Culture and Religion

A world view where the guide for society is based on human nature,
 not on ancient scriptures.  Home  or Topic Groups

 

Cosmology Off The Rails

In the Face Book group:
My post:



Am I the only one that feels that cosmology as a science that has gone off the rails? I expect some ridicule in the comments.
It seems there are always new publications and stories about dark matter or dark energy and now dark fluid.
Cosmology began with well founded science. Newton had described how the motion of objects could be affected by forces including gravity, which was a mutual force of attraction between two objects. Maxwell and others described how electric fields could be either attractive or repulsive depending on the charge polarities. Magnetic fields also could be attractive or repulsive depending on the field directions. These fields were an available source to generate a force for motion. The Lorentz force from a combination of electric and magnetic fields has a perpendicular vector.
I believe everyone will accept these scientists and others verified the relationships and equations.

Roughly at the turn of the millennium Einstein derived a new theory to describe motions due to gravity called space time curvature. Many claim this theory has been confirmed.

With all of this established physics as a  foundation why does cosmology have to make up new 'dark' entities like dark matter and dark energy and the new dark fluid? These dark concepts mean the scientific foundation set by roughly  the year 2000 is quite incapable of explaining our universe.

Is that deficiency really true or are cosmologists missing something?

Dark matter is needed because gravity alone does not explain stellar orbits. With so much plasma in the universe why are electromagnetic forces ignored? Instead invisible dark matter makes up for missing mass but I do not recall equations for exactly how this invisible stuff that is not mass somehow affects stellar motion to match each observation. Are cosmologists just assuming dark matter can do it without an equation to explain and predict it?
With no definition this theory is not falsifiable.
Dark energy is needed because all distant objects are speeding away from the earth at speeds near light. By the way a plot of this data looks like the earth is the center of the universe with everything distant zooming away at similar velocities.
Cosmologists needed a cause for this motion. It could not be gravity because there is nothing seen beyond those objects to attract them. To propose space time curvature as the attractor would result in a plot of all the distant objects being drawn to the distant curvature in space time, but unfortunately that image would resemble a flat earth with objects falling off the distant edge from every direction.
Instead cosmologists proposed a dark energy that pushes all the distant objects to great velocities. A pull on an object generally gets a predictable motion. A push on an object that is not shaped like a box, especially a sphere or ellipse, has the complication of a motion at an angle if not applied precisely perpendicular. However cosmologists usually  refer to dark energy as a push. From what I have seen there is no observed disruption of such complex structures like galaxies when getting such a strong push away from the earth. Even though galaxies are just billions of stars there are electromagnetic forces at play to maintain their integrity so I assume that is why there is no observed  disruption even at a high velocity.

I do not recall equations for exactly how this invisible energy source somehow affects galactic motion to match each observation. I doubt a galaxy can be treated as a single homogeneous object. Are cosmologists just assuming dark energy can do it without an equation to explain and predict it?
With no definition  this theory is not falsifiable.

Hit back to go to previous page in history.
Select  Cosmology to see other posts and comments to that group.