Maybe it’s time to admit that maybe Dark Matter doesn’t exist, and we need a different hypothesis to explain the universe?
Seriously though.
I’m no great physicist, but dark matter and dark energy sound like the ether of our times.
Hypothetical constructs to pluck the holes of misunderstanding the Universe.
That seems a bit silly considering how much evidence we have for it. That’s an awful lot of work to throw away for no great reason.
It’s not my job to educate you on what could be a brief Google search. Stop being such a cynic. The gravitational lens distortion of distant galaxies is basically impossible without dark matter. Not to parrot the mantra of conspiracy theorists and cultists, but do your own research.
Other than the fact that it/some of it was probably detected in 2023 and all the models do mostly work. Plus the LHC proved the existence of the Higgs Boson.
This? https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/deep-space/a46807202/dark-matter-cosmic-web/
Is this really dark matter, or just more evidence of where the current physics modelling is incorrect?
Neutrinos are an unknown science that we still know so very little about. There are hypotheses that say neutrinos could be the missing dark matter, but they are fringe. Once we have a reliable way of detecting them it would unlock all sorts of secrets of the very early universe - think microwave background radiation except with neutrinos.
Shit Sabine Hossenfelder would say. (She funny tho…)
Edit: I had no idea about her questionable actions so that is news to me.
Oh ew, really? I’m not overly surprised to be honest, her video on trans people was awful.
Absolutely horrendous. I stopped watching her after that. I don’t care if it was good intentioned or not, she obviously should have expanded her understanding of the topic before presenting herself as an expert on it, and that makes me wonder how many other topics she covers in this way.
That means you missed her video on how capitalism is good actually. It’s about as horrid as you’d expect.
The titles on some of her videos manage to be too fishy for my taste, they appear a lot on my feed due to watching a lot of videos from channels like PBS Spacetime and The History Of The Universe, stuff like that.
You can tell that she knows her stuff, but clickbait titles somewhat like, I paraphrase here: “A year ago I lost my faith in science, here’s why”, raise my suspicions and I move on without clicking. Right on the blurry edge between science and something else beyond that line, something that’s not quite legit and not good for you.
Just make one big enough that you can use billionaires instead of atomic particles
Do billionaires split apart into multiple millionaires, and anti-tax neutrinos?
That’s only in the movies. In reality they just completely evaporate. Usually they just evaporate. They take up a lot of volume but aren’t terribly filling.
/s
I’d rather have a 100km particle collider than an aircraft carrier.
You are fucking beasts
The purpose of military is always dual: to deflect other country’s military and to “protect national interests” (read: attack another country that now has to have military too, and may consider using it for an attack).
Wildly assuming you are American, you should have no issue understanding that defensive forces are not really always defensive.
I am from Europe, from country invaded by nazi Germany so I know well what means an oppressive use of army. But could you give an alternative to the army?
Yeah, if history has taught as nothing else, it’s that the guy with the biggest stick usually wins. There are many criticisms of the U.S. military, but no one could accuse it of being weak. That kind of deterrence is invaluable.
If only they wouldn’t use that force to invade half the planet…
The peace of Americans is paid for by the terror of dozens of nations. It ain’t cool.
Idk, I’m not sure I could get much use out of a particular accelerator even if I got it running. An aircraft carrier though might be joyride-able, and that I can understand. Might still be moot since both need a team, but if I get to have either one I’d have to at least think on it.
This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its labourers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement. We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people.
-Dwight D. Eisenhower
His foreign relations record includes a hell of a lot of ratfucking the third world, including being so paranoid about communism he ended up pushing quite a few nations into the Soviet sphere when the coups didn’t work (Cuba, cough cough cough) and directly enabling some of history’s greatest monsters when they did, but he is an American president so grade that on a curve I guess
What if we build it on a 100km aircraft carrier? Think of the possibilities! heh
What if we put an aircraft carrier into a particular accelerator and spin it up to the speed of light?
The sailors would probably get dizzy.
