(about the mathematically calculated unreasonably high percentage of presence of “dark matter”, and about the existence of some imaginary “dark energy” – the nature (and essence) of which is inexplicable even for the modern cosmologists themselves!!!
1. The story of the emergence of the delusion “presence of a large amount of some unknown type of dark matter in the universe”
The discovery of the American astronomer Vera Robin about the discrepancy between the predicted angular movement of galaxies and observed motion should, in fact, should have raised doubts about the expansion of the Universe. Instead of doubt, however, a delusion was generated. For modern cosmology, its data provides the first “evidence” of the presence of a large amount of some unknown kind of dark matter in the Universe. The observed phenomenon became known as the “galaxy rotation problem” and gave the first “evidence” for the fallacy of “the existence of an extremely high percentage of dark matter in the Universe” …, and since this is not confirmed – for another fallacy about the existence of some imaginary “dark energy” – the nature (and essence) of which, is inexplicable even for the modern cosmologists too! Perhaps these delusions would not have been generated if Sandra Faber’s discovery had preceded Vera Rubin’s discovery (see below).
What Vera Rubin did in her work was to map the velocities of stars at different distances from the center of a huge spiral galaxy. Vera Rubin noticed something that does not meet her expectations. Stars spinning around the center of galaxies were supposed to behave like the planets orbiting the Sun. However, they don’t. In our solar system, we have the Sun in the center, and the planets orbiting around. And since the dominant gravity is that of the Sun, the outer planets move much slower than the planets closer to the Sun. So naturally what people expected to find in a galaxy was similar – i.e. the measured velocity of the stars farther from the center was expected to be lower. Instead, Vera Rubin discovers, that the velocity of the stars from the inside out remains the same. Therefore, if all the stars in a galaxy move at the same velocity, regardless of their distance to the center of a galaxy, then the center cannot be the only source of gravity that affects them. Something else would have to be exerting a powerful force, something that simply cannot be seen.
What Vera Rubin, however, suggests is that in order to explain the observed velocities, there must be much more matter in the galaxy itself than we see. Since this matter does not emit any light (the stuff is not visible), she coined the term “dark matter” to refer to that. Rubin had every reason to believe her discovery would be met with great excitement. It was, though not the kind she might have expected. Her announcement that there was dark matter associated with every individual galaxy was received with much skepticism, because of the far-reaching implications it had, and because, also, of the inferred percentage of dark matter in the Universe.
From her work, she inferred that almost 90% of the mass in a spiral galaxy had to be “dark matter”. Rubin’s findings suggested that the destiny of galaxies (which means the accelerating expansion of the Universe too), is governed by a vast and inscrutable network…, that every galaxy is enveloped in dark matter, invisibly locking all the stars in its embrace with the gravity it exerts.
As a consequence of this not-so-considered logic, it turns out that the black emptiness of space seems not to be so empty of matter – modern cosmology accepts that even 99% of the Universe consists of a sprawling cosmic network of “dark matter”. For cosmologists who share this logic, it is crucial to know precisely how much dark matter there is in order to know what will become of the Universe eventually. For them, without questioning that the Universe is currently expanding, the total mass of our Universe is what decides the destiny of the Universe – whether we continue to expand, whether we decelerate and stop, or turn around back on ourselves. So the ultimate fate of what they think will really happen to us depends on how well we have made an inventory of the mass in the Universe. But such a high percentage of some unknown type of “dark matter” should be easily detected, even far from such percentages. However, this turns out not to be the case… and the mystery continues.
2. The search story of the “dark matter”
The simplest supposition is that exist big “MACHOs” of dark ordinary matter made up of the same material that exists in stars It just didn’t happen to become stars (“MACHO” is an abbreviation that means – “Massive Compact Halo Objects”). MACHOs have been thought to range from the size of the Earth to ten times the size of our Sun.
But although various indirect methods have been used, “dark matter”, not even in much smaller quantities, has not been discovered so far.
MACHOs were big, so why not try something tiny? As another candidate for “dark matter”, a well-known particle, the neutrinos, was targeted. But as it turns out – and this is not a solution to the problem.
