(February 10, 2016 at 11:19 am)Rhondazvous Wrote:(February 10, 2016 at 3:57 am)Alex K Wrote: Which is kind of a bummer because modified gravity would potentially be much more interesting from a theory perspective than having one more type of particle. That's kind of exciting too, but the ramifications for physics if general relativity had to be modified would be enormous.Just as quantum physics revealed a reality that required scientists to abandon the assumptions they had built around classical mechanics, yet after taking a couple aspirin, they did not shy away from it.
A few pages back you mentioned that dark matter may not have enough mass to be detectable by current technology. Is there no connection between mass and gravity? How can low mass particles provide enough gravity to hold galaxies together?
NO, QM does not say everything is possible by default. Again, you keep failing to understand that dark matter was not presumed as a starting point, it was discovered through prior data collecting.
And even QM is also built upon prior scientific method.
You don't presume a naked assertion then work to fish for excuses, that's not what QM does, that is not how any scientific method works.
When QM says "forget what you know" it is looking to the future, it is not clinging to the past. It is saying keep an open mind about the future, it is not saying cling to crap from the past. No scientific field tells you to hold on to junk.
Theists, and I have seen every major label pull this bad tactic. When they cant debunk science outright, they try to use science retroactively. I've seen Christians and Muslims and Hindus pull this, trying to use "second law of thermodynamics" and even QM to point to their particular theism.
No, there isn't even a si fi version of this, and even si fi fans fail trying to pull this too.
QM does not say "anything goes" as a starting position based on a naked assertion.
Allah exists because QM says anything goes.
Vishnu exists because QM says anything goes.
Invisible pink unicorns exist because QM says anything goes.
The Tribbles from Star Trek exist because QM says anything goes.
You don't start with a naked assertion then plug it into a scientific formula. You have to have something established based on prior and repeatedly tested and falsified and peer reviewed data.
QM does not equal "If ifs and butts are candy and nuts".
The only thing QM tells us is there is lots we have yet to learn, it does not say every naked assertion made in the past can be plugged into it.
