A physicist friend of mine called dark matter “the ultimate fudge factor”. As a curious non-scientist it seems that we are still missing something fundamental about gravity. Reminds me of the pre-Newton confusion between gravity and centrifugal force. Keep these great videos coming.
No it's the hyper mass okay, it's when stuff goes c+ it goes dark get it? But some trace remnants can be tracked since it must pass through our spaghetti too
It's gonna twist round we'll experience it at light speed ofc but really it's she's this little super tight fairy girl that everyone wants to know, are chasing her so she turns into a tree a neuron dendron and then she's everywhere and nowhere then she's back like a dream, but it's okay it's a story we don't do exactly this we go into that in our minds and learn about it, but yes the universe in its local supergrav spots cracks spacetime open basically
Actually, I wrote and published several books before the JWST was launched and wrote how the telescope would not find young, small galaxies at the edge of the observable universe. I said the telescope would discover old, fully grown galaxies as far as it's able to see, even further than the light distance of 13.8 billion light years away. I said the galaxies at a light distance of 14 billion light years away would be larger than our own Milky Way galaxy. In 2004 I discovered a glitch in Einstein's general theory of relativity, particularly his look-back time prediction based on the speed of light, age of the universe and the time it takes light to travel great distances. Basically, telescopes cannot see into the past. I based this prediction on several factors, quantum entanglement, special relativity, James Maxwell's equations on EM fields "light" thermodynamics, and Paul Dirac's equations. I determined light information produced by distant galaxies would be conveyed in a quantum instant, regardless of distance because the telescope would be contained inside the distant galaxy's EM field "light cone", thus quantum entanglement of light would apply. That and the fact that according to general relativity time is relative to the observer, not distant objects being measured. Plus, general relativity would not even apply to bodies moving away from us faster than the speed of light. Nope. Special relativity's time dilation and length contraction would be measured by the telescope when measuring the distant galaxies. Thus the distant galaxies will look as they do today, in our relative reference frame of time. So they'll be old, fully formed spirals and ellipticals at the edge of the observable universe, further than when the big bang happened if the telescope is able to see that far. I wrote how the Nance Grace Roman telescope because it will be more sensitive than the JWST, will find even further galaxies, some larger and older than our own galaxy too but further than 14 billion light years away. Those galaxies will become the mother of all paradoxes, challenging the big bang, age of the universe, thermodynamics, general relativity, speed of light, distance to the CMBR, dark matter, Hubble constant, and the LCDM model used to explain the evolution of our universe. Thus why I wrote galaxies further than 14 billion light years away will be considered the mother of all paradoxes. Astronomers however found them using the JWST and instead, call them universe breakers. I published the paperback book *SECRET UNIVERSE : GRAVITY BY RON KEMP* on September 27 2021. Which was 3 months before the telescope was launched, and a year before astronomers confirmed them. I've got terminal cancer and I had one wish, to live long enough for my wild predictions about the early universe to be confirmed. I made it. Today, I'm in full remission. So life is good. My books have been selling well. All the money made from selling the books will go into treating the cancer, keep it in full remission. I thank all of you who have supported me. ♥
A claim that a telescope cannot see in the past, is non-sensical. Viewing light 13.8 Bn light years away, IS the past. This is a fundamental physical universal concept. One of many . "Cancer Remission guy" who promotes his own paperback on someone else's channel, does not get my vote of confidence.
There is no other way than to enjoy these videos, which are always so enlightening and very professional but with language that is understandable to me a mere mortal on the other side of the screen, THANK YOU.
I find your title a bit misleading cause.. The article clearly states that current models of dark matter within the standard ΛCDM framework are not sufficient to explain the observed maturity and mass of these early galaxies. It does not argue for the absence of dark matter but highlights the limitations of current interpretations and models in fully accounting for the JWST observations. What the article does is explore alternatives such as: Axion miniclusters, or Primordial black holes (PBHs) These alternatives could explain modifications to the matter power spectrum required to accommodate the observed structures in the early universe. However, even within these alternative scenarios, the fundamental concept of dark matter remains intact. The key point that the video misses or misinterprets is that the article suggests a refinement in our understanding of how dark matter operates during this early period, not that dark matter is entirely absent. The tension with current models presents an opportunity for scientific progress, not evidence against the concept of dark matter itself.
