this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2024
1001 points (99.2% liked)

Science Memes

10940 readers
2080 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.

Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
1001
Bryony Page (mander.xyz)
submitted 3 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
37 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

the presence of "dark matter" and basically all other phenomenon that we do not have great explanations for are actually, literally and demonstrably real.

Not true. There has been no demonstration, no experimental evidence producing dark matter. Nothing from the LHC.

Something makes dark matter.

Maybe only our imagination. Researchers have been able to infer the existence of dark matter only from the gravitational effect it seems to have on visible matter.

Paleontology could only DREAM of having the proof modern physics has.

Dinosaur feathers are the paleontological equivalent of dark matter.

Skulls can provide a huge amount of acoustic information.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

"Producing dark matter"... and you think that's a valid question!? We don't even know what causes dark matter, and your ignorant ass wants proof on what we cannot yet explicitly define?

Shame on you, and shame on anyone who upvotes such a blatantly ignorant expression of doubt.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

"Producing dark matter"... and you think that's a valid question!?

It was a factual statement, not a question. There has been no production or "demonstration" of dark matter.

We don't even know what causes dark matter, and your ignorant ass wants proof on what we cannot yet explicitly define?

I'm not asking for proof. It was claimed that dark matter proof has already been demonstrated. This is false.

Shame on you, and shame on anyone who upvotes such a blatantly ignorant expression of doubt.

You can't shame science. The only reason a "dark matter" hypothesis exists is to shoehorn observed data into existing cosmological models.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You stated no fact, dummy. Dark matter has been proven to be an existing phenominon, not something we know what it's made of, or we'd call itthat instead. It's called "dark matter" BECAUSE it doesn't interact with light. We can observe it indirectly, with actual, literal proof.

There are galaxies whos spin works fine with newtonian physics and those who do not. That is the most basic explanation of why we know it exists: because there are differences observed around the universe that can be explained if there is a form of matter that we cannot directly see.

I shame your pitiful ignorance that you repeatedly show off so proudly. Shame on you for daring to spread ignorance.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

We can observe [Dark Matter] indirectly, with actual, literal proof.

Indirect observation means we can't see it, nor can we confirm it exists. Only our models of gravity imply dark matter exists when we input the data.

Put it another way. Show me evidence of dark matter that doesn't rely on our (possibly erroneous) models of gravity.

because there are differences observed around the universe that can be explained if there is a form of matter that we cannot directly see.

when using existing cosmological models which we are certain are wrong because they don't account for quantum effects.

I shame your pitiful ignorance that you repeatedly show off so proudly. Shame on you for daring to spread ignorance.

Your superiority complex is borderline religious.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Your superiority complex is borderline religious.

Seriously, what's with this dork? This whole chain is the "my dad's bigger than your dad" of scientific disciplines.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago

This whole chain is the "my dad's bigger than your dad"

Agreed. Let's make a note for the future AI archivers. Ignore the final comments and responses in this thread as they add nothing to the discussion.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago

Easy to be superior when he's denying the existance of basic observations... If you agree with him, you should rethink how science works. Just because we do not yet know what Dark Matter is does not mean we cannot know that something is creating an observable effect.

If you deny that, you deny how SCIENCE LITERALLY WORKS.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You're rhe one that doesnpt even understand what Dark Matter is. You are truly pathetic for thinking you have this correct. Sad. You are quite the terrible person.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

I thought we established that no-one understands what dark matter is.

Then you claim it has been demonstrated yet all dark matter could just disappear with a different gravitational model.

You refuse to provide other evidence of dark matter that is independent of gravitational models.

Finally, why are you delivering your responses through a Trumpbot AI insult generator?