Dark Matter: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 15:58, 20 July 2026

caption

Wikipedia Dispute: wikipedia:Dark matter

This Natural Philosophy wiki page disputes content found on Wikipedia page wikipedia:Dark matter

Dark matter is the name given, in mainstream astrophysics, to a hypothetical form of matter that neither emits nor absorbs light and whose presence is inferred solely from its gravitational effects. It was introduced to close a gap in the accounts: galaxies and clusters of galaxies appear to move as though they contained far more mass than can be seen in stars, gas and dust. On the standard cosmological model dark matter accounts for roughly 85% of all matter, and together with dark energy for something like 95% of the total mass-energy of the universe — a figure which means that, on the orthodox account, the substance we can observe is a small residue of what is really there.

The literature collected on this wiki takes a very different view. Almost none of the researchers documented here accept dark matter as a substance. They regard it instead as an artefact — of a gravitational law misapplied, or of a gravitational law that is itself incomplete, or of forces other than gravity operating at galactic scale, or of a cosmology whose mass budget is wrong because its interpretation of redshift is wrong. What unites them is not a shared alternative but a shared diagnosis: that a discrepancy between prediction and observation was resolved by inventing the missing term rather than by re-examining the theory that generated it. As Tom Van Flandern put it, dark matter is the best known of the "ad hoc helper hypotheses" by which the standard model accommodates observations after the fact.

This article sets out the observational problem as the mainstream states it, then the distinct lines of objection found in the papers archived here, then the alternatives those researchers propose in its place.

The observational problem

The case for dark matter rests on several independent measurements, and it should be stated accurately before it is criticised.

The first came from the Coma cluster. In 1933 Fritz Zwicky applied the virial theorem to the velocity dispersion of galaxies in Coma and found that the cluster's members were moving far too quickly to remain bound by the gravity of their visible mass; the shortfall was of order a hundredfold. He called the inferred remainder dunkle Materie. Similar discrepancies were subsequently found in other clusters.

The second, and the one most often cited today, is the galactic rotation curve. In a spiral galaxy the visible mass is heavily concentrated toward the centre, so on a Keplerian analysis the orbital speed of stars ought to fall off with distance from the core, as the planets' speeds fall off with distance from the Sun. Measurements of neutral hydrogen and of stellar velocities — associated above all with the work of Vera Rubin and Kent Ford from the 1970s onward — show instead that orbital speed rises to a roughly constant value and then stays flat far beyond the visible disc. Something appears to be holding the outer material in orbit that is not shining. The standard interpretation is a roughly spherical halo of non-luminous matter extending well past the optical galaxy.

A third line comes from gravitational lensing: the deflection of light from background objects by foreground clusters implies masses considerably larger than the luminous content, and in some cases the lensing mass appears displaced from the hot X-ray-emitting gas. A fourth comes from cosmology: the pattern of acoustic peaks in the cosmic microwave background and the growth of large-scale structure are, on the standard model, fitted only if the great bulk of the matter is non-baryonic and cold.

Against this stands a fact both sides acknowledge. Despite decades of increasingly sensitive underground searches, no dark matter particle has been detected in a laboratory. Stewart Ian Wells makes this the starting point of his critique in "Gravitational Permiosity of Deep Space" (2009): the hypothesis remains, he writes, without direct laboratory evidence, and its required abundance sits awkwardly beside the separate hypothesis of dark energy invoked for accelerated expansion. Christian Sutterlin adds the point that the many experiments mounted since the middle of the last century to detect the missing mass have all failed.

A review of the mainstream development of the idea, from its earliest studies to the establishment of the Cold Dark Matter paradigm in the mid-1980s, is available on this wiki in Jaan Einasto's "Dark Matter: Early Considerations" (2004), which is included here precisely so that the standard case can be read in its proponents' own words.

The case against dark matter on this wiki

The objections found in the archive fall into six reasonably distinct families. They are not all compatible with one another, and several of the researchers below would reject each other's alternatives as firmly as they reject dark matter.