Because without dark matter and dark energy it is impossible to explain an expansion and B.B. But the problem remains because you have to answer the question, that if the expansion continuous then from where the dark things are coming?
I found it easier to understand "dark matter" more as an umbrella term for a series of observations that did not align with existing models, and then a bunch of work was done to come up with potential theories/models that were compatible with those observations. It is not surprising to me if new observations point to more work being needed, but it also does not mean that previous observations that fall under the "dark matter" umbrella can be discarded.
Uh, hasn't MOND been essentially left behind? Dark matter models can be updated, especially in early epochs, but if MOND is a no-go, then it's a no-go in general. Essentially, dark matter allows for flexibility depending on how it manifests.
What prevents comments from being added to some videos? When I went to the comments, just as I did to add this one, the space where "add comment " typically is, doesn't appear. Any explanations would be appreciated. Thank you
As our Solar System goes through the current sheet and dust clouds we see changes occur that don’t “seem” to fit the mold. Everything is moving, the waves of clouds are everywhere. Their charge and magnetic fields can alter anything they go over.
@@RadagastBrown420it's been stated by many scientists, dark matter is called dark matter because they don't know what is causing the observed discrepancies to our theories, they have no actual proof that it exists.
As gravity is energy derived from rest energy then it stands to reason that a moving object is falling into it's own unidirectional gravity. This begs the question ,could gravity of motion influence ordinary gravity.???
Dark matter is the standard explanation for astrophysical physics but can’t be detected directly or experimentally,makes me wonder about how correct the theories about dark matter are
Well if we think of a Euler disk as the vertical spin momentum comes to a state of rest via the horizontal the the compression under the disc is increased including the rotational contact nodes. Prior to rest you would get max rotation.
The smaller the apeture the faster the rotation. Center of galaxy would hold the largest point of apeture as the light is observable to the dominant force. As you move away, scale by distance, the apeture is decreased by visibility of light to dominant force. I imagine there is also a sweet spot,something along the path close the outer rim like in a disc magnet where the convergent fields really like to take hold in equality. Isn't earth close to the outter rim of the galaxy?
@@beecnul8rAnd the real question is - what was the trigger for that expansion? Why then? What caused that tipping point? Is it a case of expansion and contraction of the same Universe forever into the past and future (if they are not the same thing).
I guess astronomers have been looking long enough in sufficient places to realise this is true, yes. They wouldn't make such an absurd sounding suggestion unless they had 'observed' it happening, witnessing outer stars moving faster than those closer to the hub.
Darkness is a lie we tell ourselves when we cannot measure the amount of light There is no such thing as darkness everything is light we just don't have the instruments to measure it
Instead of changing the Laws Of Physics, physicists need to contemplate the Ontological origin of the universe & understand the aether itself, which is the "sub-quantum" material that creates all things, is responsible for this added energy for it is relatively untapped by the materium in these regions! FREE
Every theory about gravity that do not take under mind the distribution of that we call mass in an object is wrong. See, the athlete who is spinning on ice, he is able to change his spinning velocity, increases it, when he gathers his arms near his body only by changing his mass' distribution. The Newton's law use the mass like as it to be gathered in one spot, and this is wrong. Many experiments here on Earth proves that the distribution of mass make objects to behave differently under gravity. So, gravity depends on not only from the quantity of mass but also depends on and from the quality of mass. That means that we don't need dark matter for explaining the trajectories of stars at the periphery of galaxies, but we have to know the distribution of their mass, and to have a new formula of gravity. The MOND theory explains this missing part of the gravitational behavior of Mercury, but it loses for any other planet. But what is that that maces Mercury to be different from the other planets? This is the fact that the surface of the planet is shrinking over time and this fact changes the mass' distribution of the planet, it increases its spinning speed and creates the paradox of its trajectory of about 8% every 400 years from the Newtonian predictions. Also, it is obvious when a galaxy is formed the stars take their place in the galaxy conglomerate of stars, with this to depends on from the differences in the mass distributions between the stars and not only based on the quantity of mass.
