EDIT: Let’s cool it with the downvotes, dudes. We’re not out to cut funding to your black hole detection chamber or revoke the degrees of chiropractors just because a couple of us don’t believe in it, okay? Chill out, participate with the prompt and continue with having a nice day. I’m sure almost everybody has something to add.

  • brain_in_a_box@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Yeah, basically.

    I wonder why lay people find adding a new form of particle to the stable to be so much more intuitively objectionable than hacking into our theory of gravity to make it align with observations.

    • supercriticalcheese@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Modifying the theory of gravity to fit the data might be useful even if it’s just for modelling purposes. But it doesn’t make a theory for sure.

      I am also an (non retired) engineer, but alas I have no theory of my own :)))

      • brain_in_a_box@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Oh it’s definitely useful, that’s what MOND theories are. If we didn’t do it, we wouldn’t now why it’s less likely than dark matter.