You are mistaken. This theory says the value of G increases as you go away from the galaxy center or from sun. This is why the rotation curves become flat, and Pioneer has a blue shift.
The problem is not with dark matter as a hypothesis. The problem is that the Tully Fisher Relation exists. It is hard to believe that dark matter will always align itself (at least for the high surface brightness galaxies), so that we can observe the Tully Fisher relation. Why shouldn't it put itself up almost randomly just like the stars in a galaxy. After all the stars are also aligned based on the gravity forces alone, dark matter should also be align based on gravity forces alone. Why should it behave in a completely illogical way, just to fit a relation?
You know what I can get for 30Euros (less than $40) in Paris. 20Mbits (down) + 1 Mbit (up) unlimited local calls unlimited national calls unlimited International to 29 countries (25 european countries + India + USA + Canada + China). Can any other country top this. France is very near to having the Telecommunications utopia. Unlimited communication for a fixed cost. Living in Paris, it is getting harder to miss India. It is easier to call anybody in India from here than from within India. It is easy to get any movies or tv programs using the internet. It is also possible to get Indian magazines over the internet. It is also possible to get any food items that we desire, although there are not as many Indian people here as you would expect. Life is good.
We will lose privacy anyway. Its also information and it will get out when there is enough technology. The good thing is that the tracking technology will also get cheaper which will make the authorities without privacy. We will have the most open government not when the government will open themselves to you, but when they cannot hide from you. You may think that the government is more powerful than the people, but the people have more eyes and given enough eyes and enough interest no secret will be a secret as technology improves. You don't need the tinfoil hat the government will need it.
The last sentence should read In the theory the repulsive component increases with the increase of the size of the universe, and hence the dark energy should increase with time.
MOND cannot explain anything like this. It was designed to fit the galactic curves. It cannot do anything more. I wouldn't even place much faith in the theory designed around MOND, to come up with these results. Actually the result is alluding to Conformal Gravity by Dr. Mannheim. In this theory gravity has three components one like Newton, second that increases with distance and is felt at galactic distances, third that increases with the square of distance but is repulsive and is felt only at cosmological scales but does manifest itself as an extra attractive constant component at galactic scales.
In the theory repulsive component decays with the evolution of Gravity, and hence the Dark Energy which is what the repulsive component amounts to.
Unfortunately there are no good web sites talking about Mannheim's theory the only paper that explains a lot of it is "Alternatives to Dark Matter and Dark Energy" which can be accessed at http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0505266
He is merely collecting data to disprove the current gravitational model. He actually believes in Dr. Mannheims Conformal Gravity. An attempt to define gravity in terms of Conformal Symmetry, which the other three forces observe.
In the theory Dark Energy is just a manifestation of the repulsive component of gravity. And this force changes with the evolution of the universe. He has just found proof of this. This would mean that they have discovered something that has not yet been predicted by the standard model. They have been hard at work to come up with something that they can predict something that can be proved based on the observation. The only other significant difference from the standard model is that in the theory universe is always expanding, and there was no contraction phase. The observations are not yet conclusive enough on this point.
There are actually several problems in Physics eg. Dark Matter(Galaxy Rotation), Dark Energy (Accelarating Universe), the Pioneer Anamoly, and that GR and Quantum Mechanics are incompatible.
Also the Ricci Tensor that gives rise to Gravitational Force in GR does not arrive from the first principles. It was chosen because it gave the Newtonian Gravity. There can be an infinite number of higher order theories that can give rise to the same Newtonian Gravity at the Solar System scales but get different results at larger distances, including removing the need for Dark Matter and Dark Energy. We are actually in a very unstable equilibrium, GR is explaining the results but after quite a bit of fine tuning. It could be that we do discover some result in the near future that cannot be explained even with fine tuning, and at that time we will need a new theory.
I think that was his biggest failure to let the country be divided. The division caused more bloodshed than the undivided country would have faced. I wish he had succeeded.
How about spending some quality Hubble time with large bodies in the Kuiper Belt. It would be useful to know whether these bodies display MOND effects or not. Maybe we can figure out the Pioneer Anomaly one way or the other.
I have just a little bit of trouble with the Red Shift Prediction. Actually GR does not unambiguously predict a Red Shift. Actually the/\ factor was added before to have a static universe, then it was removed when the Red Shift was observed, and now it has been readded with a reversed sign to account for an accelarating expansion. So it is a case of fine tuning.