Newton's law misapplied to a rotating disc

The most direct objection — and the one this wiki's own editors have most often endorsed — is that no new matter and no new law is required, because the Newtonian calculation that produces the anomaly was never done correctly in the first place. The familiar inverse-square result for orbital speed is derived for a body orbiting a point mass at a distance large compared with the source. A spiral galaxy is not a point mass. It is an extended, flattened, strongly non-homogeneous rotating distribution, and much of the material whose speed is being measured lies within rather than outside the mass that acts on it.

Cameron Rebigsol develops this argument in detail in his 2016 paper "Newton's Gravitational Law over Dark Matter". Working through a series of idealised geometries — a mass on the axis of a homogeneous bar, and a mass off that axis — he derives what he calls the on-axis and off-axis effects, showing that the shape of a gravitating body levers the motion of nearby objects in ways that a point-mass treatment cannot capture. Applied to the Milky Way, this accounts on his analysis for both halves of the observed anomaly: not only the higher-than-predicted speeds beyond about 10 kpc from the galactic centre, which are what dark matter was invented to explain, but also the lower-than-predicted speeds in the inner range between roughly 1 and 8 kpc, which are less often discussed. Rebigsol's conclusion is blunt: Newton's gravitational law "can lead someone to have unlimited quantity of dark matter — if it is misapplied."

Rebigsol also states a methodological principle that recurs throughout this literature. Anyone proposing to modify a natural law confirmed by long practice, he argues, owes two things first: a demonstrated error in the derivation of the law, or a demonstration that some part of that derivation was misled by irrelevant or inadequate facts. Proceeding to modification without either is, in his phrase, "an excellent expression defining the word recklessness." On his account neither dark matter nor modified gravity has met that burden.

Paul Schroeder reaches a related conclusion from a different direction in "Gravity and Revolution Rates within Galaxies" (2012), arguing that our understanding of galactic motion is at the stage solar-system astronomy occupied before Copernicus, Kepler and Newton, and that proper analysis finds gravity constant while its environment varies — so that dark matter, dark energy and MOND alike are answers to a badly posed question.

The missing mass is ordinary, but unseen

A second family accepts that there is unaccounted mass but denies that it is exotic. On this view "dark" has been quietly promoted from not yet seen to in principle unseeable, and the promotion is unwarranted.

William C Mitchell argues in "Dark Matter and Flat Rotation" (2007) that there is considerable astronomical evidence against non-baryonic dark matter and in favour of an ordinary cause for flat rotation curves. In "Bye Bye Big Bang, Hello Reality" (2000) he sets out the mechanism: stars and galaxies continuously shed matter and energy through radiation, stellar wind and other ejection processes, much of it above escape velocity, so that galaxies are surrounded by an accumulating envelope of ejected ordinary matter in an approximately inverse-square distribution — which is, he argues, exactly what is needed to flatten a rotation curve, and which also feeds the formation of new galaxies in a non-expanding, recycling universe.

Raymond H Gallucci has pursued the same idea quantitatively in a series of papers published under the recurring title "Who Needs Dark Matter?", examining in turn a kinematic explanation, the possibility that ordinary molecular hydrogen H₂ — virtually undetectable from space — supplies the mass, and the possibility that the rotation anomaly is an optical illusion arising from how the observations are read. Dark matter he describes throughout as a "likely fiction."

Paul E Rowe asks in "A History of Dark Matter?" (2007) whether the missing material might be Bose-Einstein condensed hydrogen, drawing on reports by J. J. Thomson and Clarence Skinner of anomalously large hydrogen production in electrical discharge, and on the observed slowing of light in laboratory Bose-Einstein condensates. On his account such a matrix of protons and unpaired electrons would be paramagnetic and dielectric, would serve as the medium for light propagation, and would explain forces between separated permanent magnets — making dark matter and the aether the same question asked twice.

The gravitational law itself needs modification

A third family concedes the observations, keeps the visible mass, and locates the fault in the force law. These researchers are the mirror image of the first family: where Rebigsol holds that Newton's law is correct and was misapplied, they hold that it was applied correctly and is incomplete.

