Does dark matter come in two types?

Or how about the most obvious answer? Dark Matter comes in no types, it
doesn't exist. These two scientists are just trying to find new ways to
justify a failed theory.

There is already quite convincing alternative explanations for the
PAMELA positron detections, namely that it's produced by supernovas. Not
just any supernovas, but a very specific type of supernova recently
discovered, one that produces Calcium and Titanium.

And searching for WIMPs in isolated mines is a waste of time, as they
could easily be signals for neutrinos or just radiation within the mine
itself.

Yousuf Khan

***
Does dark matter come in two types? - physicsworld.com
"That isn't the only problem. If the PAMELA signal was indeed evidence
for annihilation, the dark matter involved would be of a type that would
never show up in direct-detection experiments, such as CDMS-II, located
in a mine in Minnesota, US. But in recent years CDMS-II and other direct
detection experiments have found their own hints of dark matter. "
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/42872

Yousuf Khan wrote:

Or how about the most obvious answer? Dark Matter comes in no types, it
doesn't exist. These two scientists are just trying to find new ways to
justify a failed theory.

Curve fitting is all that remains of contemporary physical theory.
Grant funding will not tolerate the risk of discovery. Physics is
stuck with string theory, the Standard Model, SUSY, and dark matter.
Any junior faculty voicing dissent will be unfunded to death.

There is already quite convincing alternative explanations for the
PAMELA positron detections, namely that it's produced by supernovas. Not
just any supernovas, but a very specific type of supernova recently
discovered, one that produces Calcium and Titanium.

The Church does not tolerate heresy - ESPECIALLY if it can be seen
through a telescope. Galileo set the threshold of eccelsiastical
tolerence - zero.

And searching for WIMPs in isolated mines is a waste of time, as they
could easily be signals for neutrinos or just radiation within the mine
itself.

Properly shielded and selectively sensitive detectors (e.g., XENON)
see *nothing.* When SUSY demanded proton decay with an impossibly
undetectably long half-life, Super-Kamiokande's 50 kilotonnes of water
observed for a decade said "bull****."

(5x10^10 grams)(2H/H2O)(6.022x10^23/mole)(10 years)/(18.015
g/mole-H2O)

Required is greater than 3x10^34 years proton half-life. SUSY then
"recalculated" to add a few decimal places. Hyper-Kamiokande will
whip SUSY's ass.

How can metric gravitation and quantum field theory be incompatible
while each is unfalsifiable? One or more weak founding postulates are
being exposed. Physicists are not stupid, and there are a tremendous
number of them worldwide. How can everybody be blind to the
"obvious?" Easy!

1) All swans are white.
2) Australia.

If Australia were never visited, (1) would be absolutely impregnable.
It is also empirically wrong, Australia visited or not. What does
physics utterly, unquestionably exclude from fundamental
consideration?

1) Extrinsic, extensive, emergent-scale phenomena.
2) Asymmetry.

One can in principle brutally falsify "obvious" founding postulates -
without contradiction of prior observation - simply by looking where
physics will not. Physics is powerless before atomic mass
distribution chirality (geometric parity divergence). Physics lacks
both philosophy and mathemtics to consider it ab initio.

We thus proceed to challenge classical and quantum physics with
empirical falsification: Do opposite shoes vacuum free fall
differently? It is a trivial experiment to perform in existing
apparatus using commercial materials via SOP procedure,

http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/erotor1.jpg
The worst it can do is succeed.
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm
The long form, with pictures.

If spacetime has a detectable chiral vacuum background in the massed
sector (inert to photons), there's your problem.

What a stupid idea! Everybody knows geometric chirality is an
emergent phenomenon that cannot be tested beneath the scale of
chemical bonds, an emergent scale sphere of ~0.3 nm diameter. There
is no need to look, for theory would collapse if it were true.

Uncle Al says, "Theory predicts what it is told to predict. Somebody
should look."

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm

On Jun 9, 12:21*pm, Uncle Al wrote:
Yousuf Khan wrote:

Or how about the most obvious answer? Dark Matter comes in no types, it
doesn't exist. These two scientists are just trying to find new ways to
justify a failed theory.

