[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] intangibles (was RE: Why most classifications are fu

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 10:51:11 -0400 (EDT)
Message-id: <3060dd4caafb76914af82354689a761b.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Doug and Azamat,

Dark matter is most definitely tangible.  I agree with Doug, but I would emphasize that it's more than just theoretical.  Physicists observe dark matter by its effects on the behavior of ordinary matter in galaxies. 

That is the way we observe most things -- by the way they affect our bodies and the things around  them.

> DF: "According to the theories, dark matter is tangible and affects normal
> matter through gravity."
> AA: As now, the dark matter is lacking reality or substance, it's hard to
> identify, being percieved by the sense or measured by physical
> instrumentation. So it looks more intangible than tangible.

That is false.  Its affect on gravity demonstrates that it is very, very, very tangible.  Physicists not only measure it, they have very accurate estimates of its distribution in galaxies and its total mass in those galaxies.

But so far, they have not found any other mode of interaction with ordinary matter except through gravity.  But they suspect that there are some very weak interactions when particles of dark matter collide directly with particles of ordinary matter.

Bottom line:  Most definitely tangible, but not well understood.


Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J    (01)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>