[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

What is dark matter?
An incomprehensible substance evenly scattered throughout the Universe, or is it the border of the Universe behind the Oort cloud, from where the sunlight is simply not reflected?

Astronomers Use New Data to Create Extraordinary Dark Matter Map



The distance to the most distant galaxy is supposedly 13.4 billion light years. This means that the light travels all the distance without hindrance. This is supposedly a straight line, along which there are no objects: stars, galaxies, nebulae, dust, gas - nothing blocking light in a straight line 13.4 billion light years long ... This is hardly possible.

[evan_au]

is (dark matter) the border of the Universe behind the Oort cloud, from where the sunlight is simply not reflected?

It is good that you understand that long-period comets on an elliptical orbit come from the Oort cloud, and so it physically exists (ie it is not outside the universe).
- Long ago, astronomers were able to measure the distance to the nearer stars, using the technique of parallax as the Earth orbits the Sun. The nearest star is about 4 light years away, well beyond the Oort Cloud.
- The recent passage of Oumuamua through the Solar System followed a hyperbolic path, so it came from well outside the Oort Cloud.
- The Gaia spacecraft is in the process of using parallax to measure the distance to about a billion stars in our galaxy. It has measured the distance (and velocity) of the nearby Sculptor Dwarf galaxy at 272,000 light years, which is far beyond the Oort Cloud.
- The Gaia spacecraft is also measuring the position of some stars in the Andromeda Galaxy, which is much farther again.
- By methods like Cepheid variables and supernova brightness, the distance to even farther objects have been estimated.

Conclusion: There are real objects in our universe far beyond the Oort Cloud
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_(spacecraft)#Significant_results

nothing blocking light in a straight line 13.4 billion light years long ... This is hardly possible.

You don't seem to understand the concept of intergalactic space being a very good vacuum
- And observations suggesting that the galaxy clusters are arranged as a thin web bordering large voids containing an extremely good vacuum.
- Even if 90% of the photons from a distant quasar strike an atom on the way, and are absorbed/deflected, that is still enough photons to detect the quasar on a photograph, and to capture its spectrum, and measure its red shift

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_filament

[Bored chemist]

This is hardly possible.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity

[Kryptid]

Please keep posts like this to "New Theories". This contradicts mainstream science and you know it.

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

Please keep posts like this to "New Theories". This contradicts mainstream science and you know it.

There are many contradictions in official science, you should also be aware of this.
Since you moved this topic to "New Theories", then I will allow myself to post links to my theory which explain the contradictory theory of dark matter, and many other contradictions of the official model of the Universe.
1) New model of the Universe.
2) The nature of light and the size of the Universe.

[Bored chemist]

Perhaps we should move this to "that can't be true" on the basis that... it can't be true

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

Perhaps we should move this to "that can't be true" on the basis that... it can't be true

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity
I think one transfer of this topic is enough.

[Halc]

The OP is copied from other sites, where the topics get quickly locked, due to lack of evidence, but mostly due to poor presentation of an idea.

[charles1948]

The OP is copied from other sites, where the topics get quickly locked, due to lack of evidence, but mostly due to poor presentation of an idea.

You're right. Many good ideas get rejected, not because the idea isn't true. but because it's been poorly presented.

This is why courts sometimes send innocent people to prison.  Their lawyer didn't present their case competently..

[Bored chemist]

The OP is copied from other sites, where the topics get quickly locked, due to lack of evidence, but mostly due to poor presentation of an idea.

You're right. Many good ideas get rejected, not because the idea isn't true. but because it's been poorly presented.

This is why courts sometimes send innocent people to prison.  Their lawyer didn't present their case competently..

Presentation may be important but in this case he's just failing to  put lipstick on a pig.
It wouldn't matter how well he presented it, because it's wrong.

Obviously, since good (or even competent) presentation in science includes having evidence, and he hasn't got any, he is going to struggle.

[Kryptid]

There are many contradictions in official science, you should also be aware of this.
Since you moved this topic to "New Theories", then I will allow myself to post links to my theory which explain the contradictory theory of dark matter, and many other contradictions of the official model of the Universe.
1) New model of the Universe.
2) The nature of light and the size of the Universe.