The Label did not select it because they thought the CD will not be bought enough and they will not be able to test the reaction of the public very widely. That is why his CD escaped from being targetted for the software.
Actually if you are an Indian then maybe you can dial 911 without penalty. Just say that you where trying to call Delhi. Which by the way is 00-91-11-.
I was in New Jersey and it happened twice to me. Trying to dial my Indian no. and somehow the 00s would get lost and I would get 911. Once I didn't even find out that the police had come as I was talking to my Fiancee and my room mate talked to those guys. The other time I got the operator and I told him that I was trying to call India, and he understood what must have happened. But they still sent a Policeman to check it out.
It is true that we can rule out 1). 2) has a lot of momentum behind it but we cannot rule it out. 3) is the easiest way out.
Tully Fisher's relation (which is what MOND derives) makes 3) not an easy way out for any scientist that compares MOND and Dark Matter.
Dark Matter is ad-hoc. It is basically fitting the theories by assuming that something exists that we cannot see.
Normally it would be a good choice, but MOND gives a simple equation which fits the curves of most galaxies without any extra parameters. The real problem is the fact that MOND fits so well.
This makes the task of Dark Matter difficult because now its required to also come up with a reason for the well functioning of MOND.
I do not believe that MOND is the correct theory. Actually its not even a theory. But what it does allude to is that our understanding of Gravity beyond Solar System Scales may be faulty.
If we do assume that we do not know how Gravity functions beyond our planetary system. Then we also cannot assume that the Gravitational Lensing will work the same way. Actually most of what we know of the Standard Model becomes suspect.
So one option is to cling to the Dark Matter and turn a blind eye to this important observational problem or hunt for a better solution. Ofcourse the research will reward the very few who find out the real truth but for the rest it will be a bad thing. I think our Scientific Community is searching for safety rather than challenges.
I am waiting eagerly for the EU Gravity Probe. I am almost certain that it will come up with some unexpected findings.
There are other problems also 1) The Pioneer Effect. 2) GR does not work well with Quantum Theory. 3) There are higher order theories that give the same equations in the Solar System scale, and different equations on larger scales. Why should GR and only GR be the correct theory, when we only know without doubt results in our own solar system.
The only theory that looks good to me is Mannheim's Conformal Field Theory, although it still has a lot of problems. But then not many people are working on it.
I like it because it is a 4th order theory matching with our 4 Dimensional Universe. It also fits MOND (which I believe is the most important test for any new theory) where it matters. I don't believe they have yet found a reason for the pioneer effect within it though. It should be the second most important test.
I just love Linus's Style guide where he says that the functions should be small with large tabs (8 char), and the function should have less than 7 variables.
I think this is the holy grail. All these three are so intermingled that if you follow all these you will realize how much it improves your code.
If you use large tabs you cannot do too many nestings forcing you to break the function. If you have too many variables your function must be very complex or else you must use a structure. This also foces you to break up a function. This forces you to define new functions.
If you have few local variables then you don't need descriptive names for local variables.
I have found this set of advice to be the most important coding style requirement.
You are right that most types of items expire after 31 days. But the important thing is that not all types will expire after 31 days. An example is a recipe. More importantly you can create your own type. This will not expire. So for a model horse database you will create a model database type and use it for your purpose. This will not expire.
Internet cannot route when your providers do not want you to communicate. Nothing can protect you in this case. If on the other hand there was a natural calamity and every one was trying to get you access then you would get it. Like it happened during Katarina. This is not a natural calamity.
The best option is to ditch your provider if they are not a monopoly and if they are lobby to your government to create multiple providers.
Actually he is more correct than wrong. Linus Torvalds is the Benevolent Dictator no other BSD has. About the in-fighting between the Distributions, the problem is much less than what it was during the Unix wars and is lesser than between the different BSDs. And any major Linux distribution will dwarf the total ownership of all BSDs put together excepting MacOS X (which anyway is not that open, it will get better I am sure but its not that open now).
The other difference is that everybody knows they are against the leader so they can only go up if they stay together. During Unix wars the Vendors were fighting for an ever shrinking pie and not realizing it.
It is the best player available for windows. It is the only player that can play crippled DVDs and VCDs without crashing and it is the only one that can handle partially downloaded files. It also handles a very large formats as opposed to a very small subset provided by the proprietory vendors.
I am sure we will get other apps soon. Its not like the Movie industry is switching to Windows for their movie production.
MOND does explain the anamoly, but the paper rejects it because such a force is not felt in the orbits of Earth and Mars. Although MOND specifically says that it only applies when acceleration due to a field approaches a0. Which it does at these distances but not at Earth and Mars distances.
I understand that MOND is not a theory it is just an observation that applies to Galactic distances very well. I also believe that any theory that does not incorporate MOND in some form is missing something very critical.
My simple reason is that an equation that fits observation so well as MOND does to the Galactic distances must be a good approximation of some under lying theory. Dark Matter does not cut it, it is very ad-hoc, it would be believable if MOND did not predict things so well.
I do believe that MOND is not completely correct its like Keplers equations were to Newtons theory. It has some grains of truth. It may also not apply very well to Cosmic distances which the theory that explains MOND may explain more correctly.
I think Mannheim's Conformal Gravity does explain somethings of MOND very well, but I don't say that I understand it. It also fails miserably at Gravitational Lensing. But this is the only theory that does explain MOND.
The TeVaS is just an extension of MOND and I would n't put too much money in it. It doesn't explain MOND, and only merges MOND with Relativity. That is not good enough.
I believe Big Bang is the outcome of the observed RedShift. Dark Matter is the outcome of trying to fit the rotation curves, and Gravitational Lensing. It is also used to fit the data for structural formation of the observed universe. But these all could be due to the same lack of understanding of the basic laws as applied to large distances.
I believe they are only looking for the ad revenue. This is their cash cow. And they are not too greedy. Ofcourse being not greedy helps them conquer markets. Just like MS was in the beginning was far more interested in increasing their market share instead of making sure that everyone had a legitimate copy. We are a long time off from where Google would think that the market is not growing at all and they can only gain more money by screwing their customers.
Slashdot Mirror
It would have been one less in the MPAA and one less in the RIAA.
You are mistaken. This theory says the value of G increases as you go away from the galaxy center or from sun. This is why the rotation curves become flat, and Pioneer has a blue shift.
The problem is not with dark matter as a hypothesis. The problem is that the Tully Fisher Relation exists. It is hard to believe that dark matter will always align itself (at least for the high surface brightness galaxies), so that we can observe the Tully Fisher relation. Why shouldn't it put itself up almost randomly just like the stars in a galaxy. After all the stars are also aligned based on the gravity forces alone, dark matter should also be align based on gravity forces alone. Why should it behave in a completely illogical way, just to fit a relation?
You know what I can get for 30Euros (less than $40) in Paris.
20Mbits (down) + 1 Mbit (up)
unlimited local calls
unlimited national calls
unlimited International to 29 countries (25 european countries + India + USA + Canada + China).
Can any other country top this. France is very near to having the Telecommunications utopia. Unlimited communication for a fixed cost.
Living in Paris, it is getting harder to miss India. It is easier to call anybody in India from here than from within India. It is easy to get any movies or tv programs using the internet. It is also possible to get Indian magazines over the internet. It is also possible to get any food items that we desire, although there are not as many Indian people here as you would expect. Life is good.
We will lose privacy anyway. Its also information and it will get out when there is enough technology. The good thing is that the tracking technology will also get cheaper which will make the authorities without privacy. We will have the most open government not when the government will open themselves to you, but when they cannot hide from you. You may think that the government is more powerful than the people, but the people have more eyes and given enough eyes and enough interest no secret will be a secret as technology improves. You don't need the tinfoil hat the government will need it.
The last sentence should read
In the theory the repulsive component increases with the increase of the size of the universe, and hence the dark energy should increase with time.
MOND cannot explain anything like this. It was designed to fit the galactic curves. It cannot do anything more. I wouldn't even place much faith in the theory designed around MOND, to come up with these results. Actually the result is alluding to Conformal Gravity by Dr. Mannheim. In this theory gravity has three components one like Newton, second that increases with distance and is felt at galactic distances, third that increases with the square of distance but is repulsive and is felt only at cosmological scales but does manifest itself as an extra attractive constant component at galactic scales.
In the theory repulsive component decays with the evolution of Gravity, and hence the Dark Energy which is what the repulsive component amounts to.
This is the actual press release from Dr. Schaefer.
http://www.phys.lsu.edu/GRBHD/pressrelease/
It seems that the results are very damning to cosmological
constants.