The different idea of dark matter, that it is made up of small elementary particles (like neutrinos), was a very modern idea in those days and was the first concrete suggestion of what dark matter could be. It all came down to determining whether the neutrino has mass. Without mass, they would not have a gravitational effect and would not be a candidate for dark matter.
However, American Astronomer Sandra Faber rejects this idea too. In 1983, she published original research showing that dark matter was not composed of fast-moving neutrinos (“hot dark matter”) and that instead, it was likely composed of slow-moving particles yet to be discovered (“cold dark matter”). Important concepts such as “cold dark matter” and “the Great Attractor” are direct results of the work of Faber and her colleagues.
After excluding the neutrino, Professor Carlos Frenk, whose main interests in cosmology are the formation of galaxies, makes a computer simulation of a new model of the cosmic structure formation based on the exotic “cold dark matter”. Professor Frenk’s new model works, of course, but there is a catch. It relies on a fictional particle that actually exists only as a symbol typed on a keyboard! So, is there “cold dark matter”? What experiments need to be carried out to prove the existence of some completely fictional exotic elementary particles? Isn’t it a fact that the idea of “cold dark matter” also turns out to be unacceptable?
The failure to discover a non-existent large amount of some unknown type of “dark matter” having a greater gravitational effect than observed matter in the Universe, which controls the “inexplicable” motion of stars and galaxies, leads to another fiction of modern cosmologists – about the existence of some “dark energy”, the nature of which has not been explained to this day!
This is how we see that one delusion actually breeds another. Instead of looking for a real explanation of the astronomical observations, the mystery/problem with the “dark matter” now is continuing with another “invention” of the modern cosmologists – this is the “dark energy”!
In this sense is the conclusion of Professor Karl Popper that in modern physics “a theory must be falsifiable to be scientific”!
3. The discovery by Professor Sandra Faber’s team
The factual result of the mapping done by Sandra Faber is actually truly remarkable proof that, in fact, the Universe is in a stage of accelerating contraction towards a region with a high concentration of real matter! This awareness of reality is in full accordance with Newton’s law of universal gravitation (attraction) and completely overturns the delusion accepted by modern cosmology about the accelerating expansion of the Universe. Actually, this makes meaningless the search for the illogically large “calculated” amount of “dark matter”…, especially the fiction “dark energy” for which no one gives no explanation about its nature!!!
Actually, there is no reasonable answer to the question:
“How is it possible for the Universe to expand, when a huge region, including our galaxy, moves roughly in parallel, like a large river of galaxies, at a speed of about 600 kilometers per second, heading to a very, very big supercluster, a super-supercluster of galaxies– a supercluster of real matter”.
This was the discovery of Sandra Faber’s team, and they have called this super-supercluster of galaxies – the “Great Attractor”.
Vesto Melvin Slipher is an American astronomer who carried out the first observations of the shifting of spectral lines of electromagnetic radiation (of light) coming from distant galaxies. In September 1912, in “The radial velocity of the Andromeda Nebula” in the inaugural volume of Lowell Observatory Bulletin, Slipher reports:
„The magnitude of this velocity, which is the greatest hitherto observed, raises the question whether the velocity like displacement might not be due to some other cause, but I believe we have at the present no other interpretation for it.“ (Slipher, 1912).
Throughout his life, Hubble did not support Vesto Melvin Slipher’s supposition that the “red shift” is a velocity-like displacement” (a result of the Doppler effect), which effect, however, is an effect of mechanical waves, but not of electromagnetic waves (see “PROBLEM 5: “Doppler effect” in the case of electromagnetic (non-material) waves”).
The “unrecognized principle of nature”, in which Edwin Hubble has believed, is not the “Doppler Effect”- that is the “energy-spatial relationship” existing in the energy-space-time continuum of the Universe!
This “unrecognized principle of nature” is substantiated in the monograph “Accelerating Contraction of the Universe – the Reasonable Alternative” (ISBN: 9798847420570 ; ASIN: B0BCNMLTTH).
=> to the main page containing all Table of Contents of the website