Oh, I see, my bad, I did not read clearly enough.
I’d have immediately offered the head of this thread, but I checked and see he didn’t even offer theory, merely made a statement. I see there’s a thread about galaxies having ‘stability’ instead of DM. Now I'm with you, you can’t just think something up and offer it as a solution to the world’s problems without something to give it some credence.
However, being devils advocate, this thread was about warped space, I assume he means spacetime, a photon takes the shortest path through distorted spacetime. That would look identical to the path of the photon being biased without any warpage of spacetime. Now I’d be prepared to bet good money that you could persuade an AI to rewrite GR in terms of probability and bias the path of a photon in an identical way to curved spacetime and I’d further that by suggesting the same concept would model galactic rotation without dark matter but would have ‘stability’.
Circling back to my original point, these ideas may well be delivered by nutters trying to ruffle feathers, but (to take this example here) you may ask me ‘bias what, what is it about the photon you bias?’ - a perfectly valid question (of this made up example) but it sort of brushes over the ‘fabric of spacetime’ which suffers from the same problem. Curved spacetime is a mathematical construct that accurately models reality (until it stops and needs DM), and that young crank Einstein produced that idea working at night with a pen and paper. He didn’t have AI to speed him up.
I don’t know, I’m not trying to cause a fight, and hanging around in a pseudoscience forum, I suppose it’s all about the fight….
OK, thanks for the clarification. I should maybe explain that it happens to be a bit of a
bête noire of mine when people seem to attack what they call "mainstream"
[ugh] science, merely on the basis that it does not yet have all the answers to the mysteries of nature. But if we had all the answers, nobody would need to do any research, obviously! So the mere fact there are unexplained phenomena out there is to be expected at the cutting edge. It is
not evidence that any alternatives are being suppressed. Hence my initial challenge to what you seemed to be saying.
In fact, when it comes to Dark Matter there are rival hypotheses being entertained quite seriously. On the one hand, there is the hypothesis that our model of particle physics is incomplete (hence WIMPS etc). On the other there is the hypothesis that gravitation works differently at large scales from what we have hitherto assumed (MOND and its variants). Both have their adherents and are being pursued. Nobody is suppressing anything.
Regarding your remarks about photon paths in space, I'm not a cosmologist and don't pretend to understand GR properly, but as I understand it there are attempts to fit MOND ideas into GR, though this requires ad-hoc and inelegant bolt-ons, which physicists tend to regard with disfavour. However that is sometimes the way new insights arise, e.g. Planck's curve fitting of black body radiation in his attemot to overcome the "ultraviolet catastrophe" at the end of the c.19th. So who knows. It seems most physicists think it is particle physics that needs to be expanded, rather than a modification of GR, but no doubt in time we will see.
With LLMs, I feel fairly confident that is not the way to go where science is concerned. As the name suggests, these models are based on language. They can't do maths, nor can they reason. They have no way to tell truth from falsehood and regularly screw up badly. There are other ways to apply AI that will be far more suitable.
One final comment: don't imagine Einstein was ever thought a crank. He was building on already existing ideas (Lorentz, Poincaré etc). He was also appointed professor within 4 years of the publication of his annus mirabilis papers in 1905, which is evidence of very rapid acceptance of his ideas by the science community. There is in some quarters a bit of a c.19th Romantic myth of Einstein as the misunderstood genius, toiling away in his garret room with no money or recognition, due to the implacable opposition a hidebound establishment threatened by his ideas, etc., etc. That's balls.
