When I first began debating the merits of Lambda-CDM vs. PC/EU theory in cyberspace, it was somewhere back in the 2005-2006 timeframe. Back then, LHC and LUX were still empirical works in progress. When it came out in 2006, that GR lensing study on galaxy cluster collisions was hailed as the ultimate "proof" of the existence of exotic forms of "dark" matter. It supposedly demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that MOND theory wasn't the answer to the mainstream's problems, but rather the answer *necessarily* involved additional and necessarily exotic forms of matter.
Since that 2006 lensing study however, the mainstream has repeatedly admitted that they botched every stellar mass estimate and galaxy mass *assumption* which was used in that 2006 study. They grossly underestimated the total amount of light the galaxies emit. They grossly underestimated the number of stars in various galaxies by a whopping factor of between 3-20, depending on the size of the star and the type of galaxy.
They also underestimated the total number of stars of various sizes that reside *between* galaxies in clusters, rather than directly *inside* of galaxies too.
Every one of these revelations drives another nail in the coffin of their claim about any need for exotic forms of matter. Virtually every single assumption that they used to calculate ordinary baryonic matter in that 2006 study has since been shown to be completely worthless. There was never any 'proof' of 'dark matter' from that Bullet Cluster lensing study, they simply 'proved' that their galaxy mass estimates were an absolute *disaster* back in 2006.
In 2012, they also found all their so called "missing baryons" in the form million degree plasma that surrounds the galaxy. Not only did they resolve that minor 'issue', the demonstrated that their useless baryonic mass estimates in 2006 were *pitifully flawed* in virtually every conceivable way. They drastically underestimated the amount of ordinary matter in that 2006 study!
Back in the early days, the mainstream insisted on rubbing my nose in the upcoming LHC and LUX experiments. They boastfully proclaimed that their 'predictions' about their assumptions related to the existence of exotic matter theory could all be demonstrated and/or falsified in the ordinary empirical manner too.
Let's look at what's happened since 2006 as it relates to exotic matter claims in the lab. Not only didn't LHC find any evidence of 'WIMP' sparticles, it found no evidence whatsoever of any "sparticles" associated with SUSY theory, not a single one. Not only did the folks at LHC find the last remaining "standard" particle in the standard model of particle physics, they quite literally ruled out all the 'popular' brands of SUSY theory prior to LHC. "Mainstream" particle physics theory was validated in a huge way at LHC with the discovery of the Higgs Boson, the last remaining particle of the standard model. On the other hand LHC results haven't been at all kind to *non standard* claims about particle physics.
LUX also struck out in a *huge* way. More millions of dollars were poured own a hole looking for the hypothetical WIMP particle yet absolutely nothing was found. The same NULL results were verified again at PandaX too.
They even tested electron roundness claims in the lab that are related to *various* exotic matter theories, and again they found the ultimate *NULL* result from such lab "experiments".
Every single claim to fame that the mainstream made in 2006 in terms of being able to empirically "test" their claims in a lab blew right up in their empirical face. They all came back with *NULL* results from the LAB, each and every single lab experiment.
I'm really curious now about the next few years as it relates to exotic matter theory. What happens now to Lambda-CDM if LHC finds absolutely no other 'extraordinary' stable forms of matter? Does exotic matter theory die a natural scientific empirical death, or do we continue the never ending exotic matter snipe hunt indefinitely?
I used to believe that dark matter theory was actually the least objectionable part of Lambda-CDM theory because unlike all their fallacious claims about the empirical "cause" of photon redshift, at least exotic matter theory *could* be put to the test in the lab. I was right about the fact that at least it *could* be tested, but apparently I was naive about their horrific case of confirmation bias.
The problem as a I see it is that they've already done a lot of lab work and they've already falsified all their favorite exotic matter theories from the early days of our debates. If they come up empty now in 2015-2017 in terms of finding exotic matter at LHC, will they actually abide by the results of their so called predictive 'tests' of their theory, or is this too just another perfect example of confirmation bias at it's ugliest?
I can't say for certain that the fat lady has definitely sung her last song at LHC as it relates to finding stable forms of exotic matter, but it's been singing quite clearly about the lack of validity of their earlier mathematical SUSY models, which apparently were worth about a dime a dozen back then, and worth absolutely nothing now.
Will Lambda-CDM proponents even abide by the lab tests of their own theories?
There is absolutely no possible empirical way to even 'test' any of their claims related to photon redshift. Every cause/effect claim related to redshift is *assumed on faith* in Lambda-CDM, and none of it enjoys empirical support. There isn't even an identified "source" of dark energy, let alone a way to demonstrate in the lab that it has some empirical effect on matter or photons. "Inflation" was a completely postdicted 'meme' from it's rather inelegant inception. There no way to empirically demonstrate an empirical connection between Guth's imaginary friend and photon redshift. It's nothing more than a 'statement of faith' on the part of the 'believer'. Even the very basic claim that 'space' does magical expansion tricks is an *act of pure faith* on the part of the 'believer'. It defies empirical support in the lab, and always will defy such support.
There's really only one claim in Lambda-CDM that can be 'put to the test' in the lab empirically. Thus far "cold dark matter' has been a complete *disaster* for Lambda-CDM proponents. Are they even willing to abide by the findings of LHC over the next few years once it does come back online at higher energy states? If they don't find any exotic stable forms of matter after the upgrade process, then what?
GaryN
Re: LHC, Lambda-CDM and the total lack of exotic matter supp
If they don't find any exotic stable forms of matter after the upgrade process, then what?
Build a bigger machine, of cour$e!
paladin17
Re: LHC, Lambda-CDM and the total lack of exotic matter supp
Yes, dark matter and dark energy are just pure arbitrary constructs. Myths, if you like.
But hey, you're saying the Standard Model is OK in general, but I'm not sure about it. For example, the Higgs stuff is kind of troubling (and even some particle physics dudes are starting to acknowledge that, although not in the way that I would do it). Then we've got troubles with quantizing gravity and then we've got troubles with the confinement of quarks and gluons and the hadronization process. Hell, we cannot even derive the proton's spin from our current models. The best we can do is to aggressively bend the theory to fit the data. And that is just the tip of the iceberg. People are going crazy with all those string, multiverse, whatever-else theories that are not only unprovable, but also simply logically incoherent (take the Big bang as an example).
But there are at least two good things about LHC and other big machines: 1) they give boost to the technology; 2) the people there are searching for something. And even if they will interpret it in their own way, something might still appear on their sensors from time to time. And the other people in the future will probably need to figure out what was found there really.
viscount aero
Re: LHC, Lambda-CDM and the total lack of exotic matter supp
Belief in DM/DE is cemented in place. It is the pillar of modern cosmology and will not be going anywhere within the foreseeable future. All bias and research is poured into DM/DE studies. Scientism is the paradigm and it will remain so for generations.
If you want an idea of how permanent the mainstream belief system is, watch this (posted in another thread, too). Watch it with a barf bag as you become nauseated:
