 |
| The "Cosmic Web" is more like a cosmic electric grid. It is strung together not with hypothetical "dark matter" but with electrodynamics, IE ionized plasma along with the cosmic dust and gas known to be out there. REAL matter. Plasma only needs to be 1% ionized to conduct, and it can easily drive galactic rotation even when very diffuse in concentration. |
Assumption: Gravity alone causes galactic rotation so therefore without sufficient mass (and it follows, gravity) then there must be some unknown source of gravity undetected by us.
Astronomers used a new technique to reveal 'lost' light around the largest galaxies in Hubble Ultra-Deep Field images. ... By reprocessing the image, and combining several images, the group was able to recover a large quantity of light from the outer zones of the largest galaxies in the image. This accounts for some of the "missing matter" but nowhere near all of it, which as it turns out is not required. The most interesting part of Hubbles "Lost Light" is it shows more clearly the plasma connections between galaxies and ultimately the cosmic web structure.
50 years after the basics of the galactic rotation problem has been solved (now that electrodynamics propagating through ionized plasma is understood to make up the fillimentry Birkeland Currents and associated magnetic fields that drive them) we haven't admitted to ourselves that gravity isn't the primary force at galactic scales. It is (arguably) at solar system scales but as it turns out it may even be entirely irrelevant at galactic orders of magnitude. Despite this the search for the dark matter required to validate the joke parading as the standard cosmological model, the LAMBDA-CDM model, rages on. The cold dark matter model for some reason dominates cosmology despite no predictive success and nothing but failure in almost all channels of its expression.
MIT physicist Winston H Bostic first proved ionized plasma could form the characteristic spriral galaxy shapes, in a laboratory with magnetic feilds and no gravity required, back in 1956
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_H._Bostick
More recently this was done by Professor Anthony Perrat, of Los Alamos Labs including computer models approximating all of the main spiral galaxy formations.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Peratt
The futile search for dark matter still rages on. It remains still to this day utterly imperceptible to mortals. Either its very good at hiding itself, or, the rather more obvious scenario presents itself. It quite obviously does not exist! The assumption that gravity alone shapes the cosmos lead to failure of reasoning involving imagining invisible matter being in places where not enough gravity was detected for celestial mechanics, instead of looking for another force. Its easily the most idiotic decision in any branch of science in history.
The lunatics are running the asylum? Or is just that the very nature of establishment is to protect the grants, funding and careers at stake? To protect the Status Quo?
Synchrotron radiation incorrectly inferring "dark matter"
Establishment science is currently in such a pathetic state of affairs that it uses hypothetical or theoretical conclusions or mathematics as proof. At such a point ( the invention of "strong theoretical evidence") the observation aspect is no longer needed. We are no longer doing science.
Dark Matter, Dark Energy, cosmic inflation, strange matter etc. There is no evidence for any of it but for some reason it's acceptable that they just add the ad-hoc property of invisibility onto it and they get away with it. Just like you would if you were a clown pulling an invisible penny from a child's ear. This is of course not science. Science requires that observation is actually supposed to back up theory. This situation with the phantom unicorns we are in can (at best) be called guessing, rushing to conclusions or speculation.
I would go a step further and suggest that Cosmology must be removed from the responsibility of trying to understand the big, universal questions and instead be transferred to a science fiction movie set. AS far as I can tell they appear to be mathematicians parading as physicists or s frustrated science fiction writers for real. Perhaps they should be replaced with the rocket scientists, engineers and the electrical engineers that do such an unbelievable job on the space probes, craft and telescopes. Those guys know what they are doing!
The table below shows how cosmologists have dark matter so well classified and technically broken down. Not bad considering nobody has heard, seen or smelled a a single atom of it. But Nobel Prizes are still to this day awarded for work in the field. I would suggest to all of them that waiting for evidence before declaring it certain is prudent, but I'm old fashioned, I like science to follow the scientific method... Call me crazy!!
To remind yourself of just how pathetic the state of affairs is today read this:
https://www.universetoday.com/141713/massive-photons-could-explain-dark-matter-but-dont/
It started off in earnest but after all this time I would say this now has the paw print of a huge money wasting scam all over it. Firstly we dont need these fantasy unicorn and fairy dust concoctions. Plasma Physics and Electrodynamics has already explained everything that baffles the standard cosmological model, but to concede electrodynamics through models like Plasma Cosmology, the Electric Universe or the Thunderbolts project, were right all along, or at least closer to it. But these guys are not publically funded, they are self funded and as such will make the cosmologists who are pissing away our tax money look like idiots. With a bit of luck they will lose their jobs and their publicly funded status.