Curve fitting is all that remains of contemporary physical theory.
Grant funding will not tolerate the risk of discovery. *Physics is
stuck with string theory, the Standard Model, SUSY, and dark matter.
Any junior faculty voicing dissent will be unfunded to death.

There is already quite convincing alternative explanations for the
PAMELA positron detections, namely that it's produced by supernovas. Not
just any supernovas, but a very specific type of supernova recently
discovered, one that produces Calcium and Titanium.

The Church does not tolerate heresy - ESPECIALLY if it can be seen
through a *telescope. *Galileo set the threshold of eccelsiastical
tolerence - zero.

And searching for WIMPs in isolated mines is a waste of time, as they
could easily be signals for neutrinos or just radiation within the mine
itself.

Properly shielded and selectively sensitive detectors (e.g., XENON)
see *nothing.* *When SUSY demanded proton decay with an impossibly
undetectably long half-life, Super-Kamiokande's 50 kilotonnes of water
observed for a decade said "bull****."

(5x10^10 grams)(2H/H2O)(6.022x10^23/mole)(10 years)/(18.015
g/mole-H2O)

Required is greater than 3x10^34 years proton half-life. *SUSY then
"recalculated" to add a few decimal places. *Hyper-Kamiokande will
whip SUSY's ass.

How can metric gravitation and quantum field theory be incompatible
while each is unfalsifiable? *One or more weak founding postulates are
being exposed. *Physicists are not stupid, and there are a tremendous
number of them worldwide. *How can everybody be blind to the
"obvious?" *Easy!

* *1) All swans are white.
* *2) Australia.

If Australia were never visited, (1) would be absolutely impregnable.
It is also empirically wrong, Australia visited or not. *What does
physics utterly, unquestionably exclude from fundamental
consideration?

* *1) Extrinsic, extensive, emergent-scale phenomena.
* *2) Asymmetry.

One can in principle brutally falsify "obvious" founding postulates -
without contradiction of prior observation - simply by looking where
physics will not. *Physics is powerless before atomic mass
distribution chirality (geometric parity divergence). *Physics lacks
both philosophy and mathemtics to consider it ab initio.

We thus proceed to challenge classical and quantum physics with
empirical falsification: *Do opposite shoes vacuum free fall
differently? *It is a trivial experiment to perform in existing
apparatus using commercial materials via SOP procedure,

http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/erotor1.jpg
*The worst it can do is succeed.http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm
*The long form, with pictures.

If spacetime has a detectable chiral vacuum background in the massed
sector (inert to photons), there's your problem.

What a stupid idea! *Everybody knows geometric chirality is an
emergent phenomenon that cannot be tested beneath the scale of
chemical bonds, an emergent scale sphere of ~0.3 nm diameter. *There
is no need to look, for theory would collapse if it were true.

Uncle Al says, "Theory predicts what it is told to predict. *Somebody
should look."

--
Uncle Alhttp://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
*(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm

If dark matter had a common origin with normal matter at the Big Bang
they must always be found together but they are not. There should be
an even mix and there is not and there nothing to seperate them. I
challenge anyone.

Mitch Raemsch

Dear Yousuf Khan:

On Jun 9, 11:05*am, Yousuf Khan wrote:
Or how about the most obvious answer? Dark Matter
comes in no types, it doesn't exist. These two
scientists are just trying to find new ways to
justify a failed theory.

And it seems to me, the basis of DM lies in applying a M/L ratio
determined in an area that is "swept clear" to an entire spiral
galaxy... *despite* "seeing" evidence of anomalous normal non-lumenous
matter collections that are not present near the center.

DM is perhaps simply justifying a simple accounting error. Now what
happens to cosmology if we have "nine" times more normal matter?

There is already quite convincing alternative
explanations for the PAMELA positron detections,
namely that it's produced by supernovas. Not
just any supernovas, but a very specific type of
supernova recently discovered, one that produces
Calcium and Titanium.

Got more on this?

I also noticed that particle detections (other detectors) were aligned
with our motion through the Milky Way, rather than aligned radially
outwards from Sagittarius-A, or orthonormal to both.

And searching for WIMPs in isolated mines is a
waste of time, as they could easily be signals for
neutrinos or just radiation within the mine itself.