And people laughed at me for years when I told them they don't have a theory, but a religion... You know what happens to your theory when it does not agree with observation? No, you don't ignore the bloody observation. And when it disagrees with this much?! Dead!
Had you folks gone and studied what Nikola Tesla said and did what he did, from re 100 years ago, you could have saved a lot of time cos Tesla already knew that........Tesla debated with Einstein constantly re relativity let alone all these new ideas coming out of apparent no where
🤔 well.. the first thing thats wrong with all this... is that people are still claiming that JWST is allowing us to see into the past or that theyre looking at galaxies from the past.🤦♂️ smh th They're Not looking back into the past.
So we have to research the Tensor-Vector-Scalar Gravity/MOND theory our self then? No criticism just making sure I’m understanding the video correctly. Yes….. okay cool, thanks for at least telling me about them mate.
"Astronomers Shocked!" Sorry... Strangely enough... I am not interested anymore... I do not wish to have my mind blown away, I am not interested in shocking shit whatsoever... I just want facts presented in the most boring way... and that I suddenly think: "What the fuck..."
MOND was disproven a few years ago. And Dark Matter can explain these galaxies. They showed how Dark Matter explains how black holes can get so big so early already. This is just more MOND guys who will never give up.
@@oker59 MOND has not been “disproven”. It is not possible to “disprove” anything. It is true that certain flavors of MOND have been determined to be HIGHLY unlikely but, like string theory, there could be innumerable permutations of MOND. At the end of the day MOND isn’t any less likely than the idea the universe is made up of 90% matter we can’t see or directly detect.
@@Yury_PanbolskyЕта книга издадена на Русский тоже. Можно найти електронная версия на сайте (Спутник+) К сожаление ето только первое издание и там неть самое интересное обяснение на квантовая запутанност. Можно снести ее от мой сайт, но не хочу писать его сейчас, что бы не раздразнит платформа.
I know ain't no factual channel is making a video every day without some miss information or AI or anything thats not very valid but I like the idea maybe if they specifically stated that these are ideas not facts then maybe I'd subscribe but don't believe this stuff people be smarter
Great video, congratulations … the mystery of dark matter has already been solved ...This other video teaches new physics, hidden variables to study gravity, a demonstration of the non-existence of dark matter th-cam.com/video/b5TU-YJrMVE/w-d-xo.html
If a law doesn't work correctly we have to find the reason and to change the law and not to say oh you see laws work differently in the past and differently now. We have mess with the thermodynamics, and now it is the time to mess now and with gravity just to feet everything, be agreed, with the most stupid theory of all time, the theory of the B.B.
A physicist friend of mine called dark matter “the ultimate fudge factor”. As a curious non-scientist it seems that we are still missing something fundamental about gravity. Reminds me of the pre-Newton confusion between gravity and centrifugal force. Keep these great videos coming.
No it's the hyper mass okay, it's when stuff goes c+ it goes dark get it? But some trace remnants can be tracked since it must pass through our spaghetti too
It's gonna twist round we'll experience it at light speed ofc but really it's she's this little super tight fairy girl that everyone wants to know, are chasing her so she turns into a tree a neuron dendron and then she's everywhere and nowhere then she's back like a dream, but it's okay it's a story we don't do exactly this we go into that in our minds and learn about it, but yes the universe in its local supergrav spots cracks spacetime open basically
They could rename it dark miasma, or dark aether
Actually, I wrote and published several books before the JWST was launched and wrote how the telescope would not find young, small galaxies at the edge of the observable universe. I said the telescope would discover old, fully grown galaxies as far as it's able to see, even further than the light distance of 13.8 billion light years away. I said the galaxies at a light distance of 14 billion light years away would be larger than our own Milky Way galaxy.
In 2004 I discovered a glitch in Einstein's general theory of relativity, particularly his look-back time prediction based on the speed of light, age of the universe and the time it takes light to travel great distances. Basically, telescopes cannot see into the past. I based this prediction on several factors, quantum entanglement, special relativity, James Maxwell's equations on EM fields "light" thermodynamics, and Paul Dirac's equations. I determined light information produced by distant galaxies would be conveyed in a quantum instant, regardless of distance because the telescope would be contained inside the distant galaxy's EM field "light cone", thus quantum entanglement of light would apply. That and the fact that according to general relativity time is relative to the observer, not distant objects being measured. Plus, general relativity would not even apply to bodies moving away from us faster than the speed of light. Nope. Special relativity's time dilation and length contraction would be measured by the telescope when measuring the distant galaxies. Thus the distant galaxies will look as they do today, in our relative reference frame of time. So they'll be old, fully formed spirals and ellipticals at the edge of the observable universe, further than when the big bang happened if the telescope is able to see that far.
