Quote:
Originally Posted by RussT
I agree that the expansion (From a "grapefruit" of a shrunken down to 0 universe) is wrong, BUT, if you don't state what mainstreams model is showing correctly, then that is all that they will argue with... 
|
??
Non-Baryonic matter is Dark Matter....SO, Neutrinos fit the bill perfectly...
Just not true at all. So here's
wikipedia:
It is thought that, just like the cosmic microwave background radiation left over from the Big Bang, there is a background of low energy neutrinos in our Universe. In the 1980s it was proposed that these may be the explanation for the dark matter thought to exist in the universe. Neutrinos have one important advantage over most other dark matter candidates: we know they exist. However, they also have serious problems.
From particle experiments, it is known that neutrinos are very light. This means that they move at speeds close to the speed of light except when they have extremely low kinetic energy. Thus, dark matter made from neutrinos is termed "hot dark matter". The problem is that being fast moving, the neutrinos would tend to have spread out evenly in the universe before cosmological expansion made them cold enough to congregate in clumps. This would cause the part of dark matter made of neutrinos to be smeared out and unable to cause the large galactic structures that we see.
Further, these same galaxies and groups of galaxies appear to be surrounded by dark matter which is not fast enough to escape from those galaxies. Presumably this matter provided the gravitational nucleus for formation. This implies that neutrinos make up only a small part of the total amount of dark matter.
I say there's enough evidence to indicate that the evolution of the Cosmos can't be explained by any theory that assumes the action of the forces alone, and that such a theory, which needs to sufficiently justify and describeenoughdetails of a distinct universal cause from its effects in addition to the forces, could only be developed if quantum mechanics could also be causally explained. So, for a start, it can be pointed out that all astronomers assume that radiation from the most distant observable objects in the universe possess wave behaviour that somehow survives such vast distances.
Hence you can ask why shouldn't such wave behaviour somehow require a continually acting cause that would act unlike any of the forces by acting without surrounding objects so as to produce behaviour of a particular universal form?
The small scale universe has been found to be of a very particular form that can't be explained by describing the push or pull properties of the forces. So why should this not so for the particular form of the large scale universe?