THE WASP-18b & Space Probes Mysteries

[Humanzee]

Sorry for the potentially dumb lurker question but is dark matter something we could be expected to find in local space? Or is it distributed only in extra galactic space?

 

[Reality Check]

Sorry for the potentially dumb lurker question but is dark matter something we could be expected to find in local space? Or is it distributed only in extra galactic space?

It is expected to be everywhere. There are experiments that are going on now looking for dark matter: Dark matter - detection.

 

[Humanzee]

..should have searched myself. I wasn't aware of the # of experiments looking for WIMPS here on Earth. Thanks.

Bjarne, this is a personal question and feel free to ignore me but do you have a philosophical problem with the idea of dark matter or do you dislike it strictly from a mathematical point of view or is it something else?

 

[Bjarne]

.It is expected to be everywhere.

Like huge invisible UFO's bases, - invisible elephants, - ghost, -, god and who knows.


And it could also be a central gravity property we haven’t understood.
I mean what is gravity ?
Bended space? - NOONE even can image what is?
Come on fellows, it’s time to wake up.

 

[steenkh]

Like huge invisible UFO's bases, - invisible elephants, - ghost, -, god and who knows.

Not one of which have been proposed by scientists. This only shows your ignorance.

 

[Bjarne]

Not one of which have been proposed by scientists. This only shows your ignorance.

No this only demonstrate that science once was a omniscient superstition religion and still is.

 

[Bjarne]

PS Fly-by anomalies

Normally and naturally the space wind and the resistance against motion equalize each other. By gravity assist manoeuvre the purpose is to past close by a planet and increase speed. Hence also the resistance against motion will increase too.

Naturally the space wind always tries to equalize the resistance against orbit motion and hence prevent a object to fall down on the rotating object (e.g.; the Sun or the Earth).

But by a fly-by manoeuvre the velocity and hence also the resistance against motion increases to a level much higher than normal, and hence also higher than the space wind can equalize.

Hence the support from the space wind (from the Sun) is proportional weaker (compared to the stronger resistance against motion) by fly-by, and therefore the space probes will fall faster as expected, and off course of that the space probes also accelerate faster than expected (by fly-by).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flyby_anomaly

 

[Dancing David]

And it is not a machine artifact because...

 

[TjW]

..should have searched myself. I wasn't aware of the # of experiments looking for WIMPS here on Earth. Thanks.

Bjarne, this is a personal question and feel free to ignore me but do you have a philosophical problem with the idea of dark matter or do you dislike it strictly from a mathematical point of view or is it something else?

I'm sorry, Bjarne not liking something from a mathematical point of view strikes me as Helen Keller not liking the color of her sweater.

 

[Bjarne]

Bjarne, this is a personal question and feel free to ignore me but do you have a philosophical problem with the idea of dark matter or do you dislike it strictly from a mathematical point of view or is it something else?

If people would admit that this is only a weak hypothesis (also even though this is the best guess we have) - everthing would be all right.
But this is only pure believes that have become almost certain science. This is ridiculous.

We should be open for that problem, but instead mass hypnosis have taken over, and the result is that such kind of “science” now is allright , just when the majority believes in suchs creeds.

 

[Reality Check]

We have some fundamental errors in Bjarne's idea:

• Does Bjarne know basic physics (unit-less quantities cannot be arbitrarily assigned units)
  (First asked 23 October 2009)
• Experimental proof that Bjarne idea is wrong
  (First asked 2 November 2009)

Another problem with his idea:
First asked 13 November 2009
Bjarne only does his "calculations" for planets. Stellar formation means that planets are likely to orbit in the same direction as the rotation of their star. This is true for the 8 planets of the Solar System.
His "space wind" is caused by the rotation of the Sun. The reason that it accelerates the 8 planets is because they orbit in the same direction as the rotation.

But what about retrograde orbits, e.g that of Triton or Halley's Comet or the dwarf planet Pluto?

