Do flat earthers recognise attraction between mass?

Of course, there is no direct evidence of dark matter.  That is, it is, by definition, impossible to observe directly.  However, many "anomalies" are resolved by hypothesizing the existence of additional mass.  It seems pretty simple to me.  It's not just "well, i suppose the equations would work if we add mass."  It's that many aspects of observation in cosmology are directly explained by stipulating that additional mass does exist. 

My point is, the theorization of dark matter is absolutely not arbitrary.  There are many good reasons to believe that dark matter exists.  So saying that our understanding of the laws of physics is flawed is just misleading.  You say that just because it is very facilitative to hypothesize dark matter, we must totally revise the known laws, and I absolutely disagree.  It makes much more sense to revise our understanding of the makeup of the universe (which is based on very difficult measurements and observations) than to revise our understanding of the fundamental laws (which are based on empirical observation of experiments). 

Of course, the one big assumption we must make is that the laws of physics are consistent throughout the universe, but it is an assumption that is necessary in order to attempt to draw any conclusions at all.

Of course, there is no direct evidence of dark matter.  That is, it is, by definition, impossible to observe directly.  However, many "anomalies" are resolved by hypothesizing the existence of additional mass.  It seems pretty simple to me.  It's not just "well, i suppose the equations would work if we add mass."  It's that many aspects of observation in cosmology are directly explained by stipulating that additional mass does exist. 

My point is, the theorization of dark matter is absolutely not arbitrary.  There are many good reasons to believe that dark matter exists.  So saying that our understanding of the laws of physics is flawed is just misleading.  You say that just because it is very facilitative to hypothesize dark matter, we must totally revise the known laws, and I absolutely disagree.  It makes much more sense to revise our understanding of the makeup of the universe (which is based on very difficult measurements and observations) than to revise our understanding of the fundamental laws (which are based on empirical observation of experiments). 

Of course, the one big assumption we must make is that the laws of physics are consistent throughout the universe, but it is an assumption that is necessary in order to attempt to draw any conclusions at all.

Thank you for an intelligent post on the subject. There is also other anomalies, such as the fact that we have observed light passing through gas from very distant galaxies that seems to suggest alpha is different at those distances.

We have also observed a strange acceleration in objects we send outside of our solar system. It isn't much, but the drift can't be accounted for by our current understanding of the universe. I agree that dark matter is highly probable, but we are going to at least redefine the equations for gravity at macro distances within the next 100 years.

Of course, there is no direct evidence of dark matter.

Yes there is.

Quote from: munkirench on May 08, 2009, 09:52:58 PM

Of course, there is no direct evidence of dark matter.

Yes there is.

lol

Quote from: munkirench on May 08, 2009, 09:52:58 PM

Of course, there is no direct evidence of dark matter.

Yes there is.

Ok. So what is this direct way to observe dark matter?

And once you tell us, we will call the Nobel Prize committee, you'll be receiving yours soon.

Ok. So what is this direct way to observe dark matter?

And once you tell us, we will call the Nobel Prize committee, you'll be receiving yours soon.

Here:

http://chandra.harvard.edu/press/06_releases/press_082106.html

I look forward to my Nobel Prize.

Quote from: Raist on May 09, 2009, 10:27:11 AM

Ok. So what is this direct way to observe dark matter?

And once you tell us, we will call the Nobel Prize committee, you'll be receiving yours soon.

Here:

http://chandra.harvard.edu/press/06_releases/press_082106.html

I look forward to my Nobel Prize.

You can have mine!

Quote from: Raist on May 09, 2009, 10:27:11 AM

Ok. So what is this direct way to observe dark matter?

And once you tell us, we will call the Nobel Prize committee, you'll be receiving yours soon.

Here:

http://chandra.harvard.edu/press/06_releases/press_082106.html

I look forward to my Nobel Prize.

That isn't direct evidence. That is indirect evidence.

Technically, that is indeed indirect evidence.  Although I would say it is stronger evidence than we previously had, it is still indirect evidence because it relies on deduction based on a different observation.