• ThoughtGoblin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’m not sure what you’re getting at. Dark matter has been proven numerous times, is a predictive model, and is the only explanation that has held up to scrutiny and observations. It’s very clearly the right explanation and we know how dark matter generally behaves, we just don’t know specifically what it is.

    See, for example, the behavior of the bullet cluster merger.

    • Zagorath@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Sorry, but…aren’t modified gravity theories gaining some more traction recently? Not enough to say that modified gravity is the most likely explanation for observations, but at least enough to avoid saying that dark matter is “clearly the right explanation”?

      edit: I’ve just realised that some people would describe modified gravity as a specific theory to describe the observational effect of dark matter. Is that what you were doing here?

      • ThoughtGoblin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sorry for not responding earlier, I don’t seem to be getting notifications! My other reply further down in the thread hopefully answers all of your (wonderful) questions, though. Have a great day!