Unfortunately there are no good web sites talking about
Mannheim's theory the only paper that explains a lot of
it is "Alternatives to Dark Matter and Dark Energy" which
can be accessed at http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0505266
He is merely collecting data to disprove the current gravitational model.
He actually believes in Dr. Mannheims Conformal Gravity. An attempt to define
gravity in terms of Conformal Symmetry, which the other three forces observe.
In the theory Dark Energy is just a manifestation of the repulsive component of
gravity. And this force changes with the evolution of the universe. He has just
found proof of this. This would mean that they have discovered something that has
not yet been predicted by the standard model. They have been hard at work to come
up with something that they can predict something that can be proved based on the
observation. The only other significant difference from the standard model is that
in the theory universe is always expanding, and there was no contraction phase.
The observations are not yet conclusive enough on this point.
There are actually several problems in Physics eg. Dark Matter(Galaxy Rotation), Dark Energy (Accelarating Universe), the Pioneer Anamoly, and that GR and Quantum Mechanics are incompatible.
_ physics
Also the Ricci Tensor that gives rise to Gravitational Force in GR does not arrive from the first principles. It was chosen because it gave the Newtonian Gravity. There can be an infinite number of higher order theories that can give rise to the same Newtonian Gravity at the Solar System scales but get different results at larger distances, including removing the need for Dark Matter and Dark Energy. We are actually in a very unstable equilibrium, GR is explaining the results but after quite a bit of fine tuning. It could be that we do discover some result in the near future that cannot be explained even with fine tuning, and at that time we will need a new theory.
Just take a look at the following page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsolved_problems_in
I think that was his biggest failure to let the country be divided.
The division caused more bloodshed than the undivided country would have faced.
I wish he had succeeded.
How about spending some quality Hubble time with large bodies in the Kuiper Belt.
It would be useful to know whether these bodies display MOND effects or not.
Maybe we can figure out the Pioneer Anomaly one way or the other.
I have just a little bit of trouble with the Red Shift Prediction. Actually GR does not unambiguously predict a Red Shift. Actually the /\ factor was added before to have a static universe, then it was removed when the Red Shift was observed, and now it has been readded with a reversed sign to account for an accelarating expansion. So it is a case of fine tuning.
I think you misunderstand.
The Label did not select it because they thought the CD will not be bought enough and they will not be able to test the reaction of the public very widely. That is why his CD escaped from being targetted for the software.
Actually if you are an Indian then maybe you can dial 911 without penalty.
Just say that you where trying to call Delhi. Which by the way is 00-91-11-.
I was in New Jersey and it happened twice to me. Trying to dial my Indian
no. and somehow the 00s would get lost and I would get 911. Once I didn't
even find out that the police had come as I was talking to my Fiancee and
my room mate talked to those guys. The other time I got the operator and
I told him that I was trying to call India, and he understood what must have
happened. But they still sent a Policeman to check it out.
It is true that we can rule out 1).
2) has a lot of momentum behind it but we cannot rule it out.
3) is the easiest way out.
Tully Fisher's relation (which is what MOND derives) makes
3) not an easy way out for any scientist that compares MOND
and Dark Matter.
Dark Matter is ad-hoc. It is basically fitting the theories
by assuming that something exists that we cannot see.
Normally it would be a good choice, but MOND gives a simple
equation which fits the curves of most galaxies without any
extra parameters. The real problem is the fact that MOND fits
so well.
This makes the task of Dark Matter difficult because now its required
to also come up with a reason for the well functioning of MOND.
I do not believe that MOND is the correct theory. Actually its
not even a theory. But what it does allude to is that our
understanding of Gravity beyond Solar System Scales may be faulty.
If we do assume that we do not know how Gravity functions
beyond our planetary system. Then we also cannot assume that the
Gravitational Lensing will work the same way. Actually most of what
we know of the Standard Model becomes suspect.
So one option is to cling to the Dark Matter and turn a blind eye
to this important observational problem or hunt for a better solution.
Ofcourse the research will reward the very few who find out the real
truth but for the rest it will be a bad thing. I think our Scientific
Community is searching for safety rather than challenges.
I am waiting eagerly for the EU Gravity Probe. I am almost certain that
it will come up with some unexpected findings.
There are other problems also
1) The Pioneer Effect.
2) GR does not work well with Quantum Theory.
3) There are higher order theories that give the same equations in the
Solar System scale, and different equations on larger scales. Why should
GR and only GR be the correct theory, when we only know without doubt
results in our own solar system.