Frederic Lassiaille derives a modification of Newton's law from what he calls an Euclidean vision of relativity, in his three "A Solution for the 'Dark Matter Mystery' Based on Euclidean Relativity" papers (2009–2010) and the follow-up "Validation of Dark Matter Explanation" (2010). His model yields a theoretical rotation curve which he reports as very close to the measured one, and separately a larger effective value of G for galaxies moving within their groups; the same framework is extended in his "Gravitational Model of the Three Elements Theory" (2011), which he applies also to the Pioneer anomaly and the Earth flyby anomalies.

Reginald T Cahill generalises Newtonian gravity into a fluid-flow formalism with a single new dimensionless constant, and argues in "Gravitation, the 'Dark Matter' Effect and the Fine Structure Constant" (2005) that borehole gravity data fix that constant at the fine structure constant, 1/137. On his account the same one parameter predicts the near-flatness of spiral rotation curves, the absence of the effect in ordinary elliptical galaxies, and the central masses of the globular clusters M15 and G1 — the elliptical-galaxy point being one he regards as a discriminating test, since a halo hypothesis has to explain why the halos are selective. The wider framework is set out in "Dynamical 3-Space: A Review" (2009).

Bernard Guy proposes in "A Modified Law of Gravitation taking Account of the Relative Speeds of Moving Masses" (2010) a law depending on the relative speeds of the interacting masses, which simulates a mass "supplement" and, with one additional parameter, gives the right order of magnitude simultaneously for the Pioneer anomaly, for stars in galaxies and for galaxies in clusters — and, in the late stages of an expanding system, an apparent repulsion of about the magnitude attributed to dark energy. Jerry Hynecek's "Gravitons, the Speed of Gravity, and the Generalized Newton Gravitational Law" (2013) generalises the law by recognising two non-collinear components of the gravitational force. Pharis E Williams argues in "New Time Dependent Gravity Displays Dark Matter and Dark Energy Effects" (2008) that a gravitational field weakening with time reproduces both the tangential velocities in spiral arms and the high-z supernova results, so that both dark sectors arise from one physical cause and neither requires exotic matter. Lawrence M Stephenson's "A Dynamical Origin for the Gravitational Constant" (2003) seeks a dynamical origin for G that also explains the equality of gravitational and inertial mass, and reports that one of his two candidate theories dispenses with dark matter and dark energy together.

Two further variants deserve separate mention. Thierry De Mees extends Newtonian gravitation by transposing Maxwell's electromagnetism into gravitation, producing a second, gravitomagnetic field he calls gyrotation. In "Deduction of Orbital Velocities in Disk Galaxies. 'Dark Matter': a myth?" (2007) he derives the orbital velocities of stars in disc galaxies from an assumed mass distribution of the original spherical galaxy, and concludes that dark matter does not exist except in marginal quantities. He develops the consequences in "Swivelling Time of Spherical Galaxies Towards Disk Galaxies" (2010) and states the polemical version in "Understanding the Uselessness of 4D Curved Space, GRT, Hyperspace and String Theory" (2010), where he calls the invention of dark matter "a striking example of the incompetence" of general relativity and the Riemann metric to explain the cosmos.

Ulpio Nascimento, in "A Quantum Gravity Model Foregoing the Dark Matter" (2007), derives a gravitational attraction equation differing from Newton's from an elastic quantum etherspace of electrons and positrons, and concludes that the model generates all the gravity observed without any dark matter at all. Robert de Hilster approaches the problem from the Particle Model and Le Sage-style pushing gravity: in his 2018 CNPS talk "Dark Matter Versus G" he traces the invention of dark matter to the determination to preserve Newton's equation unchanged, and argues from Georges-Louis Le Sage's shielding idea and Quirino Majorana's experiments that a gravity equation built from the actual geometry and mass of the bodies involved, rather than idealised point masses, removes the need for it.

Electromagnetic and plasma forces at galactic scale

A fourth family holds that the error is not in the gravitational law but in the assumption that gravity is the only force that matters over galactic distances. Galaxies are largely ionised; ionised matter responds to electric and magnetic fields; and those fields are simply omitted from the standard rotation-curve calculation.

Borrowing from the Electric Universe and plasma-cosmology programmes, Raymond H Gallucci examines in "Who Needs Dark Matter? An Alternative Explanation for the Galactic Rotation Anomaly" (2015) an idealised case in which the combined magnetic fields of a rotating charged galactic core and a rotating charged spiral disc are taken into account, and finds a trend toward flatness in the rotation curve as one moves outward. He has extended the approach to the intergalactic medium, arguing that galaxies "boil off" electrons from their outer regions by the photoelectric effect and that the resulting charge structure supplies a mechanism for what is read as dark matter.

The plasma line connects to the redshift objection below through the work of Ari Brynjolfsson, whose plasma redshift is a mechanism by which photons lose energy traversing hot, sparse electron plasma. In "Plasma Redshift Cosmology" (2011) he argues that the same cross-section explains the intrinsic redshifts of the Sun, of stars, galaxies and quasars, the cosmic microwave background and the X-ray background, and the supernova magnitude-redshift relation — with the consequence that there is no need for the Big Bang, inflation, dark energy or dark matter.

Redshift is misinterpreted, so the mass budget is wrong

A fifth family attacks the problem upstream. Much of the cosmological case for dark matter is a case about the budget of an expanding universe of a particular age and density. If the redshift-distance relation is not a velocity relation — if the universe is not expanding — then the budget that the missing mass is missing from does not exist.

Rati Ram Sharma argues across "Nature of the Non-Expanding Universe" (2009), "Unified Theory's Non-expanding Universe Replaces Big Bang & Steady State Theories" (2009) and "Theory of Non-expanding Universe" (2010) that in a genuinely expanding universe cosmic redshifts should increase exponentially with time, which is not observed, and that the total energy-mass content is instead eternally conserved. Ruggero Maria Santilli reports in "Experimental Verifications of Isoredshift with Possible Absence of Universe Expansion, Big Bang, Dark Matter, and Dark Energy" (2010) laboratory measurements of what he calls isoredshift — a frequency shift of light traversing a physical medium — and draws the same conclusion. Lyndon E Ashmore examines the supernova light-curve broadening usually held to be decisive evidence for expansion, and argues in "Supernovae Ia Light Curves Show a Static Universe" (2012) that it does not survive scrutiny at low redshift. Jack W Sulentic's "Quasar Spectra: Black Holes or Nonstandard Models?" (1994) presses the discordant-redshift evidence associated with Halton C Arp, and Konrad Rudnicki and colleagues offer redshift quantisation and the "fingers of God" phenomenon as further anomalies in "An Alternative Picture of the Structure of Galaxies" (1999).

Tom Van Flandern's "The Top 50 Problems with the Big Bang" (2005) is the compendium of this line of argument. His charge is that the Big Bang has never achieved a genuine prediction success under conditions where it risked falsification, and that dark matter and dark energy are the best known of the accommodations that keep it afloat.

Dark matter as the aether

A sixth family accepts that space is not empty but denies that what fills it is matter in the ordinary sense. Here dark matter is identified with the medium — see Aether for the wider literature.

Charles Kenneth Thornhill states the position in a single sentence in "Universal Physics" (2006): "There can now be little doubt remaining that the so-called 'dark matter' is the ether, and 'dark energy' is the intrinsic energy of the ether." Duncan W Shaw builds gravity itself from aether absorption by atoms in "On The Cause of Gravity" (2009) and suggests the same mechanism accounts for dark matter and dark energy. John V Milewski argues in "Superlight, a Dynamic Aether, Explains Pushing Gravity and Inertia, and Says No Neutrinos, Gluons or Dark Matter" (2010) that the missing mass of the universe is not missing but present as field energy. Hector A Munera reaches the aether question through the experimental route in "Towards the Reinstatement of Absolute Space" (2009), arguing that a closed finite Newtonian universe yields an additional acceleration term of the same order as the MOND cut-off and so offers an alternative to the dark matter and MOND hypotheses alike. Slobodan Nedic's "Non-Conservativeness of Natural Orbital Systems" (2016) treats dark matter and dark energy as among the symptoms of modelling orbital systems as conservative closed-path zero-work systems, and argues for the aether as an energy substrate.

The methodological objection

Running through all of the above is an objection that is not about galaxies at all. It is that dark matter, as practised, is unfalsifiable curve-fitting: a free parameter distributed wherever it is needed, in whatever quantity is needed, to make a failed prediction succeed.

Roger A Rydin puts the general form of the complaint in "The Problem with Theoretical Physics" (2008), taking up the question of whether theoretical physics is heading down the wrong track. Charles William Lucas argues in "The Trouble with Modern Physics and the Solution Based on Logic and Metatheory" (2016) that infinities, dark matter, dark energy, black holes and an excess of adjustable parameters are symptoms of a common logical failure, and that a discipline claiming more certainty than the world's religions should be willing to be evaluated on its logic. Glenn Borchardt approaches it philosophically in "The Physical Meaning of E=mc2" (2009): "dark energy" and "dark matter" are spoken of as though they were two different things, which he regards as a further step in the objectification of what are properly descriptions of matter in motion. Alexander A Scarborough makes the Kuhnian point directly in "Origins of Universal Systems" (2005) — that the Big Bang survives for want of a viable alternative rather than for want of criticism — and offers his Little Bangs/FLINE model as one that needs neither dark matter nor dark energy. J Marvin Herndon states the epistemic version in "Questioning Astrophysics" (2008): "in science consensus is nonsense; science is a logical process, not a democratic process."

Rydin also supplies the reminder that this community argues with itself. His "Critique of the Meta Model of the Universe" (2002) is a detailed and largely unfavourable examination of Van Flandern's Dark Matter, Missing Planets and New Comets, agreeing with some of its arguments and rejecting others — including its graviton-scattering account of redshift, which he notes is at odds with Arp's.

Alternative explanations

Set out as competing proposals rather than as a single position, the alternatives advanced in this archive are:

Correct Newtonian treatment of an extended rotating disc — Rebigsol's on-axis and off-axis effects; Schroeder's reanalysis of galactic gravity.
Gravitomagnetism — De Mees's gyrotation, obtained by transposing Maxwell's equations into gravitation.
Modified force laws — Lassiaille's Euclidean-relativity modification, Guy's speed-dependent law, Hynecek's generalised Newtonian law, Williams's time-dependent G, Stephenson's dynamical G. MOND itself appears here chiefly as a foil: Munera recovers an acceleration of the MOND scale from absolute space without adopting MOND, and Schroeder rejects MOND alongside dark matter.
Fluid-flow and in-flow gravity — Cahill's dynamical 3-space, in which the fine structure constant fixes the size of the effect.
Pushing / particle gravity — Robert de Hilster's Particle Model treatment in the Le Sage tradition, and Milewski's Superlight aether.
Plasma and electromagnetic accounts — Gallucci's magnetic-field analysis of the rotating charged core and disc; the wider Electric Universe and Plasma Cosmology programmes; Brynjolfsson's plasma redshift.
Ordinary unseen baryonic matter — Mitchell's ejected-matter envelopes, Gallucci's molecular hydrogen, Rowe's condensed hydrogen matrix.
Aether identifications — Thornhill, Shaw, Nascimento, Nedic.
Static-universe cosmologies — Sharma, Mitchell, Santilli, Ashmore, Scarborough, and John M Kulick.

Dark matter and dark energy

The two dark components are usually treated together in this literature, and for a characteristic reason: researchers here tend to see them as two instances of the same manoeuvre rather than two discoveries. Van Flandern pairs them as the best known ad hoc helper hypotheses of the Big Bang; Borchardt objects to both as reifications; Kulick's "Applications of a Geometric Expansion Model to Cosmology" (2007) opens with the twin assertions that there is no dark energy and no dark matter, attributing supernova dimming to a stronger gravity in the past and the rotation anomaly to the kinematic cost of expansion. Williams and Guy each derive both effects from a single modification of gravity, and Brynjolfsson, Santilli and Sharma dispose of both by removing the expansion that dark energy was introduced to accelerate.

Wells makes a sharper point: that the two hypotheses are in tension with each other, since the quantity of dark matter required to bind structures sits awkwardly with the quantity of dark energy required to accelerate their separation.

Not everyone here is a rejecter, and the exceptions are worth recording. James G Gilson, in a long series of papers built on his Friedman dust universe model with Einstein's Lambda, works within general relativity and argues that the pressure term of the field equations induces additional mass density above what is conventionally assumed, from which he obtains flat galactic rotation curves without exotic particles but also without abandoning the dark sector as a description — his "The Dark Matter Problem" papers (2010) derive the general-relativistic replacement for the inverse-square law from the Friedman equations. James E Beichler treats dark matter and dark energy as real and as evidence for a fourth macroscopically extended spatial dimension, arguing in "The Fundamental Nature of Relativity" (2008) that dark matter is spatial curvature in that dimension not associated with local matter. Morton F Spears argues in "Permittivity Creates Dark Matter and an Older Universe With Accelerating Expansion" (1998) and "Determining Age, Expansion, and Dark Matter for Our Universe" (1999) that a permittivity of open space decreasing over time creates dark matter as a real consequence. Glen W Deen proposes in "Neutron Gravity and the Anti-universe" (2009) that dark matter consists of antineutrons in an anti-universe exchanging space with our own. Jan Koziar and Stanislaw Ciechanowicz, in "Possible Relation Between Earth Expansion and Dark Matter" (1994), go further still and offer Earth expansion as a tangible terrestrial effect of dark matter. Arnold G Gulko's papers of 1988 and 1991 compare dark matter with ordinary matter and examine its role in Big Bang cosmology.

Researchers on this wiki

Researchers whose work bears on the dark matter question, with the aspect each is documented here for:

Cameron Rebigsol — Newtonian re-derivation for extended rotating masses; on-axis and off-axis effects
Thierry De Mees — gyrotation / Maxwell analogy for gravitation; "dark matter: a myth"
Raymond H Gallucci — "Who Needs Dark Matter?" series; magnetic fields, molecular hydrogen, optical illusion
Reginald T Cahill — dynamical 3-space; the fine structure constant as the gravitational anomaly parameter
Frederic Lassiaille — modification of Newton's law from Euclidean relativity
Ari Brynjolfsson — plasma redshift cosmology
Tom Van Flandern — problems with the Big Bang; dark matter as an ad hoc helper hypothesis
William C Mitchell — ordinary ejected matter and the recycling universe
Paul Schroeder — gravity and revolution rates within galaxies
Paul E Rowe — dark matter as Bose-Einstein condensed hydrogen
Rati Ram Sharma — non-expanding universe
Ruggero Maria Santilli — isoredshift and the absence of expansion
Ken H Seto — Model Mechanics and the E-Matrix
Roger A Rydin — critique of theoretical physics; critique of the Meta Model
Glenn Borchardt — the reification of energy, dark matter and spacetime
Charles William Lucas — logic and metatheory applied to modern physics
J Marvin Herndon — questioning astrophysics; consensus versus logic
Alexander A Scarborough — Little Bangs / FLINE model
Hector A Munera — absolute space; alternatives to dark matter and MOND
Stewart Ian Wells — gravitic permiosity; critique of the abaryonic hypothesis
Christian Sutterlin — the Stacy McGaugh law and the visible-mass link
Pharis E Williams — time-dependent gravity
Lawrence M Stephenson — dynamical origin of the gravitational constant
Jerry Hynecek — generalised Newtonian gravitational law
Bernard Guy — speed-dependent modified law of gravitation
Ulpio Nascimento — quantum etherspace foregoing dark matter
Duncan W Shaw — aether absorption as the cause of gravity
Charles Kenneth Thornhill — dark matter identified with the ether
John V Milewski — Superlight; pushing gravity without dark matter
Slobodan Nedic — non-conservative orbital systems; aether as energy substrate
Robert de Hilster — Particle Model; pushing gravity; "Dark Matter Versus G"
David de Hilster — documentary and video work on galaxies said to lack dark matter
Phil Bouchard — Finite Theory; rotation curves without dark matter
John M Kulick — geometric expansion model; neither dark matter nor dark energy
Lyndon E Ashmore — supernova light curves and a static universe
Jack W Sulentic — quasar spectra and nonstandard models
Konrad Rudnicki — alternative picture of galactic structure; redshift quantisation
Vivian Pope — the Pioneer anomaly and a dissident perspective
Philipp M Kanarev — "The Secrets of Dark Matter"
Osvaldo Domann — gravitation from migrated electrons and positrons
Vladimir B Ginzburg — spiral string theory; structure of ordinary and dark matter
Athanassios A Nassikas — universe evolution without additional entities
Miles F Osmaston — continuum theory as a replacement for relativity
James G Gilson — dust universe with Lambda; galactic rotation curves within general relativity
James E Beichler — dark matter as fourth-dimensional spatial curvature
Morton F Spears — permittivity of space as the origin of dark matter
Glen W Deen — antineutron dark matter and the anti-universe
Arnold G Gulko — cold dark matter and the Big Bang
Jan Koziar — Earth expansion as an effect of dark matter
Sithamalli K Balasubramanian — proposed mass numbers for dark matter
Jaan Einasto — historical review of the mainstream dark matter paradigm
James Carter — proposed definitive experiment on dark matter and the equivalence principle
Yuri A Baurov — on the nature of dark matter and dark energy

Papers on this wiki

Galactic rotation and the dark matter hypothesis directly

2016 - Newton’s Gravitational Law over Dark Matter — Cameron Rebigsol
2015 - Who Needs Dark Matter? An Alternative Explanation for the Galactic Rotation Anomaly — Raymond H Gallucci
2012 - Gravity and Revolution Rates within Galaxies — Paul Schroeder
2011 - The Stacy McGaugh Law: The Link Between Galaxies, Rotation Speed Link and Visible Mass — Christian Sutterlin
2010 - Swivelling Time of Spherical Galaxies Towards Disk Galaxies — Thierry De Mees
2010 - Dark Matter and Dark Energy — Sithamalli K Balasubramanian
2009 - The Secrets of Dark Matter — Philipp M Kanarev
2009 - Gravitational Permiosity of Deep Space — Stewart Ian Wells
2007 - Deduction of Orbital Velocities in Disk Galaxies. "Dark Matter": a myth? — Thierry De Mees
2007 - Dark Matter and Flat Rotation — William C Mitchell
2007 - A History of Dark Matter? — Paul E Rowe
2007 - On the Nature of Dark Matter and Dark Energy — Yuri A Baurov
2004 - Dark Matter: Early Considerations — Jaan Einasto (mainstream review)
1996 - Dark Matter vs. the Equivalence Principle. A Proposed Definitive Experiment to Either Establish or Negate the Existence of Dark Matter — James Carter
1994 - Possible Relation Between Earth Expansion and Dark Matter — Jan Koziar, Stanislaw Ciechanowicz
1991 - Cold Dark Matter and the Big Bang Theory — Arnold G Gulko
1988 - Dark Matter - Comparison with Ordinary Matter — Arnold G Gulko