I wrote how the Nance Grace Roman telescope because it will be more sensitive than the JWST, will find even further galaxies, some larger and older than our own galaxy too but further than 14 billion light years away. Those galaxies will become the mother of all paradoxes, challenging the big bang, age of the universe, thermodynamics, general relativity, speed of light, distance to the CMBR, dark matter, Hubble constant, and the LCDM model used to explain the evolution of our universe. Thus why I wrote galaxies further than 14 billion light years away will be considered the mother of all paradoxes. Astronomers however found them using the JWST and instead, call them universe breakers.
I published the paperback book *SECRET UNIVERSE : GRAVITY BY RON KEMP* on September 27 2021. Which was 3 months before the telescope was launched, and a year before astronomers confirmed them.
I've got terminal cancer and I had one wish, to live long enough for my wild predictions about the early universe to be confirmed. I made it. Today, I'm in full remission. So life is good. My books have been selling well. All the money made from selling the books will go into treating the cancer, keep it in full remission. I thank all of you who have supported me. ♥
As a cancer survivor I wish you well
As a cancer survivor I wish you well I'm not sure if my first message made it
Thank you Mr. Kemp for working hard to expand our understanding of the cosmos. Our species needs more people such as you.
Is your book on Amazon?
A claim that a telescope cannot see in the past, is non-sensical. Viewing light 13.8 Bn light years away, IS the past.
This is a fundamental physical universal concept. One of many .
"Cancer Remission guy" who promotes his own paperback on someone else's channel, does not get my vote of confidence.
It is fascinating to keep abreast of the latest scientific discoveries, theories and anomalies.
There is no other way than to enjoy these videos, which are always so enlightening and very professional but with language that is understandable to me a mere mortal on the other side of the screen, THANK YOU.
Quite interesting! Regardless of your take on why, it’s always fascinating to find anomalies.
Great discovery. JWST is very important to know our universe. Thanks ❤
I find your title a bit misleading cause..
The article clearly states that current models of dark matter within the standard ΛCDM framework are not sufficient to explain the observed maturity and mass of these early galaxies. It does not argue for the absence of dark matter but highlights the limitations of current interpretations and models in fully accounting for the JWST observations.
What the article does is explore alternatives such as:
Axion miniclusters, or
Primordial black holes (PBHs)
These alternatives could explain modifications to the matter power spectrum required to accommodate the observed structures in the early universe. However, even within these alternative scenarios, the fundamental concept of dark matter remains intact.
The key point that the video misses or misinterprets is that the article suggests a refinement in our understanding of how dark matter operates during this early period, not that dark matter is entirely absent. The tension with current models presents an opportunity for scientific progress, not evidence against the concept of dark matter itself.
Don't trust any title on TH-cam containing the word "shock". If all of it were true, our world would be truly overwhelming.
Because without dark matter and dark energy it is impossible to explain an expansion and B.B. But the problem remains because you have to answer the question, that if the expansion continuous then from where the dark things are coming?
@@user-dialectic-scietist1 Yes, we need explanations anyway.
Excellent graphic content.
I found it easier to understand "dark matter" more as an umbrella term for a series of observations that did not align with existing models, and then a bunch of work was done to come up with potential theories/models that were compatible with those observations. It is not surprising to me if new observations point to more work being needed, but it also does not mean that previous observations that fall under the "dark matter" umbrella can be discarded.
Excellent graphic .
Uh, hasn't MOND been essentially left behind? Dark matter models can be updated, especially in early epochs, but if MOND is a no-go, then it's a no-go in general. Essentially, dark matter allows for flexibility depending on how it manifests.