However, that is exactly why they are not teaching science anymore. Science would expose them. They teach mathematics and a bizarre fetish for trying to explain the universe with a single force. Gravity. This obviously was never going to work, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO HAVE BALANCED SYSTEMS AND EQUILIBRIUM WITHOUT A MINIMUM OF AT LEAST TWO FORCES plus velocity is needed. Even simple orbital systems quickly descend in chaos with one attractive force added to velocity. But the original gatekeers adjusted the syllabus so all the lies are tought AS SCIENCE, in prestigious Universities, and graduates end up working for places like NASA, and use the telescopes and funding TO ACTUALLY LOOK for all the dark things they made up to comply with conclusions only using gravity.
It's a pity because these are not hard problems to solve for real scientists, the dark matter problem can be solved by watching the below 60 second clip, and because the obvious answer with loads of evidence wasnt "gravity" they concocted an eighty year long search for the invisible evidence. They already had the answer, gravity, the matter would surely turn up eventually. By then evidence wont be a part of the science anyway if they keep going like that. In case, we foot the bill.
These clowns have inserted full blown lunacy all over science, and we pay for it. They would have us believe most of the matter and energy in the universe is just mysteriously invisible, that there are 11 spatial dimensions and that the universe is just a 2D hologram on a 3D sphere, when actually there ARE other explanations that would not make such an all-around mockery of Occam's Razor. The below clip explains how the origins of dark matter were not the sorcery of today, simply matter we couldn't see. It follows what went wrong.
The "lost light" of Hubble.
MIT physicist Winston H Bostic first proved ionized plasma could form the characteristic spriral galaxy shapes, in a laboratory with magnetic feilds and no gravity required, back in 1956
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston_H._Bostick
 |
| Bostic's Lab plasmoids |
More recently this was done by Professor Anthony Perrat, of Los Alamos Labs including computer models approximating all of the main spiral galaxy formations.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Peratt
 |
| Perrat's work |
Below: Mainstream cosmology seems to be getting to the point where alot of questions are being asked about the intractable problems presented by the fruitless search for Dark Matter, but is this impacting on the model in any meaningful way?
The lunatics are running the asylum? Or is just that the very nature of establishment is to protect the grants, funding and careers at stake? To protect the Status Quo?
Establishment science is currently in such a pathetic state of affairs that it uses hypothetical or theoretical conclusions or mathematics as proof. At such a point ( the invention of "strong theoretical evidence") the observation aspect is no longer needed. We are no longer doing science.
Dark Matter, Dark Energy, cosmic inflation, strange matter etc. There is no evidence for any of it but for some reason it's acceptable that they just add the ad-hoc property of invisibility onto it and they get away with it. Just like you would if you were a clown pulling an invisible penny from a child's ear. This is of course not science. Science requires that observation is actually supposed to back up theory. This situation with the phantom unicorns we are in can (at best) be called guessing, rushing to conclusions or speculation.
I would go a step further and suggest that Cosmology must be removed from the responsibility of trying to understand the big, universal questions and instead be transferred to a science fiction movie set. AS far as I can tell they appear to be mathematicians parading as physicists or s frustrated science fiction writers for real. Perhaps they should be replaced with the rocket scientists, engineers and the electrical engineers that do such an unbelievable job on the space probes, craft and telescopes. Those guys know what they are doing!
The table below shows how cosmologists have dark matter so well classified and technically broken down. Not bad considering nobody has heard, seen or smelled a a single atom of it. But Nobel Prizes are still to this day awarded for work in the field. I would suggest to all of them that waiting for evidence before declaring it certain is prudent, but I'm old fashioned, I like science to follow the scientific method... Call me crazy!!
To remind yourself of just how pathetic the state of affairs is today read this:
https://www.universetoday.com/141713/massive-photons-could-explain-dark-matter-but-dont/
It started off in earnest but after all this time I would say this now has the paw print of a huge money wasting scam all over it. Firstly we dont need these fantasy unicorn and fairy dust concoctions. Plasma Physics and Electrodynamics has already explained everything that baffles the standard cosmological model, but to concede electrodynamics through models like Plasma Cosmology, the Electric Universe or the Thunderbolts project, were right all along, or at least closer to it. But these guys are not publically funded, they are self funded and as such will make the cosmologists who are pissing away our tax money look like idiots. With a bit of luck they will lose their jobs and their publicly funded status.
However, that is exactly why they are not teaching science anymore. Science would expose them. They teach mathematics and a bizarre fetish for trying to explain the universe with a single force. Gravity. This obviously was never going to work, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO HAVE BALANCED SYSTEMS AND EQUILIBRIUM WITHOUT A MINIMUM OF AT LEAST TWO FORCES plus velocity is needed. Even simple orbital systems quickly descend in chaos with one attractive force added to velocity. But the original gatekeers adjusted the syllabus so all the lies are tought AS SCIENCE, in prestigious Universities, and graduates end up working for places like NASA, and use the telescopes and funding TO ACTUALLY LOOK for all the dark things they made up to comply with conclusions only using gravity.
