Further Expansion

The non amateur stuff. Hawking, black holes, that sort of thing

Moderators: joe, Brian, Guy Fennimore

joe
Site Admin
Posts: 4382
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 11:24 am
Location: Greenwich, London
Contact:

Post by joe »

Mike Feist wrote:Are they not made-up concepts to fill a flaw in current cosmological thinking!
Yes. But if I'm reading you correctly, "made-up" is not quite fair. Observations of galaxies show that the movement of visible matter is not what it should be if that is all there is. It is not outwith the bounds of probability that there is a whole load of stuff out there that does not emit light, i.e. is dark. Enough dark matter surrounding the galaxies would explain the movement of the visible matter. The theory might be correct or false but it is possible and research continues. The energy of the vacuum (Dark Energy?) is a fact. What needs to be established is whether it has an influence over the universe as a whole.

Regards,
200mm Newtonian, OMC140, ETX90, 15x70 Binoculars.
Cliff
Posts: 6604
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 8:18 pm
Location: Manchester
Contact:

Post by Cliff »

Dear Davep and Mike
I needed to give both Mike's brief comment and your reply a little thought before replying.
I appreciate that you (initially Davep that is) are probably trying to take a fair minded stance in your comment. I might agree that Mike's wording might be slightly on the strong side. However, unless you get very long winded, as I often tend to do, I think brevity can sometimes seem a bit hard. On the other hand there are big dangers in being long-winded. One persons saying can be interpreted very differently by someone else.
However, getting back to the main point. My own feelings are that Dark Matter and even more so, Dark Energy have not been around very long, but already they seem to be taken almost for granted. I personally still feel very uneasy about them.
Incidentally, there are some very interesting comments in the latest "New Scientist" about the rather unscientific way that finger printing is taken as gospel. It makes you wonder if other aspects of science are taken for granted? One might hope that astronomers and cosmologists are above that sort of thing. But is it possible that some of them might be worse?
Best wishes from the Grumpy Old Codger Cliff
joe
Site Admin
Posts: 4382
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 11:24 am
Location: Greenwich, London
Contact:

Post by joe »

Cliff wrote:My own feelings are that Dark Matter and even more so, Dark Energy have not been around very long, but already they seem to be taken almost for granted.
Dear Cliff,

This is not my impression at all! The ball is still in the air as they say(as he watches Charlton getting thrashed for the first time this season :cry: )
200mm Newtonian, OMC140, ETX90, 15x70 Binoculars.
Cliff
Posts: 6604
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 8:18 pm
Location: Manchester
Contact:

Post by Cliff »

Dear Joe
Thanks for the response. Perhaps I went too far in suggesting that Dark Matter and Dark Energy are now accepted as being the norm.
I would not necessarily argue with you about that.
It may be unfair of me to lump Dark Matter and Dark Energy in in one basket.
However, I have got the impression that Dark Matter is considerd a fairly well understood issue (not entirely so by me I might add!). Dark Energy does seem to be much more iffily understood, if I have been following the dumbed down material I have been reading properly. Of course if it were not dumed down I probably would not have a clue what they are on about.
Even so I think I will need a lot more convincing before I feel happy as happy with the Big Bang Theory ( or perhaps various Big Bang theories that seem to be now floating around) as I used to be when I was a happy care free youngster.
Best wishes from the Grumpy Old Codger Cliff
Post Reply