What prevents comments from being added to some videos? When I went to the comments, just as I did to add this one, the space where "add comment " typically is, doesn't appear. Any explanations would be appreciated. Thank you
As our Solar System goes through the current sheet and dust clouds we see changes occur that don’t “seem” to fit the mold. Everything is moving, the waves of clouds are everywhere. Their charge and magnetic fields can alter anything they go over.
I think dark matter & dark energy are made up to fill an empty space in the equations.
Where did you study these things?
@@RadagastBrown420 In the need of the B.B. theory, because something has to feel the gaps of the expansion. Ha, ha, ha.
Much like phlogiston and Aether were proposed to explain fire and the transmission of light.
@@RadagastBrown420it's been stated by many scientists, dark matter is called dark matter because they don't know what is causing the observed discrepancies to our theories, they have no actual proof that it exists.
I thought they were. A placeholder of sorts. Do I have this wrong?
The answer is in the book - "Theory of Everything in Physics and The Universe"
JWST is to the cosmology game as MF DOOM is to the rap game. Turned it on its head!
As gravity is energy derived from rest energy then it stands to reason that a moving object is falling into it's own unidirectional gravity.
This begs the question ,could gravity of motion influence ordinary gravity.???
The jury is still out. More tests and more astronomy.
Dark matter is the standard explanation for astrophysical physics but can’t be detected directly or experimentally,makes me wonder about how correct the theories about dark matter are
Maybe our universe is older than we thought?
Well if we think of a Euler disk as the vertical spin momentum comes to a state of rest via the horizontal the the compression under the disc is increased including the rotational contact nodes. Prior to rest you would get max rotation.
The smaller the apeture the faster the rotation. Center of galaxy would hold the largest point of apeture as the light is observable to the dominant force. As you move away, scale by distance, the apeture is decreased by visibility of light to dominant force. I imagine there is also a sweet spot,something along the path close the outer rim like in a disc magnet where the convergent fields really like to take hold in equality. Isn't earth close to the outter rim of the galaxy?
If everything is supposed to have started from the same point, how did we end up billions of light years away from these galaxies?
There was a rapid expansion blowing out at a higher speed than light.
@@beecnul8rAnd the real question is - what was the trigger for that expansion? Why then? What caused that tipping point? Is it a case of expansion and contraction of the same Universe forever into the past and future (if they are not the same thing).
@@beecnul8r what was the universe expanding in to ?
God knows! Ha, ha, ha. Because the B.B. was his fart. I am worst than Hole!
Could it be that we’re seeing our own galaxy billions of years in the past?
So do we have data on the Milky Way showing this unpredictably higher speed of stars orbiting out on the rim?
I guess astronomers have been looking long enough in sufficient places to realise this is true, yes. They wouldn't make such an absurd sounding suggestion unless they had 'observed' it happening, witnessing outer stars moving faster than those closer to the hub.
Darkness is a lie we tell ourselves when we cannot measure the amount of light
There is no such thing as darkness everything is light we just don't have the instruments to measure it
Instead of changing the Laws Of Physics, physicists need to contemplate the Ontological origin of the universe & understand the aether itself, which is the "sub-quantum" material that creates all things, is responsible for this added energy for it is relatively untapped by the materium in these regions! FREE
The reason galaxies act different than our solar system is because they are different
Every theory about gravity that do not take under mind the distribution of that we call mass in an object is wrong. See, the athlete who is spinning on ice, he is able to change his spinning velocity, increases it, when he gathers his arms near his body only by changing his mass' distribution. The Newton's law use the mass like as it to be gathered in one spot, and this is wrong. Many experiments here on Earth proves that the distribution of mass make objects to behave differently under gravity. So, gravity depends on not only from the quantity of mass but also depends on and from the quality of mass. That means that we don't need dark matter for explaining the trajectories of stars at the periphery of galaxies, but we have to know the distribution of their mass, and to have a new formula of gravity. The MOND theory explains this missing part of the gravitational behavior of Mercury, but it loses for any other planet. But what is that that maces Mercury to be different from the other planets? This is the fact that the surface of the planet is shrinking over time and this fact changes the mass' distribution of the planet, it increases its spinning speed and creates the paradox of its trajectory of about 8% every 400 years from the Newtonian predictions. Also, it is obvious when a galaxy is formed the stars take their place in the galaxy conglomerate of stars, with this to depends on from the differences in the mass distributions between the stars and not only based on the quantity of mass.