The only theory that looks good to me is Mannheim's Conformal Field Theory,
although it still has a lot of problems. But then not many people are working
on it.
I like it because it is a 4th order theory matching with our 4 Dimensional
Universe. It also fits MOND (which I believe is the most important test for any
new theory) where it matters. I don't believe they have yet found a reason for
the pioneer effect within it though. It should be the second most important test.
Actually it is very effective as any of the living Calcutta Electricity Board members will attest.
I just hope someday the same method is applied in my own city. We may have then uninterrupted power supply.
It maybe an urban legend I hope somebody from Calcutta will elaborate.
I just love Linus's Style guide where he says that the functions should be small with large tabs (8 char),
and the function should have less than 7 variables.
I think this is the holy grail. All these three are so intermingled that if you follow all these you will
realize how much it improves your code.
If you use large tabs you cannot do too many nestings forcing you to break the function. If you have too
many variables your function must be very complex or else you must use a structure. This also foces you
to break up a function. This forces you to define new functions.
If you have few local variables then you don't need descriptive names for local variables.
I have found this set of advice to be the most important coding style requirement.
You are right that most types of items expire after 31 days.
But the important thing is that not all types will expire after 31 days.
An example is a recipe.
More importantly you can create your own type. This will not expire.
So for a model horse database you will create a model database type and use it for your purpose.
This will not expire.
Internet cannot route when your providers do not want you to communicate.
Nothing can protect you in this case.
If on the other hand there was a natural calamity and every one was trying to get you access
then you would get it. Like it happened during Katarina.
This is not a natural calamity.
The best option is to ditch your provider if they are not a monopoly and if they are lobby to your government to create multiple providers.
Actually he is more correct than wrong. Linus Torvalds is the Benevolent Dictator no other BSD has.
About the in-fighting between the Distributions, the problem is much less than what it was during
the Unix wars and is lesser than between the different BSDs. And any major Linux distribution will
dwarf the total ownership of all BSDs put together excepting MacOS X (which anyway is not that open,
it will get better I am sure but its not that open now).
The other difference is that everybody knows they are against the leader so they can only go up if they
stay together. During Unix wars the Vendors were fighting for an ever shrinking pie and not realizing it.
It is the best player available for windows. It is the only player that can play crippled DVDs and VCDs without crashing and it is the only one that can handle partially downloaded files. It also handles a very large formats as opposed to a very small subset provided by the proprietory vendors.
I am sure we will get other apps soon. Its not like the Movie industry is switching to Windows for their movie production.
MOND does explain the anamoly, but the paper rejects it because such a force is not felt in the orbits of Earth and Mars. Although MOND specifically says that it only applies when acceleration due to a field approaches a0. Which it does at these distances but not at Earth and Mars distances.
I understand that MOND is not a theory it is just an observation that applies to Galactic distances very well. I also believe that any theory that does not incorporate MOND in some form is missing something very critical.
My simple reason is that an equation that fits observation so well as MOND does to the Galactic distances must be a good approximation of some under lying theory. Dark Matter does not cut it, it is very ad-hoc, it would be believable if MOND did not predict things so well.
I do believe that MOND is not completely correct its like Keplers equations were to Newtons theory. It has some grains of truth. It may also not apply very well to Cosmic distances which the theory that explains MOND may explain more correctly.
I think Mannheim's Conformal Gravity does explain somethings of MOND very well, but I don't say that I understand it. It also fails miserably at Gravitational Lensing. But this is the only theory that does explain MOND.
The TeVaS is just an extension of MOND and I would n't put too much money in it. It doesn't explain MOND, and only merges MOND with Relativity. That is not good enough.
Are big bang and Redshift related to Dark Matter.
I believe Big Bang is the outcome of the observed
RedShift. Dark Matter is the outcome of trying
to fit the rotation curves, and Gravitational
Lensing. It is also used to fit the data for
structural formation of the observed universe.
But these all could be due to the same lack of
understanding of the basic laws as applied to
large distances.
I believe they are only looking for the ad revenue. This is their cash cow. And they are not too greedy. Ofcourse being not greedy helps them conquer markets. Just like MS was in the beginning was far more interested in increasing their market share instead of making sure that everyone had a legitimate copy. We are a long time off from where Google would think that the market is not growing at all and they can only gain more money by screwing their customers.