Re: Theory of gravity

From: robert j. kolker (nowhere_at_nowhere.net)
Date: 12/02/04 

Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2004 10:00:47 -0500

John Sefton wrote:

>
> Current theory of gravity was
> disproven when they had to propose
> Dark Matter to prop it up.

It has to be fairly shown that Dark Matter does not exist or probably
does not exist.

I will give cases in point. When Uranus showed anamalous motion, it was
not immediately assumed that Newton's law of gravitation was wrong.
Instead, a not yet observed planet was postulated (analogous to dark
matter) which exaplained the anomaly. Eventually the unseen planet was
seen. It is now called Neptune.

Second case:
The anomalous precession of the perihelion of Mercury was not
immediately taken as falsification for Newton's theory of gravitation.
Bodies closer to the Sun were postulated, but were never found. In the
mean time a theory which not only predicted the anomalous precession of
Mercury correctly, but predicted several other effects later proven
experimentally, was found --- to wit GTR. In latter days, Newtonian
Gravitation cannot be used with the GPS system. It gives wrong locations
by a wide margin, but SR and GTR corrections produce correct locations.

In reference to Dark Matter etc. studies and research are not being do
to see if Dark Matter can be verified empirically. It is just a tad too
early to conclude GTR is wrong, although it very well may be wrong. Find
a single, or a few adverse experiments is not grounds for giving up on
the current theory. First one tries to find un-accounted for conditions
that can explain the anomalies within the theory. Failing that, one can
look for a better theory that explains the anomaly and has the current
theory as a limiting case. This is what happened with Newtonian Gravitation.

One does not abandon a theory that has some glitches. One either
explains the glitiches or formulates a better theory to replace the
troublesome theory. The constraints on a new theory is that it must
predict every effect and event that was correctly predicted by the prior
theory. In short the replacement should be lossless.

Bob Kolker

Relevant Pages

  • Re: How do astronomers know how much dark energy and dark matter in the universe from a radio map?
    ... >"We observe in large astrophysical systems, ... >galactic to cosmological scales, some ?anomalies? ... Dark matter theories spring from the *unwillingness to deviate* from ... the known laws of gravitation and general relativity. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Syncronized atomic clocks
    ... sounds a bit suspicious to me, though -- although "dark matter" ... automobiles involve speeds of around 10^-7 c, which, ... might involve anomalies about the width of ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Dark Matter and Early Stars
    ... and condensed nearby clouds of gas by gravitational force. ... interactions or any interactions at all aside from gravitation. ... Dark matter may not be hot at all, now or in the early universe. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Question on dark matter?
    ... Their claim is for not just dark matter, but any collisionless self-gravitating system. ... in GR gravitation is nonlinear ... BTW their subject is galactic evolution, and for that Newtonian gravitation is quite adequate. ... Dark matter is subject to the same limitations as ordinary matter vis-a-vis a black hole. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Could Dark Matter be here on earth?
    ... doesn't a large star suck up gobs of dark matter and appear to, ... GRAVITATION DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY.. ... and look at how angular momentum plays a role ... example is the gravitational dynamic friction of a star cluster kicking ...
    (sci.physics)
Quantcast