Not a waste then, since they also can serve to detect supernovae
events. Besides, those holes have to be good for something... ;)

David A. Smith

BURT wrote:

On Jun 9, 12:21 pm, Uncle Al wrote:
Yousuf Khan wrote:

Or how about the most obvious answer? Dark Matter comes in no types, it
doesn't exist. These two scientists are just trying to find new ways to
justify a failed theory.

Curve fitting is all that remains of contemporary physical theory.
Grant funding will not tolerate the risk of discovery. Physics is
stuck with string theory, the Standard Model, SUSY, and dark matter.
Any junior faculty voicing dissent will be unfunded to death.

There is already quite convincing alternative explanations for the
PAMELA positron detections, namely that it's produced by supernovas. Not
just any supernovas, but a very specific type of supernova recently
discovered, one that produces Calcium and Titanium.

The Church does not tolerate heresy - ESPECIALLY if it can be seen
through a telescope. Galileo set the threshold of eccelsiastical
tolerence - zero.

And searching for WIMPs in isolated mines is a waste of time, as they
could easily be signals for neutrinos or just radiation within the mine
itself.

Properly shielded and selectively sensitive detectors (e.g., XENON)
see *nothing.* When SUSY demanded proton decay with an impossibly
undetectably long half-life, Super-Kamiokande's 50 kilotonnes of water
observed for a decade said "bull****."

(5x10^10 grams)(2H/H2O)(6.022x10^23/mole)(10 years)/(18.015
g/mole-H2O)

Required is greater than 3x10^34 years proton half-life. SUSY then
"recalculated" to add a few decimal places. Hyper-Kamiokande will
whip SUSY's ass.

How can metric gravitation and quantum field theory be incompatible
while each is unfalsifiable? One or more weak founding postulates are
being exposed. Physicists are not stupid, and there are a tremendous
number of them worldwide. How can everybody be blind to the
"obvious?" Easy!

1) All swans are white.
2) Australia.

If Australia were never visited, (1) would be absolutely impregnable.
It is also empirically wrong, Australia visited or not. What does
physics utterly, unquestionably exclude from fundamental
consideration?

1) Extrinsic, extensive, emergent-scale phenomena.
2) Asymmetry.

One can in principle brutally falsify "obvious" founding postulates -
without contradiction of prior observation - simply by looking where
physics will not. Physics is powerless before atomic mass
distribution chirality (geometric parity divergence). Physics lacks
both philosophy and mathemtics to consider it ab initio.

We thus proceed to challenge classical and quantum physics with
empirical falsification: Do opposite shoes vacuum free fall
differently? It is a trivial experiment to perform in existing
apparatus using commercial materials via SOP procedure,

http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/erotor1.jpg
The worst it can do is succeed.http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm
The long form, with pictures.

If spacetime has a detectable chiral vacuum background in the massed
sector (inert to photons), there's your problem.

What a stupid idea! Everybody knows geometric chirality is an
emergent phenomenon that cannot be tested beneath the scale of
chemical bonds, an emergent scale sphere of ~0.3 nm diameter. There
is no need to look, for theory would collapse if it were true.

Uncle Al says, "Theory predicts what it is told to predict. Somebody
should look."

--
Uncle Alhttp://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm

If dark matter had a common origin with normal matter at the Big Bang
they must always be found together but they are not.
[snipc rap]

idiot

Photons and neutrinos are not pinned to matter - and they interact.

Mitch Raemsch

idiot
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm

Yousuf Khan wrote:

Or how about the most obvious answer? Dark Matter comes in no types, it
doesn't exist. These two scientists are just trying to find new ways to
justify a failed theory.

Bullet cluster.

Pick your new physics - either gravitation or particle physics, either way a
field gets rewritten.


There is already quite convincing alternative explanations for the
PAMELA positron detections, namely that it's produced by supernovas. Not
just any supernovas, but a very specific type of supernova recently
discovered, one that produces Calcium and Titanium.

One can't help but wonder how exceedingly rare supernovae can generate a
consistent background of signal.


And searching for WIMPs in isolated mines is a waste of time, as they
could easily be signals for neutrinos or just radiation within the mine
itself.

If only scientists considered the obvious as carefully as you.

Wait, they have. There's a reason shielding is discussed so heavily in these
types of experiments.


