Mysterious signal from the center of the Perseus Cluster unexplained by known physics !

originally posted by: 0zzymand0s
a reply to: SonOfTheLawOfOne

That's exactly backwards.

In fact - one of the best ways to understand what an unknown actually *is* is to first discover what it is not.

EDIT: for example - I am setting up a lathe, and it is not making me a good part. We have done this job 1000 times in the last 10 years. Is it the program? Unlikely, as it has proven to work in the past. Are the tools new? If anything has been used from a previous job, there is a chance it might be. Check that. Is it tool height? Check that. Etc.

Please note that this is only part of the troubleshooting process. In this case, there are likely teams or individuals analyzing the data to make sure this isn't a computer error, and so on. While this is going on, others are speculating. Most of these speculations can be immediately back-burnered as unlikely causes, but often -- speaking them aloud -- is part of a process where the most unlikely is eliminated quickly until only a handful of likely explanations remain. At this point, the hard science begins.

I think you might have missed my point.

Since when was dark matter categorized into different types?

A type means you can correctly classify it in the first place, hypothetically or not. The OP source says 60 different types.

There is also nothing to experimentally prove, as another poster said, until dark matter is first identified and confirmed and can be proven experimentally. Then, you can start to hypothesize about 60 other types or exotic ideas.

~Namaste

a reply to: pikestaff

Patience is all we can give to the search for life. Next on the horizon is the ATLAST program which will be able to look for chlorophyll signatures with more nuance than what we have now. Apparently it's more likely to achieve better results by focusing the initial searches on oxygen signatures as there's a greater signal to noise ratio.

Check this out >> Prospects for Detecting Oxygen, Water, and Chlorophyll in an Exo-Earth: Timothy D. Brandt, David S. Spiegel; 2014

a reply to: SonOfTheLawOfOne

A few different 'types' for you



the point really is that theory is quite open, and they do fall into different types.

originally posted by: SonOfTheLawOfOne
a reply to: 727Sky

Interesting find OP.

The part I found amusing is, that if they still don't know what dark matter is, and haven't even come up with a way to describe it hypothetically, why would they make this statement:

After we submitted the paper, theoreticians came up with about 60 different dark matter types which could explain this line.

I would expect that before you can come up with 60 types of something, you have to know what that something is first?

~Namaste

If anything gives off photons, then it's usually electrons jumping from one orbital plane to another. Then that something must be large or small enough to have those orbital planes. So they will come up with all sorts of combinations of atomic particles that have those orbitals.

originally posted by: stormcell

originally posted by: SonOfTheLawOfOne
a reply to: 727Sky

Interesting find OP.

The part I found amusing is, that if they still don't know what dark matter is, and haven't even come up with a way to describe it hypothetically, why would they make this statement:

After we submitted the paper, theoreticians came up with about 60 different dark matter types which could explain this line.

I would expect that before you can come up with 60 types of something, you have to know what that something is first?

~Namaste

If anything gives off photons, then it's usually electrons jumping from one orbital plane to another. Then that something must be large or small enough to have those orbital planes. So they will come up with all sorts of combinations of atomic particles that have those orbitals.

I can also be dark matter relic annihilation/decay. not necessarily atomic shells

originally posted by: pikestaff
This reminds me that I am sure some TV program stated that 'they' have yet to find a chorofill band in any of the spectrum's they take of stars, so that substance being vital for plant growth, makes me think that as there are no plants out there, no animals either, therefore no humanoids? so we are alone?

Chlorophyll is an adaptation by Earth plants to make use of the infra-red and UV light given out by the Sun while discarding the green wavelengths of light. Plants appear green because Chlorphyll doesn't absorbs those wavelengths of light. Different stars have a different color temperature depending on how hot they are, so any plant-like life on another planet may have evolved differently.

the actual paper of the event is here guys, arxiv.org... if you want something better to read than the tabloid versions

I guess we can finally get rid of. . .

originally posted by: pikestaff
This reminds me that I am sure some TV program stated that 'they' have yet to find a chorofill band in any of the spectrum's they take of stars, so that substance being vital for plant growth, makes me think that as there are no plants out there, no animals either, therefore no humanoids? so we are alone?

