|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
More on LIGO, DM, PBHs, CIB and CXB
On Wednesday, July 27, 2016 at 6:54:14 PM UTC-4, Phillip Helbig
(undress to reply) wrote: I think that you would probably accuse anyone else extrapolating from two events of being over-confident. I'm not. It is you who "knows" what the dark matter is and who rushes to judgements about the significance of negative results. Again, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. One is, correctly, not required to prove one's innocence in court. We are not as far apart in our thinking as we used to be. Empirical evidence has a way of doing that. By the way, your two statements above violate the rules of SAR. (1) We are not allowed to speculate on what someone might or might not do/think. (2) The second statement is not true and is a personal attack. Some of my posts have been rejected for these reasons. The same rules should apply to all. Right? RLO http://www3.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw [[Mod. note -- Our newsgroup charter forbids discussion of the moderation policy in the newsgroup. (I'm not quite sure where it would be discussable in a public forum; there's always private E-mail.) So let's close the discussion (speculation) about what various people do or don't think here, and get back to discussing research in astronomy and astrophysics. -- jt]] |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
More on LIGO, DM, PBHs, CIB and CXB
In article ,
"Robert L. Oldershaw" writes: I think that you would probably accuse anyone else extrapolating from two events of being over-confident. I'm not. It is you who "knows" what the dark matter is and who rushes to judgements about the significance of negative results. Again, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. One is, correctly, not required to prove one's innocence in court. We are not as far apart in our thinking as we used to be. Empirical evidence has a way of doing that. That's good. Maybe my post will be rejected by the moderator for similar reasons, but if so, I ask him to send it to you nonetheless. By the way, your two statements above violate the rules of SAR. (1) We are not allowed to speculate on what someone might or might not do/think. Since there is ample evidence in the newsgroup archives, it is not speculation. (2) The second statement is not true and is a personal attack. I don't see why it's a personal attack. In this context, a "personal attack" means attacking the person and not the positions held by that person. I am discussing your position, and it should be evident to all that you think---with no evidence at all, based mainly on your theory which has failed a testable prediction---compact macroscopic objects are the only viable dark-matter candidate. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
More on LIGO, DM, PBHs, CIB and CXB
[An earlier version of this article seems to have vanished; sorry if
it appears twice. This version is better.] In article , Jos Bergervoet writes: http://arxiv.org/abs/1605.04023 .... Or is it ruled out that they are PBHs? (That would in fact be contrary to what the paper mentions..) I don't see how it's possible to rule out that any black holes are primordial, but that doesn't seem to be the way to bet. Current theory of binary star evolution naturally produces such mergers. One recent paper is at http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture18322.html (As far as I can tell, this is open access, but if not, there's a preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/1602.04531 .) Commentary on the article is at http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...l/534478a.html -- Help keep our newsgroup healthy; please don't feed the trolls. Steve Willner Phone 617-495-7123 Cambridge, MA 02138 USA |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Only GOPer Mafia Could Get Away With LIGO | Herbert Glazier | Misc | 21 | September 19th 16 10:27 PM |
Is LIGO for Real??? | G=EMC^2TreBert | Misc | 13 | March 27th 16 09:20 PM |
LIGO and LISA | TMA[_2_] | Amateur Astronomy | 3 | February 24th 07 03:11 PM |
LIGO Progress | Mike | Astronomy Misc | 8 | April 5th 06 04:21 AM |
LIGO Interferometer Question | Mike | Astronomy Misc | 5 | March 21st 05 11:04 PM |