Yousuf Khan

***
Does dark matter come in two types? - physicsworld.com
"That isn't the only problem. If the PAMELA signal was indeed evidence
for annihilation, the dark matter involved would be of a type that would
never show up in direct-detection experiments, such as CDMS-II, located
in a mine in Minnesota, US. But in recent years CDMS-II and other direct
detection experiments have found their own hints of dark matter. "
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/42872

On Jun 9, 4:24*pm, Uncle Al wrote:
BURT wrote:

On Jun 9, 12:21 pm, Uncle Al wrote:
Yousuf Khan wrote:

Or how about the most obvious answer? Dark Matter comes in no types, it
doesn't exist. These two scientists are just trying to find new ways to
justify a failed theory.

Curve fitting is all that remains of contemporary physical theory.
Grant funding will not tolerate the risk of discovery. *Physics is
stuck with string theory, the Standard Model, SUSY, and dark matter.
Any junior faculty voicing dissent will be unfunded to death.

There is already quite convincing alternative explanations for the
PAMELA positron detections, namely that it's produced by supernovas.. Not
just any supernovas, but a very specific type of supernova recently
discovered, one that produces Calcium and Titanium.

The Church does not tolerate heresy - ESPECIALLY if it can be seen
through a *telescope. *Galileo set the threshold of eccelsiastical
tolerence - zero.

And searching for WIMPs in isolated mines is a waste of time, as they
could easily be signals for neutrinos or just radiation within the mine
itself.

Properly shielded and selectively sensitive detectors (e.g., XENON)
see *nothing.* *When SUSY demanded proton decay with an impossibly
undetectably long half-life, Super-Kamiokande's 50 kilotonnes of water
observed for a decade said "bull****."

(5x10^10 grams)(2H/H2O)(6.022x10^23/mole)(10 years)/(18.015
g/mole-H2O)

Required is greater than 3x10^34 years proton half-life. *SUSY then
"recalculated" to add a few decimal places. *Hyper-Kamiokande will
whip SUSY's ass.

How can metric gravitation and quantum field theory be incompatible
while each is unfalsifiable? *One or more weak founding postulates are
being exposed. *Physicists are not stupid, and there are a tremendous
number of them worldwide. *How can everybody be blind to the
"obvious?" *Easy!

* *1) All swans are white.
* *2) Australia.

If Australia were never visited, (1) would be absolutely impregnable.
It is also empirically wrong, Australia visited or not. *What does
physics utterly, unquestionably exclude from fundamental
consideration?

* *1) Extrinsic, extensive, emergent-scale phenomena.
* *2) Asymmetry.

One can in principle brutally falsify "obvious" founding postulates -
without contradiction of prior observation - simply by looking where
physics will not. *Physics is powerless before atomic mass
distribution chirality (geometric parity divergence). *Physics lacks
both philosophy and mathemtics to consider it ab initio.

We thus proceed to challenge classical and quantum physics with
empirical falsification: *Do opposite shoes vacuum free fall
differently? *It is a trivial experiment to perform in existing
apparatus using commercial materials via SOP procedure,

http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/erotor1.jpg
*The worst it can do is succeed.http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4..htm
*The long form, with pictures.

If spacetime has a detectable chiral vacuum background in the massed
sector (inert to photons), there's your problem.

What a stupid idea! *Everybody knows geometric chirality is an
emergent phenomenon that cannot be tested beneath the scale of
chemical bonds, an emergent scale sphere of ~0.3 nm diameter. *There
is no need to look, for theory would collapse if it were true.

Uncle Al says, "Theory predicts what it is told to predict. *Somebody
should look."

--
Uncle Alhttp://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
*(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm

If dark matter had a common origin with normal matter at the Big Bang
they must always be found together but they are not.

[snipc rap]

idiot

Photons and neutrinos are not pinned to matter - and they interact.

Please show the measurements. How do we see them interacting?
Does a photon have light of its own that we can see it by even before
the photon is absorbed?

Please show how we can see a neutrino. Kiss my ass al.
Or are you going to avoid another challenge?

Mitch Raemsch


Mitch Raemsch

idiot
--
Uncle Alhttp://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
*(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz4.htm- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

On Jun 9, 11:05*am, Yousuf Khan wrote:
Or how about the most obvious answer? Dark Matter comes in no types, it
doesn't exist. These two scientists are just trying to find new ways to
justify a failed theory.

