Swansont. I am still liking MOND better.

What, other than the rotation of distant galaxies does dark matter explain? Does it answer any local questions?

Regards, TAR

I am not a believer in time dilation.

I think if the traveling twin counted the ticks of a distant pulsar and the stay at home twin counted the ticks from the same pulsar, both twins would have counted the same number of ticks upon the return of the traveling twin. Regardless of the speed and direction of travel of the traveling twin. Any slowing of the home clock observed by the traveling twin on the way out would be reversed the way back as the stay at home clock would appear to be running fast as the light from the clock is blue shifted. Red shifted while traveling away, blue shifted while traveling home, cancelling out and resulting in no time dilation.

I think the flying Cesium clocks might be explained by which way the clocks were positioned in the aircraft, as there are moving photons within the clock apparatus. If the emiitter is faacing against the wind so to speak the receiver will receive a redshifted signal. My thought, along the MOND direction is a photon just goes where its pointed, the wave just goes out in an arc. It does not know or care how the emitter is moving. The Plane is moving, the Earth is moving, rotating and revolving, the Sun is moving round the center of the Galaxy. Whether the clock slows down or speeds up or slows down compared to the stay at home clock depends ont eh blue shift or red shift induced by these various motions on the photons traveling between the emitter and receiver. A difference can occur in the readout of the clock based on blueshift and redshift with time never dilated.

15 minutes ago, tar said:

Swansont. I am still liking MOND better.

What, other than the rotation of distant galaxies does dark matter explain? Does it answer any local questions?

From the linked article:

- the fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background, including the “acoustic peaks” that simply cannot exist without some form of dark matter.

- the clustering pattern seen in the large-scale structure of the Universe

- the behavior of two clusters of galaxies colliding

18 minutes ago, tar said:

I am not a believer in time dilation.

Too bad, but that’s hardly a serious objection.

I don’t see any reason to waste time and effort arguing about it. You are free to come up with a rigorous analysis to try and explain it away. i.e. not the hand-wave you presented.

in my model every observer is the same age, the age of the universe by definition includes all observers

and another postulate is that currently the Universe is only in ONE arrangement and ALL components are exactly the age of the Universe.

Different observers will order events differently based on their distances from the events but all events happen only once and causality is never broken.

Another postulate is the Universe fits together perfectly. And does not change according to our whims unless we physically modify it to match our internal model.

3 minutes ago, swansont said:

From the linked article:

- the fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background, including the “acoustic peaks” that simply cannot exist without some form of dark matter.

- the clustering pattern seen in the large-scale structure of the Universe

- the behavior of two clusters of galaxies colliding

3 minutes ago, swansont said:

From the linked article:

- the fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background, including the “acoustic peaks” that simply cannot exist without some form of dark matter.

- the clustering pattern seen in the large-scale structure of the Universe

- the behavior of two clusters of galaxies colliding

I apologize, I did not read the link yet. I will now. However the explanations you noted all have to do with current observations of stuff that happened Billions of years ago and errors could have been made in measurements and assumptions. If a premise is false, you cannot arrive at a true conclusion.

For instance if I observe the distant truck is the same size and shape as the toy truck in my yard, I can not say that therefore the toy truck can hold 4 yards of material due to squeezing effect of dark energy and matter.

Well thanks for the article Swansont but I don't understand the cosmic background radiation clustering stuff. Nor the galaxies colliding stuff.

The radio information we see coming from all portions of the sky shows us what the universe around us looked like 14Billion years ago. Those volumes of space now still contain matter and I would assume it is matter that has evolved from the first matter for the last 14Bilion years, so any findings about the state of the universe now, based on 14Billion year old information is nothing that needs explaining. I is what it is. Or is what it was.

The other thing in the article that I had NO idea about what it was showing was the red and blue stuff seen when galaxies collide. I am not sure you can get a before and after picture of galaxies colliding. They are massive and the collision would take a LONG time. If light takes 100k years to cross a galaxy another galaxy would take millions of years to cross a galaxy.

All in all, the article said MOND wins over dark matter in explaining the rotation of distant galaxies but fails explaining other observations from farther away and from a younger Universe. Maybe things now are different then things then. For instance, the Universe is bound to look different when everything is Hydrogen compared to how it would look after generations of stars builing heavier elements.

Regards, TAR

P.S. Newtonian physics wins locally, MOND and Dark Matter do about the same at the billion ly range with MOND having a slight edge and Dark Matter wins explaining the Early Universe. I would suggest evaluating the usefulness of predictions about local stuff, stuff a billion years away and stuff 14 billion years away.

If we want to live in the past and live in people's imagination and revel in the formulas of relativity and dark matter and dark energy calculations I suppose Dark Matter is a workable theory.

But when it comes to practicality, explaining stuff that affects us now, I am not sure Dark Energy and Dark Matter are worth the invisible paper its written on.

I have a prediction about the clumping noticed in the Background Microwave Radiation. Its going to produce strings of galaxies and voids. Like soap bubbles. The strings of galaxies being the soap and the voids being the air in the bubble.....hey look at that. 10B years later that's what the place looks like.

2 hours ago, tar said:

but I don't understand the cosmic background radiation clustering stuff. Nor the galaxies colliding stuff

That seems to be your problem; you don't understand stuff, so you make shit up.

Are you following the MO of your President ?

5 hours ago, tar said:

The other thing in the article that I had NO idea about what it was showing was the red and blue stuff seen when galaxies collide.

X-rays are pink, signal from normal matter in blue, just like it says

5 hours ago, tar said:

I am not sure you can get a before and after picture of galaxies colliding.

Nobody said that’s what’s shown

Seeing as you’re in simple denial mode regarding mainstream science and have nothing to offer that meets the requirements of speculations, there’s no point in continuing