Afterlife

[Cyberman]

Arguing particle physics with a particle physicist...

I'll get the mop.

[Cyberman]

Also:

"It's not so much an afterlife, more a sort of aprés vie."

[Alex K]

Your father was a hamster, and your mother smelt of elderberries!

You can do better than repetition! Thou art a flat minded, borborygmus dompteuse of puny stature! Hah!

Heh

No, Dark Matter is not considered crazy. There is multiple evidence for Dark Matter and there are very simple and plausible ways to explain it. There is no comparable plausibility or any evidence for afterlife claims. Just because science has open questions, that doesn't mean your toy fantasy is real.

Can you explain dark matter simply and plausibly to me?

Of course I don't know which is the *correct* explanation because we lack the data to say. But to just give you one relatively simple explanation: The electrical dipole field of the neutron is undetectably small, and this fact seems odd in the Standard Model, where there is no reason why the corresponding free parameter should be so exceedingly small (though it could be zero without running into theoretical inconsistencies, this seems like an unlikely choice). To explain this fact completely unrelated to Dark Matter, one can promote this free parameter to a dynamical field called the Axion field by a not very complicated extension of the theory. One can then calculate that this field would retain residual energy density after the universe cools below the temperature where the strong force starts binding quarks and gluons. This residual energy density of the axion field would have precisely the correct properties to explain all effects connected to Dark Matter. The beauty of this approach is that it was not invented to explain Dark Matter but something else, and yet it also explains Dark Matter. Those are the best hypotheses. The Axion Dark Matter hypothesis has only been partially tested experimentally so far, but will be thoroughly tested by the next generations of so-called Axion Haloscopes, which could directly detect these hypothetical particles by converting them into microwaves in a powerful magnetic field.

Here's a currently running experiment of this type:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axion_Dark...Experiment

[Arkilogue]

Arkilouge, many people hate the idea of God, even if they have the doubts regarding his existance.

You have to give up your pride, most earthly pleasures, to tremble before God and care for the people you dont wish to care if it wasnt for hell and heaven.

Even supernatural will be proven as a fact in the future, which will trigger even more doubts regarding the existing supernatural being like God, there still will be people who will hate such ideas, as they put them to miserable position.

I'm not here to win converts, I'm here to exposed my weakness and ignorance in practice of sharpening my argument for the existence of God and the practice of my faith. More than humbleness, it will involve pruning off crossing branches and burning the excess while nurturing stronger and more consistent growth that yields fruits metabolizable by those who reject all subjective arguments for God. My faith is objective and evidential.

Atheists are the best competitors and practice partners I could hope for.

[The Grand Nudger]

An "objective and evidential" -faith-, lol.  That's what they all claim.  Step one, L2word good and everything.

[Arkilogue]

You can do better than repetition! Thou art a flat minded, borborygmus dompteuse of puny stature! Hah!

Heh

Can you explain dark matter simply and plausibly to me?

Of course I don't know which is the *correct* explanation because we lack the data to say. But to just give you one relatively simple explanation: The electrical dipole field of the neutron is undetectably small, and this fact seems odd in the Standard Model, where there is no reason why the corresponding free parameter should be so exceedingly small (though it could be zero without running into theoretical inconsistencies, this seems like an unlikely choice). To explain this fact completely unrelated to Dark Matter, one can promote this free parameter to a dynamical field called the Axion field by a not very complicated extension of the theory. One can then calculate that this field would retain residual energy density after the universe cools below the temperature where the strong force starts binding quarks and gluons. This residual energy density of the axion field would have precisely the correct properties to explain all effects connected to Dark Matter. The beauty of this approach is that it was not invented to explain Dark Matter but something else, and yet it also explains Dark Matter. Those are the best hypotheses. The Axion Dark Matter hypothesis has only been partially tested experimentally so far, but will be thoroughly tested by the next generations of so-called Axion Haloscopes, which could directly detect these hypothetical particles by converting them into microwaves in a powerful magnetic field.

Here's a currently running experiment of this type:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axion_Dark...Experiment

Very interesting, thank you! So in this explanation, the condensation of quark-gluon plasma into hadrons "leaves behind" a certain amount of energy in a universe wide field and this is the 5x more dark matter influence on the rest of matter? Is there anything in this theory that directly predicts the 1 to 5 ratio?

---

An "objective and evidential" -faith-, lol.  That's what they all claim.  Step one, L2word good and everything.

Just going by the biblical definition of what faith actually is, not by modern bastardized colloquialism.

Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Substance and evidence are not made by man's belief, It is either there or not there.


Ephesians 2:8: "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God"

Again, "not of yourselves" aka not man made belief.

[Homeless Nutter]

Do you consider acceptable the standard model of particle physics and plausible the modern scientific measure of 5 times more gravitational influence from some other matter/existence/realm that overlaps our but does not directly interact with our matter? Is that all crazy stuff too? Every new scientific breakthrough is "crazy" to the paradigm it replaces.[...]

Yeah, nice try there, Fritz Zwicky. You know what else is "crazy"? Crazy.

For every "new scientific breakthrough" there's a million nut-jobs, who made up something they liked the sound of and without a shred of evidence used it to prop up their preconceived notions of some sort of sky-cake.

But hey - I'll happily concede the point, when you collect your Nobel prize. I'll be holding my breath over here until then...

[Alex K]

Heh


Of course I don't know which is the *correct* explanation because we lack the data to say. But to just give you one relatively simple explanation: The electrical dipole field of the neutron is undetectably small, and this fact seems odd in the Standard Model, where there is no reason why the corresponding free parameter should be so exceedingly small (though it could be zero without running into theoretical inconsistencies, this seems like an unlikely choice). To explain this fact completely unrelated to Dark Matter, one can promote this free parameter to a dynamical field called the Axion field by a not very complicated extension of the theory. One can then calculate that this field would retain residual energy density after the universe cools below the temperature where the strong force starts binding quarks and gluons. This residual energy density of the axion field would have precisely the correct properties to explain all effects connected to Dark Matter. The beauty of this approach is that it was not invented to explain Dark Matter but something else, and yet it also explains Dark Matter. Those are the best hypotheses. The Axion Dark Matter hypothesis has only been partially tested experimentally so far, but will be thoroughly tested by the next generations of so-called Axion Haloscopes, which could directly detect these hypothetical particles by converting them into microwaves in a powerful magnetic field.

Here's a currently running experiment of this type:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axion_Dark...Experiment

Very interesting, thank you! So in this explanation, the condensation of quark-gluon plasma into hadrons "leaves behind" a certain amount of energy in a universe wide field and this is the 5x more dark matter influence on the rest of matter? Is there anything in this theory that directly predicts the 1 to 5 ratio?

Yes, that's roughly what would happen if that were the correct explanation: The energy in the axion field gets "frozen" once quantum chromodynamics develops a condensate. The 1:5 ratio is not exactly a completely fixed prediction, but it is plausible because the energy scale of the Axion field for which this ratio comes out correctly is very close to the energy scale which would explain the Neutrino masses and unification of forces, and these things *could* be related, but that's still speculative. Fortunately, the axion hypothesis is testable directly via detectors, so we don't have to rely on these somewhat shaky theoretical arguments.

[purplepurpose]

Arkilouge, many people hate the idea of God, even if they have the doubts regarding his existance.

You have to give up your pride, most earthly pleasures, to tremble before God and care for the people you dont wish to care if it wasnt for hell and heaven.

Even supernatural will be proven as a fact in the future, which will trigger even more doubts regarding the existing supernatural being like God, there still will be people who will hate such ideas, as they put them to miserable position.

I'm not here to win converts, I'm here to exposed my weakness and ignorance in practice of sharpening my argument for the existence of God and the practice of my faith. More than humbleness, it will involve pruning off crossing branches and burning the excess while nurturing stronger and more consistent growth that yields fruits metabolizable by those who reject all subjective arguments for God. My faith is objective and evidential.

Atheists are the best competitors and practice partners I could hope for.  

Cute. As long as you dont go old testament style preching, you atleast entertain people by claiming that your feelings or faith proves the existance of God.

[Arkilogue]

Do you consider acceptable the standard model of particle physics and plausible the modern scientific measure of 5 times more gravitational influence from some other matter/existence/realm that overlaps our but does not directly interact with our matter? Is that all crazy stuff too? Every new scientific breakthrough is "crazy" to the paradigm it replaces.[...]

Yeah, nice try there, Fritz Zwicky. You know what else is "crazy"? Crazy.

For every "new scientific breakthrough" there's a million nut-jobs, who made up something they liked the sound of and without a shred of evidence used it to prop up their preconceived notions of some sort of sky-cake.

But hey - I'll happily concede the point, when you collect your Nobel prize. I'll be holding my breath over here until then...

I've been laying forth the case in a predictive model with supporting evidence here: http://atheistforums.org/thread-44634-po...pid1363757

Just explained/predicted the dark energy constant to within .5%