N.B. Bjarne does not have Pluto on his web site for some strange reason - maybe because his equation for "space wind" fails completely for Pluto.

Bjarne:
Why do objects in retrograde orbits that have "space wind" and "kinetic resistance" in the same direction have stable orbits?

 

[Reality Check]

If people would admit that this is only a weak hypothesis (also even though this is the best guess we have) - everthing would be all right.
But this is only pure believes that have become almost certain science. This is ridiculous.

We should be open for that problem, but instead mass hypnosis have taken over, and the result is that such kind of “science” now is allright , just when the majority believes in suchs creeds.

Totally wrong as usual.
Scientists and people who can think logically believe that dark matter exists because of the strong observational evidence for it, namely

• The motion of galaxies in galactic clusters that need more mass in them them is visible. This has been known since the 1940's!
• The flatness of galaxy rotation curves (they should decrease at large distances).
• Gravitational lensing maps of galactic clusters that show most of the mass is not in the galaxies.
• The observation that the universe is flat but we can only find 4% of the mass & energy needed to make it flat.
• The large scale structure of the universe fits models that include dark matter.

Dark matter is a placeholder term for whatever explains the above evidence.

The real stupidity of your web site is that you think that the only evidence for dark matter is the galaxy rotation curves. If you want to get rid of dark matter you need to explain all of the observations, not pick one at random.

 

[Bjarne]

But what about retrograde orbits, e.g that of Triton or Halley's Comet or the dwarf planet Pluto?

N.B. Bjarne does not have Pluto on his web site for some strange reason - maybe because his equation for "space wind" fails completely for Pluto.

Did you read post 267
Elliptical orbits it self do not cause any anomaly.
I mean so long an object follows the space wind.
And orbit can have huge inclination, but anyway an object always moves in an basic equalized environment.

BUT elliptical orbits are typically used to gravity assist (fly-by). It is not the elliptical orbit that causes the velocity increase, but stronger gravity. It’s important to understand this point.

It is first when objects more or less have course “directly” towards and heavy object that velocity of that reason increases, - and hence that an fly-by anomaly occurs.

OR – if an object doesn't follows the space wind direction. Read post 258
In the case that a satellite orbits over the poles (exsample altitude 35000 meter) you’ll will only be able to measure a deviation of around 25% of 0.00166 Metre per year – if closer a little bit more. Not much but enough to that it can be measured if we really want. It’s in the same way with comets etc. Depending on orbit they will be affected, - but notice we talk about effect in these orbit that only is from 1E-9 to 1-11 m/s and hence much less as than a total deviation of 1 meter per year.

Totally wrong as usual.
Scientists and people who can think logically believe that dark matter exists because of the strong observational evidence for it, namely

I am happy that you know finally wrote "that scientist believes "

No they believes as they do only because they have a very limit imagination and only one shot in the gun. They MUST give some kind of answer. If the answer was: honestly we don’t know, these scientist would feel them self very stupid and no government would pump billions into these guys salary's.

 

[steenkh]

No this only demonstrate that science once was a omniscient superstition religion and still is.

By ascribing something to science that scientists have never claimed you are demonstrating that science was once an omniscient superstitious religion????

You are amazing.

But good entertainment

 

[Reality Check]

Did you read post 267
Elliptical orbits it self do not cause any anomaly.

Did you read post 271 which you are replying to.
All orbits cause "space wind" according to you.
Thus retrograde orbits cause "space wind" whether they are elliptical or not.

First asked 13 November 2009
Bjarne only does his "calculations" for planets. Stellar formation means that planets are likely to orbit in the same direction as the rotation of their star. This is true for the 8 planets of the Solar System.
His "space wind" is caused by the rotation of the Sun. The reason that it accelerates the 8 planets is because they orbit in the same direction as the rotation.

But what about retrograde orbits, e.g that of Triton or Halley's Comet or the dwarf planet Pluto?

