say, because Rabat Ammon is also a city with a mass of about one and a half million people (according to Gdala = mass), but there is a different ratio than in Tel Aviv between the amounts of luminous matter and dark matter
that make it up.
If the pilot is……(no names)……?
What does he conclude? It's hard to know.
Maybe he concludes that his glasses are broken?
Maybe he concludes that he is tired and can't see well?
Or maybe he concludes that this is the way it is and there is nothing to investigate in the matter?
.
without shadow and idleness.
Looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooood
If we compare the sky and the galaxies to a mirror that reflects the world of physical reality:
Dark holes are the absence of reflection, that is, deletion.
Lights are the reflection of the light-truths.
According to the data of the article, 85% of the acquired reality is a lie and fiction. 15% truth-perpetuated for a visible prospectus.
Currently - in the mirror of the sky.
point:
When they discovered the distant planets in the solar system they "invented" them to explain the orbital anomalies of other stars. Not as a result of prediction. The prediction was then the reality of these planets and it was eventually verified by experiment with a telescope.
Of course, it can still be argued that the mirror you see in the telescope is unrelated. It's silly, but it can be argued.
And what about the dark mass?
It was invented as an explanation for the rotation speed of the stars in certain galaxies. Based on this theory, they predicted, for example, a certain gravitational dusting in those galaxies. This exact gravitational cooling was obtained in the measurements.
Both the speed of rotation and the gravitational acceleration are different from galaxy to galaxy, so it is possible to argue - as Yehuda claims, that gravity works differently in each galaxy and that the Saul galaxy rotates exactly according to Newton's laws and other galaxies rotate at different speeds.
It is of course stupid but it can be argued that way.
Sabdarmish, you should be open to all options and not be locked in and confident in your understanding. After all, you, like them, have only hypotheses and no evidence.
What I understand less is:
If the dark mass is 85%, that means the visible mass is 15%. How can it be that this 15% is one hundredth or thousandth of the entire mass? 15% is 15 hundredths.
Greetings friends,
Ami Bachar
dark mass
Masa Afalo
A flying mass
mass ter- la- la.
For sale is a dark-transparent substance with no taste and no smell, and can only be found very far at the edge of the galaxy. Does not include transport. Any amount you want. at any price you want. Every number wins!
A special responsibility of our Michael.
When will the sun rise over this nonsense?
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Yehuda,
Don't you dare!
A little weird.
If the dark matter is part of the theory then according to the calculations the mass of the galaxy should have been predicted.
It is unscientific to use a concept solely to explain a phenomenon. Predictability is required.
In this galaxy there is an Earth-like planet where an extraterrestrial lives who claims that there is no Yehuda Sabdarmish 🙂