On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 14:32:29 GMT, (Wayne Throop)
wrote:

: Len Lekx
: BUT - until they *are* observed... DIRECTLY... the idea is still suspect.
In what sense is the observation of a neutrino "direct"?
You "observe" cherenkov radiation, which in the theory is due to

Quite correct... it's not a direct observation.

And this you class as more "direct" than "you observe an object
falling, which in the theory is due to mass"?

But that's not an argument for the presence of Dark Matter. Any
more than "you observe an object falling faster than you expect it to"
is an argument for higher mass than measured... maybe our current
theory of gravity is incomplete.

Admittedly, I'm not very close to the problem - I'm not up on the
current information. I'm here because I want to know more...