N.B. Bjarne does not have Pluto on his web site for some strange reason - maybe because his equation for "space wind" fails completely for Pluto.

Bjarne:
Why do objects in retrograde orbits that have "space wind" and "kinetic resistance" in the same direction have stable orbits?

 

[Reality Check]

I am happy that you know finally wrote "that scientist believes "

No they believes as they do only because they have a very limit imagination and only one shot in the gun. They MUST give some kind of answer. If the answer was: honestly we don’t know, these scientist would feel them self very stupid and no government would pump billions into these guys salary's.

In fact "honestly we don’t know" what dark matter is. We do know that it exists.
Scientists believe that dark matter (just like they believe that electrons, etc. exist) because they have overwhelming evidence for dark matter, namely the evidence that you are ignorant of:

• The motion of galaxies in galactic clusters that need more mass in them them is visible. This has been known since the 1940's!
• The flatness of galaxy rotation curves (they should decrease at large distances).
• Gravitational lensing maps of galactic clusters that show most of the mass is not in the galaxies.
• The observation that the universe is flat but we can only find 4% of the mass & energy needed to make it flat.
• The large scale structure of the universe fits models that include dark matter.

They can detect it and measure its properties. The list below is quoted from Ethan Siegel's blog article What is Dark Matter?

1. It isn't in dense clumps.

Not faint, dark stars, not planets, not basketballs, and not gas and dust. We've already gone over that it can't be normal matter, but it also can't form structures the same way that normal matter does.
2. It doesn't interact with itself. Yes, it interacts gravitationally, but that's not what I mean. It doesn't feel the strong nuclear force, it doesn't feel the electromagnetic force, and if it feels the weak force, it feels it even more weakly than neutrinos do! (And you need about a light year of lead to stop your typical neutrino.) As a result of this, dark matter is incredibly fluffy and diffuse, which means even in our Solar System, by the heart of our galaxy, dark matter's effects are negligibly unobservable.
3. These dark halos form very early. This is very important. Looking back as far as we can see, we find that these diffuse collapsed structures have been around for pretty much the entire history of the Universe. This tells us that the dark matter is cold, or that its kinetic energy has pretty much always been much, much less than its mass. This rules out every single standard model particle that we know of from being dark matter, since the stable ones are relatively light and are all produced hot.[/QUOTE]

 

[Bjarne]

By ascribing something to science that scientists have never claimed you are demonstrating that science was once an omniscient superstitious religion????

I think you must have slept in history lessons. 300 years ago science and religion was one and the same thing. If you do not believe this who do you believe was hanging and burning disbelievers. The professors or the church?
Today we do not hang disbelievers anymore, but the orthodox obdurate religious, superstition, brainwashed, mass-hypnotises creeds are almost the same omniscient intolerantly pattern as before.

 

[Bjarne]

All orbits cause "space wind" according to you.

Chocking, -I thought you had understood that point long ago.
Orbits don’t create anything, all rotating objects created space wind.

Thus retrograde orbits cause "space wind" whether they are elliptical or not.

Once agian, you have completely failed to understand the point.

But what about retrograde orbits, e.g that of Triton or Halley's Comet or the dwarf planet Pluto?

I do not understand “what”
“What” do you mean?
I am not thought-reader
If an object relative to a rotating object is retrograde, YES it will have no support for the space wind and hence it certainly will lose altitude. It’s not much; you can see an example in post 258, try to be more specific, if you find any problems with that statement let me know what it is..

In fact "honestly we don’t know" what dark matter is. We do know that it exists.

It’s the same as I write: we don’t know what UFO's is but we know that these exist. Yes I agree in this statement, but this doesn’t make us any wiser.
Now I was kind because you wrote we know ---it--- (dark matter) exist.
So the comparable example should rather have been: we do not know what ghost is but we know these exist.