Why would they expect to see evidence of chlorophyll in spectrum analysis of stars?

All that proves (obviously) is that plants don't grow on the Sun...... Duh!

originally posted by: pikestaff
This reminds me that I am sure some TV program stated that 'they' have yet to find a chorofill band in any of the spectrum's they take of stars, so that substance being vital for plant growth, makes me think that as there are no plants out there, no animals either, therefore no humanoids? so we are alone?

That's assuming we have the information available to us. Remember that the technocratic elite hoard discoveries until they've had a chance to interpret the results. The CERN collider mysteriously "broke" after the initial testing phase so that their scientists could determine the fate and humanity's stance towards the Higgs boson. The Apollo 1 astronauts paid the ultimate price, as has anyone trying to promote affordable solar technology, 3-D interactive pornography and anti-gravity jets.

a reply to: Mon1k3r

Thats exactly what CMDR Chris hadfield had to say.

Dark Matter is a place holder, speculation at best.

a reply to: DigitalJesusWuang

The LHC didn't "mysteriously" break - it was a well publicised fault with a dodgy weld on some super-cooled magnets. Besides that, it actually worked quite well, just not at full power. They have since shut it down and are just finishing off full repairs to fire it up at full power sometime next year and affordable solar tech is quite freely available, at least here in Europe..

a reply to: Kandinsky

Everything is life we just have a different perspective on it.

a reply to: ErosA433

If it looks like spaghetti, and it tastes like spaghetti -

It's probably spaghetti!

Sorry , bad joke!

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: DigitalJesusWuang

The LHC didn't "mysteriously" break - it was a well publicised fault with a dodgy weld on some super-cooled magnets. Besides that, it actually worked quite well, just not at full power. They have since shut it down and are just finishing off full repairs to fire it up at full power sometime next year and affordable solar tech is quite freely available, at least here in Europe..

Sorry, but no. Steve Quayle debunked that on Alex Jone's radio show a while back. The supposedly "simple" weld problem was a poor excuse for a delay to the LHC's use. The real reason is that CERN's work would easily negate long-standing myths that were put in place as a means of control.

Take for example the revelation that man-made global warming was at least partially debunked by CERN, but that the details of the Cosmics Leaving Outdoor Droplets (CLOUD) experiment were suppressed:

www.prisonplanet.com...

originally posted by: Soapusmaximus
a reply to: ErosA433

If it looks like spaghetti, and it tastes like spaghetti -

It's probably spaghetti!

Sorry , bad joke!

I like ducks.

Oh, and your avatar is really cool, Soapus.

originally posted by: Mon1k3r
No one will ever discover the existence of dark matter. Or dark energy. They are just substitutes for the words "I don't know."

Exactly..

Its a stop gap solution, a throwaway explanation to keep things ticking along until they can explain why their theoretical model of the universe doesn't fit with standard cosmology...Academics are abhorrent about using words like "we don't know" God forbid they show themselves to be human and fallible lol.

I don't think these scientific article are written by or even edited by scientists.

a reply to: TiM3LoRd

Academics say "we don't know" all the time. You're simply projecting your own prejudices, here.

originally posted by: SonOfTheLawOfOne
a reply to: 727Sky

Interesting find OP.

The part I found amusing is, that if they still don't know what dark matter is, and haven't even come up with a way to describe it hypothetically, why would they make this statement:

After we submitted the paper, theoreticians came up with about 60 different dark matter types which could explain this line.

I would expect that before you can come up with 60 types of something, you have to know what that something is first?

~Namaste

dark mat·ter-
noun ASTRONOMY
noun: dark matter; noun: cold dark matter; noun: hot dark matter
(in some cosmological theories) nonluminous material that is postulated to exist in space and that could take any of several forms including weakly interacting particles ( cold dark matter ) or high-energy randomly moving particles created soon after the Big Bang ( hot dark matter ).

Hope that helps!


-Alien

a reply to: DigitalJesusWuang

Oh please..... Alex Jones? Give me a break... They guy has been against the LHC for years and has constantly parroted BS about it - such as Black Holes destroying us for example.

Now I know where you get your info from, I know you don't actually know what you're talking about.. How on earth you can tie the LHC to Global Warming in any way is a mystery.