Modified, re-derived and alternative gravity

Dark matter retained or reinterpreted

Methodological and general critiques

2016 - The Trouble with Modern Physics and the Solution Based on Logic and Metatheory — Charles William Lucas
2015 - The Essence of the Universal Spacetime Theory (UST) — Vladimir B Ginzburg
2015 - Unified Field Theory - Finite — Phil Bouchard
2014 - The Theory of Reality — Gerald I Lebau
2013 - Differential Topology: Notational Illusion Leading Away From Nordström's Aether into General Relativity — Jeff Baugher
2013 - The Founding of the Theory of the Harmonicity of the Field of Light-Certain Consequences — Dionysios G Raftopoulos
2013 - Our Cosmos = Holographic 4D-Spherical Standing Wave — John P Wsol
2012 - On the Fractal Nature of Existence — Christopher A. Laforet
2011 - Weaknesses in the Formation and Evolution Processes of Mainstream Gravity and Cosmology Theories, and their Consequences — Thierry De Mees
2011 - Improved Relativity Theory (IRT) and the Doppler Theory of Gravity (DTG) — Ken H Seto
2009 - The Physical Meaning of E=mc2 — Glenn Borchardt
2009 - Universe Evolution Under The Claim for Minimum Contradictions — Athanassios A Nassikas
2009 - Improved Relativity Theory and Doppler Theory of Gravity — Ken H Seto
2009 - True Nature of Potential Energy of a Hydrogen Atom — Koshun Suto
2008 - Recent Discoveries in Physics that the Natural Philosophy Alliance Should Support — Martin Müller
2008 - The Problem with Theoretical Physics — Roger A Rydin
2008 - The Pioneer Anomaly, or a "Dissident" Perspective on Modern Physics — Vivian Pope
2008 - My Conversations With Einstein — Paul E Rowe
2007 - Using Dynamical Field Geometries to Describe Material Structure and Interaction — Richard Oldani
2006 - Towards a Theory of Everything Integrating Known Physical and Invisible Virtual Universe — Satya Pal Asija
2006 - A Probabilistic Model of the Universe — Salomon Borensztejn
2006 - The Clouds of Physics and Einstein's Last Query: Can Quantum Mechanics be Derived from General Relativity? — Friedwardt Winterberg
2005 - Universe within Universe — Satya Pal Asija
2005 - Unification of Physics — Ken H Seto
2003 - Do We Need Nature? — Win Lambertson
2002 - Critique of the Meta Model of the Universe — Roger A Rydin
1989 - An Essay on Discrete Foundations for Physics — H Pierre Noyes, David O. McGoveran

Papers held in the archive but not yet given pages here include Gallucci's "Who Needs Dark Matter? Is the Galactic Rotation Anomaly an Optical Illusion?" (2017), his "Is Molecular Hydrogen (H₂) the 'Dark Matter' that Explains the Galactic Rotation Anomaly?" (2017–2018) and his paper on galaxies "boiling off" electrons by the photoelectric effect (2018), and Robert de Hilster's "Dark Matter vs. G" (2018).

Video

"2nd Galaxy without Dark Matter - Newton Explains" — David de Hilster, Dissident Science channel (28 April 2019)

Prompted by the announcement of a second galaxy said to contain little or no dark matter, and by the shape of that galaxy, de Hilster argues in this talk that the anomaly never required dark matter in the first place: "The answer lies in an explanation that needs no more than Newton's gravity." The video cites Cameron Rebigsol's "Newton's Gravitational Law over Dark Matter" for the geometric re-derivation, and the pushing-gravity work of Robert de Hilster for the underlying mechanism — drawing together the two strands of the Newtonian objection described above.

External links

"2nd Galaxy without Dark Matter - Newton Explains" — Dissident Science (YouTube)
"Dark Matter Versus G by Bob de Hilster" — CNPS online seminar, 27 June 2018

@@ Line 308: / Line 308: @@
 == See also ==
+* [[Dark Energy]] &mdash; the companion hypothesis, and the objection that it reifies a bookkeeping quantity
+* [[Energy]] &mdash; energy as a measure of matter in motion rather than a substance
 * [[Aether]] &mdash; the medium with which several researchers here identify the dark sector
 * [[Electric Universe]] and [[Plasma Cosmology]] &mdash; electromagnetic accounts of galactic dynamics