The Dark Matter Conundrum faced by aether deniers

PSI Blog 20190717 The Dark Matter Conundrum faced by aether deniers

From Bill Howell:

Thanks for the responses.  Aether entrainment seems like a perfectly reasonable explanation for the Michelson-Morley results, and a galactic version of that could explain the flattening of galactic rotation curves.  I hadn't heard that less than 1% of the mass of the Milky Way was in the nucleus.  If Newton's point-source/center of gravity concept isn't applicable to galaxies, that would certainly explain the flattening of those curves over a large distance (of course, that would also support the MOND idea).

Seems obvious now that you point it out.  It's yet another example of how you provide a simple explanation that hadn't occurred to me (and others). But if this simple solution is the answer to the 'missing mass problem' (which spawned the theories about Dark Matter), I'm puzzled why it has eluded astronomers for so long?

[GB: Bill, thanks again for your comments to Blog 20160120 (Does dark matter and dark energy prove Einstein wrong?).

Remember that, to a man, astronomers are led by cosmogonists and regressive physicists who are raised on the mantra that “there is no ether, there is no aether.” Giving any credence to aether would crush the Big Bang Theory forthwith. Although most probably are unaware of the logic behind that, editors of mainstream publications must follow the no aether mantra without fail. That is why any manuscript with the word “ether” or “aether” receives the circular file. I tested this with my Aether Deceleration Theory manuscript (Borchardt, Glenn, 2018, The Physical Cause of Gravitation: viXra:1806.0165), which I submitted to Physical Review Letters. It was infamously rejected within 23.47 hours without review.

Bill, you may have missed my PSI Blog 20190410 (Why do the Big Bang Theory and the Steady State Theory regard the universe as expanding?). Let me try a different approach so you can see the logic behind aether denial. It goes like this:

1.   Nothing exists for an eternity[1]
2.   The traditional view assumes that, as with everything else, the universe had a beginning[2]
3.   God or something (Dark Energy?) created the universe out of nothing[3]
4.   The above assumes nonexistence (perfectly empty space) is possible
5.   Light is a massless particle capable of perpetual motion through empty space
6.   The Doppler Shift can occur without a medium
7.   Alternatively, empty space (nothing) is capable of expansion
8.   The Cosmological Redshift proves the universe is expanding in all directions
9.   Our improbable position at the exact center of the observable universe containing 2 trillion galaxies is resolved by the four dimensions of Einstein’s General Relativity Theory

As explained in IUT[4] and throughout the PSI Blog, all of these claims are false. The slavish dedication to aether denial and Einstein’s photon theory makes it impossible for cosmogonists to understand Dark Matter. And most of all, they will never be able to understand the part played by aether deceleration in the acceleration that causes gravitation.]

[1] Strictly speaking, this would be impossible. Cosmogonists seldom have an answer to what came before the Big Bang. The party line seems to be that matter, space, time, and the laws of physics were created at the moment of the Big Bang.
[2] This is the assumption underlying cosmogony.
[3] Remember that energy does not exist. It is a calculation.
[4] Borchardt, Glenn, 2017, Infinite Universe Theory: Berkeley, California, Progressive Science Institute, 343 p. [http://go.glennborchardt.com/IUTebook].

No comments: