Singularity Vs Quantum Theory of Gravity

Going on what you have claimed over the last few months, I suggest that it is nowhere near enough.

Perhaps.....But most of those students would not have been approaching this subject with such an anti mainstream science agenda.
And they would have had in most cases quality education. Your's,?? the mind boggles!

Evidence of your posts in this and half a dozen other threads, says different.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I asked you to explain an obvious quandary in post 515?
Are you going to explain it?
Or are you going to side step it as you have done with regards to many questions and situations put to you in at least half a dozen threads.
To reiterate your methodology in those early threads, you asked questions...got accepted mainstream answers...ignored them......and then waffled on about Super Suns and our galaxy not actually orbiting the galactic center.
Since its your credibility that is at stake, and the evidence is there for all to read, then you need to explain yourself.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The existence of dark matter isn't being questioned. What's under review is it's particle theory. Finding a particle theory. The proposal that interests me the most is Mirror Dark Matter. There's ongoing experiments to directly detect Mirror Dark Matter. It's a mind blowing theoretical prediction. Since dark matter has been directly detected in lensing experiments there's not much left for MOND to explain.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Is this an explanation that DM may be mirror matter to normal Baryonic matter?
If not then I'm inferring it now.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Is that a possibility worth considering?

I see MOND as a complete waste of time, considering it needs to be tweeked across a variety of galactic types...at least from the last time I read anything about it.

 

You should read Professor Footes original paper on his mirror dark matter proposal. BTW Professor Foote is a countryman of yours. I'll find his paper that does a great job of explaining his idea without a bunch of equations.

 

Thanks brucep.......

 

It's Professor Robert Foot not Foote. This is really interesting read.
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0309330

 

Interesting, thanks again brucep.
[Funny, seriously, I did read about mirror matter years ago, and actually was thinking along similar lines when DM raised its ugly head.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

]

 

His proposal is the dark matter is mirror matter. It's interesting how many folks found ways to explain the Voyager anomalous acceleration within the context of their proposals. If you link 'cited by' there's discussions about several experiments in progress to detect a mirror dark matter particle. Essentially his proposal is a particle theory for dark matter mirroring the Standard Model. The Pioneer an........ LOL.

 

Paddoboy,

Did you understand what Brucep said ?? Very politely (or should I say condescendingly) Brucep exposed your bluff...

DM raised its ugly head way back in 1930s.......and came out fully in 1960s (Vera Rubin), and mirror matter is being proposed as dark matter only...and the concept is much earlier than early 1990s.........So Paddoboy, don't you think you are shown the mirror now even by your Friend Brucep.

You have a way out.....you can always claim that DM raised its ugly head, in your head, around 12 years back when you were fiddling with/at Magic Chicken.

And by the way above paper of Foot's somewhere has a reference to God also, you would call your countryman physicist as God botherer, agenda laden man ? I will not........


The point, Paddoboy, I made was that MOND is on weak footing, DM is hypothetical and still elusive, so there is a place for some alternative explanation for Galaxy distribution curves.........such observation by anyone cannot be termed as anti mainstream, God Bothering, Agenda laden.....do you get it ? know-all-bluffy-pal !!

 

Idiot wind. Moderation needs to do something about your useless troll.

 

The point is funny boy, that MOND was never on any strong footing anyway, DM is far more than elusive, and hypothetical, [it is accepted cosmology due to convincing evidence] and your alternative explanations hasn't changed from what it was the first time you proposed it...Unsupported pseudoscience.

I know that you are at desperation tactics, with the obvious hoax you have been trying to pull on this forum and as Aid cottoned on to earlier in the peace, and myself revealing the nature of you and your posts, has shown you with zero credibility.
Your Super Sun proposal is a joke!
Do better.

 

He has yet to interpret anything correctly, and actually ranks along side of theorist constant and chinglu for anti science nonsense.

 

When are you ever going to cut all this pretentious crap you go on with.
No one is impressed. I have shown exactly what you are.

Fred Zwicky first raised DM, and like the Newtonian BH concept raised by Michell in the late 1800s, was shelved as highly unlikely and both forgotten about.
Rubin's work saw it resurrected again just as I said, and again just as I said, I speculated mirror matter after reading about it.
Again, you really need to do better, stop the pretense, realise you are nothing but a glorified sparky, no cosmological qualifications, no learning of any consequence, just plain old delusions of grandeur, and a hugely inflated ego, that has been tarnished somewhat after crossing swords with a few far better then yourself on this forum.

 

Are you going to explain yourself Rajesh?

 

Today, it is widely believed that mirror symmetry is in fact violated in nature. God – it is believed – is left-handed. Actually, though, things are not so clear

You mean the above.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

You certainly have a lot to learn my good fellow......things like sarcasm, fecetousness, and in your case total ignorance it appears.

 

There is another massively incorrect information being spread repeatedly in multiple threads...that is with respect to infalling matter

Gravity Overcoming the strong Nuclear force.....By Paddoboy & OnlyMe

.............When matter crosses the EH of a BH, the first effects are Spaghetification.
Then as the mass approaches the center of the BH, electrons are stripped, the atomic nucleus is torn apart, and even protons and neutrons most probably, so overcoming the strong nuclear force that is responsible for the original stability of the atomic nucleus and atom.
A similar scenario is envisaged again according to our best models, the closer we approach the moment of the BB........


We do not really/conclusively know what happens to mass inside EH. There is something called Tidal Force, which will stretch the material even before it reaches the EH (Spaghetification), this stretch may continue inside EH but we do not know. For electrons to strip away from Nucleus (Suggesting of tearing apart of Nucleus is complete lack of understanding at that level....it is worse than saying ionization due to acceleration at 20%-30% of c on its own....) the Tidal Force at least must be larger than the Electrostatic Force between electron and nucleus.

It is very simple to understand that inside EH there is no overtaking....First In First to Centre....so primarily there is no possibility of collision, so only thing which can tear apart is tidal force.....that is most favourably possible for an atom if its nucleus is facing the centre and electrons is on the side away (lets assume)...now the Tidal force due to extreme gravity...is still insufficient to overcome this....leave aside tearing apart nucleus.

There are series of incorrect responses being passed on b some of very active posters, even as answer to unsuspecting members..this must be curbed.....The pathetic assertion by paddoboy / OnlyMe that when an atom is accelerated to 20%-30% of c, its electrons will strip apart due to energy (such non sense must be curbed).

 

yes, yes, the kind of word you use for others need to be moderated...

By the way you have still not answered why the angular momentum has got nothing to do frame dragging.......correct the mistake if you have guts...making a mistake is not sin....continuing with it even when exposed is certainly........

And be honest if you know something.....make Paddo / OnlyMe realise their numerous mistake...continued mistakes.

 

Shut the fuk up with the nonsense. All the answers about the physics you've been fuking up is in the link I posted for your worthlessness.

 

I feel sad for you Brucep !! You have given some flashes that you know something on the subject, but you cannot handle situation.. Paddo is and will always be a Phoenix and thats a quality he has got.