It's a pity because these are not hard problems to solve for real scientists, the dark matter problem can be solved by watching the below 60 second clip, and because the obvious answer with loads of evidence wasnt "gravity" they concocted an eighty year long search for the invisible evidence. They already had the answer, gravity, the matter would surely turn up eventually. By then evidence wont be a part of the science anyway if they keep going like that. In case, we foot the bill.
These clowns have inserted full blown lunacy all over science, and we pay for it. They would have us believe most of the matter and energy in the universe is just mysteriously invisible, that there are 11 spatial dimensions and that the universe is just a 2D hologram on a 3D sphere, when actually there ARE other explanations that would not make such an all-around mockery of Occam's Razor. The below clip explains how the origins of dark matter were not the sorcery of today, simply matter we couldn't see. It follows what went wrong.
With that established, someone needs to explain what good it would do even if there was a claim dark matter was discovered, because its not just missing mass to be accounted for, Birkeland currents drive galactic rotation with no need for gravity..
.. but also entire galaxies move in synch with these currents, and dark matter cant explain that now can it?
 |
| If you look closely you won't see anything, that's an accurate representation of dark matter Click here for part 2 of my "Assumptions in science" series dealing with the thermonuclear solar model.
References:
References supported by the following published scientific papers
PLASMA COSMOLOGY
The Evidence For Electrical Currents in Cosmic Plasma, A. L. Peratt, IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 18, p.26 (1990) (548KB).
Plasma Experiments in the Laboratory and Space, A. L. Peratt, C.-G. Fälthammar, and N. Rynn (1992) (548KB)
Equilibrium of Intergalactic Currents, B. E. Meierovich and A. L. Peratt, IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 20, p.891, 1992 (152KB)
Alfvén Waves and Birkeland Currents, T. A. Potemra, Physica Scripta, T60, 107-112, 1995
Advances in Numerical Modeling of Astrophysical and Space Plasma, A. L. Peratt, APSS 242, 1997 (3.3MB)
Advances in Numerical Modeling of Astrophysical and Space Plasma, Part II Astrophysical Force Laws on the Large Scale. A. L. Peratt, APSS 256, 1998 (2.1MB)
Advances in Numerical Modeling of Astrophysical and Space Plasma, Part II Astrophysical Force Laws on the Large Scale. A .L. Peratt, APSS 256, 1998 [Adobe annotated edition] (8.3MB)
The Redshift Revisited A.K.T. Assis and M.C.D. Neves(36KB), Astrophys. Space Sci. 227, 13-24, 1995 (696K)
The Temperature of Space, C.H. Guillame 1896 (108KB)
Thermalization of synchrotron radiation from field-aligned currents, W. Peter and A. Peratt, Laser and Particle Beams, vol. 6, part 3, pp. 493-501, 1988 (560K)
COBE Satellite Finds No Hint of Excess in the Cosmic Microwave Spectrum, Physics Today, 1990 (128K).
COBE Sows Cosmological Confusion, Science, vol. 257, 28, 1992 (356K).
Fretting About Statistics, Daniel Kleppner, Physics Today, July 1992 (236KB).
On the Critical Ionization Velocity Effect in Interstellar Space and Possible Detection of Related Continuum Emission, G. L. Verschuur, IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., vol. 35, pp. 759-766, 2007.
Atlas of Peculiar Galaxies, H. Arp, Astrophys. J., Supplement Series, 123-132, 1966 (152K).
Evolution of the Plasma Universe: I. Double Radio Galaxies, Quasars, and Extragalactic Jets, A. L. Peratt, IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. Vol. PS-14, N.6, pp.639-660, December 1986.(1.7M)
Evolution of the Plasma Universe: II. The Formation of Systems of Galaxies, A. L. Peratt, IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. Vol. PS-14, N.6, pp.763-778, December 1986 (1.9M).
The Role of Particle Beams and Electrical Currents in the Plasma Universe, A. L. Peratt, Laser and Particle Beams, vol.6, part.3, pp.471-491, 1988.
Electrical Engineering, Plasma Science, and the Plasma Universe, A. L. Peratt, 1986 (312KB)
The Golden Anniversary of Magnetic Storms and the Aurorae, T. A. Potemra and A. L. Peratt, 1989 (516KB)
Guest Editorial: The IEEE International Conference on Plasma Cosmology, La Jolla, CA, A. L. Peratt, 1990 (1.1MB)
Guest Editorial: Plasma Experiments in the Laboratory and in Space, A. L. Peratt, C.-G. Fälthammar, N. Rynn, IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 1992 (548K).
Guest Editorial, Space Weather Effects, S. T. Lai, N. Singh, A. L. Peratt, IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. December 2000 (36K).