I have to admit that gravity kicks my butt.
And people laughed at me for years when I told them they don't have a theory, but a religion... You know what happens to your theory when it does not agree with observation? No, you don't ignore the bloody observation. And when it disagrees with this much?! Dead!
well, there is that annoying Kaleidoscope model long known.
It doesn't matter the dark matter ! 😁
How many apples need to hit our collective head?
spin modified gravity
I told you dark matter wasn’t real!
😂😂😂
Many have gone quiet
I really dislike clickbait titles of videos!
Had you folks gone and studied what Nikola Tesla said and did what he did, from re 100 years ago, you could have saved a lot of time cos Tesla already knew that........Tesla debated with Einstein constantly re relativity let alone all these new ideas coming out of apparent no where
It’s all about absolute zero 🌑🌑🌑🌑🌑🌑🌑🌑🌑
🤔 well.. the first thing thats wrong with all this... is that people are still claiming that JWST is allowing us to see into the past or that theyre looking at galaxies from the past.🤦♂️ smh th
They're Not looking back into the past.
So we have to research the Tensor-Vector-Scalar Gravity/MOND theory our self then? No criticism just making sure I’m understanding the video correctly. Yes….. okay cool, thanks for at least telling me about them mate.
JWST can only see so far. If it could see even further there would be more large galaxies. The universe is infinite.
Infinity, eternal without limits and shape and this is the truth. The problem is that the truth hasn't a place for God and his fart.
"Astronomers Shocked!"
Sorry... Strangely enough... I am not interested anymore...
I do not wish to have my mind blown away, I am not interested in shocking shit whatsoever...
I just want facts presented in the most boring way... and that I suddenly think: "What the fuck..."
MOND was disproven a few years ago. And Dark Matter can explain these galaxies. They showed how Dark Matter explains how black holes can get so big so early already. This is just more MOND guys who will never give up.
You appear to be a dark matter guy who refuses to give up.
Every dark matter model susceptible to testing has been falsified.
@@oker59 MOND has not been “disproven”. It is not possible to “disprove” anything.
It is true that certain flavors of MOND have been determined to be HIGHLY unlikely but, like string theory, there could be innumerable permutations of MOND.
At the end of the day MOND isn’t any less likely than the idea the universe is made up of 90% matter we can’t see or directly detect.
Dark matter literally means unknown matter
@@mmaximk Dark Matter has been proven to exist in over five independent ways. MOND has been disproven in every case.
Although MOND is a bit contrived, it has not been disproven.
Home page "Pavel Kroupa: The Dark Matter Crisis"
What about the book - "Theory of Everything in Physics and The Universe"?
@@Orion15-b9j Сожалею, на английском не осилю. На русском или в автопереводе было бы интересно.
@@Yury_PanbolskyЕта книга издадена на Русский тоже. Можно найти електронная версия на сайте (Спутник+) К сожаление ето только первое издание и там неть самое интересное обяснение на квантовая запутанност. Можно снести ее от мой сайт, но не хочу писать его сейчас, что бы не раздразнит платформа.
I know ain't no factual channel is making a video every day without some miss information or AI or anything thats not very valid but I like the idea maybe if they specifically stated that these are ideas not facts then maybe I'd subscribe but don't believe this stuff people be smarter
Dark matter is today what god was 500 years ago.
Non exit but serve as an explanation.
Great video, congratulations … the mystery of dark matter has already been solved ...This other video teaches new physics, hidden variables to study gravity, a demonstration of the non-existence of dark matter th-cam.com/video/b5TU-YJrMVE/w-d-xo.html
@@maftis51 mind-blowing ✨
Trying 2ForceSpiritSource in2 a 3rdDim Manipulatable Ki$$ eQuatION...not gonna happin
If a law doesn't work correctly we have to find the reason and to change the law and not to say oh you see laws work differently in the past and differently now. We have mess with the thermodynamics, and now it is the time to mess now and with gravity just to feet everything, be agreed, with the most stupid theory of all time, the theory of the B.B.
😂😂😂😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣👎🏻
First off everyone is wrong the closer you get to (let's just say heavenly father) the point of origin is not oldest it's youngest