You have no right to claim more than: we know that there is more gravity in the universe as we can account for, but we don’t know why. and that's it.

And you can add: our only wild guess is some very mysteries kind of matter that in such a case must have very strange (an almost unbeliveable) properties:

• Completely unlike matter from the period system
• Note reflecting EM valves
• Invisible
• Not interacting with gravity
• And much more strange like: UFOs, ghost, invisible elephant, - all together.

 

[Sensation_of_physics]

Bjarne takes on the properties of dark matter;

Completely unlike matter from the period system

Such matter exists in huge quantities. The form of matter that make up the 92 elements native to Earth constitutes a minute fraction of all forms of matter currently known. Oh well, it's not Bjarnes fault his knowledge of particle physicis is nearly a hundred years out of date.

Note reflecting EM valves

The reflection of electromagnetic radiation is related to the electronic properties of solid or plasma matter. Dark matter is niether hypothesized to form solid matter nor charged plasma. It is part of it's very nature that it doesn't interact with electromagnetic radiation, or at least interacts very weakly - that is the "dark" part. And yes, matter with such properties are known to exist.

Invisible

Part of not interacting with electromagnetic radiation is being unable to be detected by the naked human eye, ie. invisible.

Not interacting with gravity

And now Bjarnes logic train has completely derailed.

As it has been stated numerous times in this very thread, the only way dark matter does make its pressense known is through gravitonic interaction with the surrounding space. This statement that dark matter does not interact gravitationally appearently came from the nether orifice of Bjarnes body, in a rather pathetic attempt to riddicule that which he absolutely refuses to understand.

 

[Reality Check]

Chocking, -I thought you had understood that point long ago.
Orbits don’t create anything, all rotating objects created space wind.

Once agian, you have completely failed to understand the point.

All orbits around rotating bodies cause "space wind" according to you.
The Sun rotates. Pluto orbits the Sun in a retrograde orbit. According to you Pluto should not be orbiting because your "space wind" and mythical "kinetic resistance"

But what about retrograde orbits, e.g that of Triton or Halley's Comet or the dwarf planet Pluto?

I do not understand “what”

What about retrograde orbits, e.g that of Triton or Halley's Comet or the dwarf planet Pluto? You know the ones around rotating bodies like the Sun and Saturn.

“What” do you mean?
I am not thought-reader
If an object relative to a rotating object is retrograde, YES it will have no support for the space wind and hence it certainly will lose altitude. It’s not much; you can see an example in post 258, try to be more specific, if you find any problems with that statement let me know what it is..

That is what Pluto and many other bodies in the Soar System do.
Pluto and Triton have been doing this for billions of years. According to you they should "lose altitude" and crash into the Sun or Saturn.
They have not.
Thus

1. "Space wind" does not exist.
   • Objects with retrograde orbits around rotating onjects exist (e.g. Pluto and Triton) and these ovbits are stable. But their "space wind" any mythical "kinetic resisttance" add together and make the orbits unstable.
2. We already know that "kinetic resisttance" does not exist because
   • Does Bjarne know basic physics (unit-less quantities cannot be arbitrarily assigned units)
     (First asked 23 October 2009)
   • Experimental proof that Bjarne idea is wrong
     (First asked 2 November 2009)

...snipped UFO and ghost rant...

If UFOs and ghosts had observations to produce evidence that they exist then science would consider them likely to exist. They do not and so they are not considered to exist.

Dark matter has observations that produces evidence that dark matter exists. Thus science considers that dark matter exists. This is the evidence that you are ignorant of:

• The motion of galaxies in galactic clusters that need more mass in them them is visible. This has been known since the 1940's!
• The flatness of galaxy rotation curves (they should decrease at large distances).
• Gravitational lensing maps of galactic clusters that show most of the mass is not in the galaxies.
• The observation that the universe is flat but we can only find 4% of the mass & energy needed to make it flat.
• The large scale structure of the universe fits models that include dark matter.