Guest Editorial Sixth Special Issue on Space and Cosmic Plasma, A. L. Peratt and C.-G. Fälthammer, December 2003 (1.4MB)
Guest Editorial Seventh Special Issue on Space and Cosmic Plasma, A. L. Peratt and T. E. Eastman, August 2007 (3 MB)
Evolution of Colliding Plasmas, A. Peratt, J. Green, and D. Nielsen, Physical Review Letters, 44, pp. 1767-1770, 1980 (248K).
Microwave Generation from Filamentation and Vortex Formation within Magnetically Confined Electron Beams, A. L. Peratt and C. M. Snell, Physical Review Letters, 54, pp. 1167-1170, 1985 (688K).
A Particle-in-Cell Simulation of a Cyclic Beam Buncher, A. L. Peratt, C. M. Snell, and F. S. Felber, IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 18, p.626, (1990) (448KB).
Comments on Tired-Light Mechanisms, H. Arp, IEEE TPS v.18, 1990 (136K).
Evidence for Quantized and Variable Redshifts in the Cosmic Background Rest Frame , W. G. Tifft, in Modern Mathematical Models of Time and Their Applications to Physics and Cosmology, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1997 (1.2M).
Redshifts and Blueshifts of Spectral Lines Emitted by Two Correlated Sources, E. Wolf, Phys. Rev. Letters, 58, 2646, 1987 (176K)
Shifts of Spectral Lines Caused by Scattering from Fluctuating Random Media, D. F. V. James, M. P. Savedoff, and E. Wolf, Astrophysical J., 359, 67, 1990 (448K).
Filamentation of Volcanic Plumes on the Jovian Satellite Io, A. L. Peratt and A. J. Dessler, Astrophys. Space Sci. 144, pp. 451-461, 1988 (1M).
Was the Titius-Bode Series Dictated by the Minimum Energy States of the Generic Solar Plasma? E. Wells, IEEE TPS v.18, 1990 (264K).
Interstellar Neutral Hydrogen Filaments at High Galactic Latitudes and the Bennett Pinch, G. L. Verschuur, Astrophys. Space Sci. 227, pp. 187-198, 1995 (776K).
Radiation Properties of Pulsar Magnetospheres: Observation, Theory, and Experiment. K. Healy and A. Peratt, Astrophys. Space Sci. 227, 1995 (1.1MB).
Galactic Neutral Hydrogen Emission Profile Structure, G. L. Verschuur and A. L. Peratt, Astron. J. 118, pp.1252-1267, 1999 (672K).
Observation of the CIV Effect in Interstellar Clouds: A Speculation on the Physical Mechanism for Their Existence, A. L. Peratt and G. L. Verschuur, IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. December 2000 (344K).
Trends in Apparent Time Intervals Between Multiple Supernovae Occurrences, E. Sanders, IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci.31, pp.1252-1262, 2003 (408Kb)
Self-similarity of plasma networking in a broad range of length scales: From laboratory to cosmic plasmas, A. B. Kukushkin and V. A. Rantsev-Kartinov, Rev. Scientific Instr., 70, n.2, pp.1387-1391, 1999.
Plasma Physics from Laboratory to Cosmos—The Life and Achievements of Hannes Alfvén, C.-G. Fälthammar (808KB)
Dean of the Plasma Dissidents, A. L. Peratt, The World & I, Natural Science Sec., pp.190-197, May 1988, (4 MB)
The Most Feared Astronomer on Earth: Halton Arp. W. Kaufman III. (592KB).
A Tribute to Oscar Buneman—Pioneer of Plasma Simulation, R. Buneman, R. J. Barker, A. L. Peratt, S. H. Brecht, A. B. Langdon, H. R. Lewis, IEEE Trans.Plasma Sci. 22, 1994 (1.2MB)
Particle Beams and Basic Plasma Phenomena in the Plasma Universe: A Special Issue in Honor of the 80th Birthday of Hannes Alfvén, Laser and Particle Beams, v.6, pt.3, 1988 (464KB)
The Legacy of Birkeland's Plasma Torch, A. L. Peratt, The Kristian Birkeland Lecture, Norwegian Academy of Science and Letters, v.9, Oslo, Norway, 1996 (12MB).
In Memoriam Grote Reber 1911-2002 Founder of Radio Astronomy, IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 31, December 2003 (372kB)
PLASMA SCIENCE APPLICATION PRESENTATIONS
“Multiple Platform Application of 3D CAD PIC Simulations in Pulsed Power: The Coaxial Plasma Thruster: Demonstration of Large-Scale Separation of Electrons and Ions In Space and in the Laboratory for the Production of Gigawatt Microwaves , Invited Paper, A. L. Peratt and M. A. Mostrom, IEEE International Conference on Plasma Science, Madison, WI.,1995 (4.6MB Quicktime Movie)
|