There is already quite convincing alternative explanations for the
PAMELA positron detections, namely that it's produced by supernovas. Not
just any supernovas, but a very specific type of supernova recently
discovered, one that produces Calcium and Titanium.

And searching for WIMPs in isolated mines is a waste of time, as they
could easily be signals for neutrinos or just radiation within the mine
itself.

* * * * Yousuf Khan

***
Does dark matter come in two types? - physicsworld.com
"That isn't the only problem. If the PAMELA signal was indeed evidence
for annihilation, the dark matter involved would be of a type that would
never show up in direct-detection experiments, such as CDMS-II, located
in a mine in Minnesota, US. But in recent years CDMS-II and other direct
detection experiments have found their own hints of dark matter. "http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/42872

The gravity accelerator of satellites moving in gravitational wells
accelerates
axle forces, slower speeds carry hidden inertia (galaxy torque). This
torque
can be shown in models "as if more weight was riding on the axle"

But this theory ran into confusion when scientists said that the shape
of
dark matter is not disk bound, but is like a ball, a squished ball
around
galaxies.

Then I said that most of the matter is not on the disk where things
are
highly compacted with gasses and matter, but in the less active dark
zone,
which too revolves around an axle running vertically through the
galaxy's
center. It makes sense, since smaller galaxies have more dark matter,
and larger ones attract more of the mass to the disk region.

The gravitational sphere of a spiral galaxy rotates even in the dark
region.

Galaxies in the early universe had dark matter between them, then
galaxies ripped apart into chunks, where dark matter was trapped
around them.

These chunks concentrate around galaxies gravitationally, and a weaker
dark matter is seen around galactic clusters, but there dark matter
forms
a long cigar shape.

On Jun 10, 3:22*pm, gb wrote:
On Jun 9, 11:05*am, Yousuf Khan wrote:





Or how about the most obvious answer? Dark Matter comes in no types, it
doesn't exist. These two scientists are just trying to find new ways to
justify a failed theory.

There is already quite convincing alternative explanations for the
PAMELA positron detections, namely that it's produced by supernovas. Not
just any supernovas, but a very specific type of supernova recently
discovered, one that produces Calcium and Titanium.

And searching for WIMPs in isolated mines is a waste of time, as they
could easily be signals for neutrinos or just radiation within the mine
itself.

* * * * Yousuf Khan

***
Does dark matter come in two types? - physicsworld.com
"That isn't the only problem. If the PAMELA signal was indeed evidence
for annihilation, the dark matter involved would be of a type that would
never show up in direct-detection experiments, such as CDMS-II, located
in a mine in Minnesota, US. But in recent years CDMS-II and other direct
detection experiments have found their own hints of dark matter. "http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/42872

The gravity accelerator of satellites moving in gravitational wells
accelerates
axle forces, slower speeds carry hidden inertia (galaxy torque). This
torque
can be shown in models "as if more weight was riding on the axle"

But this theory ran into confusion when scientists said that the shape
of
dark matter is not disk bound, but is like a ball, a squished ball
around
galaxies.

Then I said that most of the matter is not on the disk where things
are
highly compacted with gasses and matter, but in the less active dark
zone,
which too revolves around an axle running vertically through the
galaxy's
center. It makes sense, since smaller galaxies have more dark matter,
and larger ones attract more of the mass to the disk region.

The gravitational sphere of a spiral galaxy rotates even in the dark
region.

Galaxies in the early universe had dark matter between them, then
galaxies ripped apart into chunks, where dark matter was trapped
around them.

These chunks concentrate around galaxies gravitationally, and a weaker
dark matter is seen around galactic clusters, but there dark matter
forms
a long cigar shape.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

WIMPS And MACHOs are 90% of the universe These sub-micro particles
only have gravitation.(no charge no interating) However they out
number neutrinos,photons and electrons combined. TreBert

On 6/10/2010 1:41 AM, BURT wrote:
If dark matter had a common origin with normal matter at the Big Bang
they must always be found together but they are not. There should be
an even mix and there is not and there nothing to seperate them. I
challenge anyone.

Mitch Raemsch

You said something smart, finally.

Yousuf Khan