Jump to content

Dark Energy Explained


stevecastleberry

Recommended Posts

These two statements are not really compatible. How can you consider yourself qualified to comment on the highly mathematical theory of general relativity if you claim to "not be a mathematician" when asked to do a relatively simple but of mathematics?

 

 

You need to go back & read who & what I was talking about. So you`re staff? Are you telling me I`m not qualified to post?Try & delete my post ...

Edited by stevecastleberry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dark matter is really not relevant to this discussion because it`s a different discussion

 

 

You first five posts were about dark matter. But never mind.

I`m talking of a possibility that as far as what I know of Einstein is plausible & far more probable in this matter. If I`ve said anything in ignorance of him or Newton, please somebody stop me...

 

 

No disputes that Einsteins theory is the best we have. It is the basis of all current cosmological models.

 

 

 

I`m assuming your evidence is two independent teams & not the Nobel committee

 

Yes, the evidence has been confirmed by multiple teams.

 

 

 

 

I myself, have already explained how & why two teams may have misread their results or actually

 

The nearest thing to an "explanation" from you that I have been able to find is:

 

"All I`m stating is that something in our galaxy caused them to get absurd results ( even with two teams ) in an experiment done. I`m not sure what it is exactly, but I`m sure it has to do with time dilation. Whether through speed or mass."

 

I don't think that "they may have made an error of some sort for unknown reasons" is much of an explanation.

 

 

 

To believe in the theory of Dark Energy would require me to drop Newton`s Laws of motion & I`m unable to do that yet.

 

 

There is no theory of dark energy yet. There is evidence that needs to be explained. That's it.

 

And Newton's laws of motion are irrelevant. The expansion of space is explained by Einstein's theory of general relativity (remember that: the one you said was most likely to be correct) not by Newtonian physics.

 

 

 

Not when I know that these tests were performed around known & unknown black holes.

 

The observations of expansion have nothing to do with black holes.

 

 

 

Not when I know the effects of super massive black holes are not well known

 

Don't confuse your own ignorance with that of others. Unless you can actually show that there is some relevant behaviour of black holes.

 

 

 

I feel I have to remind you that questioning is still in the realm of science.

 

Indeed. But that questioning has to be done on the basis of evidence and/or theory.

 

Just saying "I clearly know nothing about the theory or the evidence but I think it must be wrong". That is not science. I am not sure what it is. Delusional behaviour?

 

 

 

We are hovering in space about a few light days from a super massive.

 

Please calculate the time dilation caused by the black hole. You might then see why you are wrong.

 

 

 

You`ve all brought up some good points but haven`t convinced me I`m wrong yet.

 

I and others have pointed out many of your errors and misunderstandings. But you have just ignored them. So I doubt anything will convince you that you are wrong. You have the certainty of the non-scientist on your side ("it makes sense to me so it must be right").

You need to go back & read who & what I was talking about.

 

As far as I can see you haven't said who you are talking about. Please provide references to the relevant scientific papers.

 

 

 

So you`re staff? Are you telling me I`m not qualified to post?Try & delete my post ...

 

That is obviously not what Klaynos said. You seem to have reading comprehension problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

..please somebody stop me...

!

Moderator Note

 

 

Done.

This thread is falling well below the levels we require for the Speculations forum. It is based on misconception and ignorance of present theory and the OP has confirmed that no mathematical back up will be forth coming. Basic questions are being ignored and posts with refutations / suggestions are not engaged with.

 

Thread Locked. Do not open a thread on the same topic; you may request a new thread when you have significantly more detail to your argument.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.