Your model is wrong, at least in part, because it gets sizes and distances incredibly wrong. Your argument for that is flawed because you make an incorrect analogy about light. The physics of light is rather different than the physics of waves in water. An individual photon would have no problem traversing empty space because there is nothing in the way for it to transfer its energy to (unlike the molecules in a wave of water).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_incredulity

Bored Chemist is not using the argument from incredulity. He's saying that it can't be true because all of the evidence we have points to your idea being wrong.

It sure would be nice if you actually stuck around for a while and debated with us about the specific points of your idea.

You're right. Many good ideas get rejected, not because the idea isn't true. but because it's been poorly presented.

Well, that's not true in this particular case.  AlexandrKushnirtshuk thinks that Mars is only a few tens of kilometers across (I forget the exact number).

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

An individual photon would have no problem traversing empty space because there is nothing in the way for it to transfer its energy to (unlike the molecules in a wave of water).

I will answer briefly. Overcoming the distance without spending energy (that is, with zero energy expenses) is impossible a priori. The existence of a medium with absolutely zero resistance is impossible, a priori impossible.

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

Well, that's not true in this particular case.  AlexandrKushnirtshuk thinks that Mars is only a few tens of kilometers across (I forget the exact number).

Mars' diameter is about 15-20 km. according my assumptions.

[Kryptid]

I will answer briefly. Overcoming the distance without spending energy (that is, with zero energy expenses) is impossible a priori.

It's a vacuum: there is nothing to "overcome".

The existence of a medium with absolutely zero resistance is impossible, a priori impossible.

First of all, whether a vacuum is a "medium" is debatable. Secondly, we do know of mediums with zero resistance (superfluid helium, for example).

Mars' diameter is about 15-20 km. according my assumptions.

An assumption refuted by measurements.

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

It sure would be nice if you actually stuck around for a while and debated with us about the specific points of your idea.

My several other thoughts to the important issues directly related to the structure of the Universe.

1) The actual (real) structure of the Universe is the key to a correct understanding of the origin of life, its nature, as well as the essence of paranormal phenomena, UFOs, so called "aliens", and the key to the correct worldview.

2) There are no extraterrestrials (in the sense that they are not from other planets - not EXTRAterrestrials ). I think that the Earth is the only planet in the Universe. The Sun is the only star in the Universe. "Aliens" (all their alliances and races) are, roughly speaking, angels / demons. Entities that somehow, for some time manage to avoid incarnation. Their influence on humanity is insignificant on the physical plane (paranormal or subtle phenomena interact very weakly with matter), but enormous in terms of mental (religion, worldview). Most of all, they affect the mind through fear of death and ignorance. "Aliens" is a psychophysical, subtle, noosphere phenomenon.

3) Is the Universe local?
Yes. Moreover, it is absolutely local. This comes from the name itself. If besides the Universe there is something else, then without this something it is no longer the Universe. Within the framework of the Universe, the existence of something local is impossible, that is, absolutely without any interaction with the rest of the Universe. In short, this supposedly difficult question, in fact, is a priori very unambiguous: the Universe is absolutely local, within the Universe, conditionally (relatively) local phenomena or regions (space) can exist, for example: a soundproof room, an airtight container, water-air, etc. .P. impermeable containers. But it is impossible to create an absolutely impenetrable space within the framework of the Universe itself for absolutely nothing. In short, the Universe is an absolutely local space, within which the existence of any other absolutely local space is impossible.

4) Is it possible to know the future?
No. Knowledge of the future itself influences (changes) this future. Example. You find out that something bad is about to happen, even if you try to do nothing to fix it or avoid it, then at least your behavior and thinking will change. In short, it is impossible to know the future, because knowledge of the future itself affects the future, that is, changes it. There are certain trends and expectations of the future, but nobody knows 100% of it, although it is likely that it can be 100% predetermined.

5) The only infinite parameter (in the full sense) in the Universe is time. Energy and matter, like consciousness and space, are limited, but indestructible ... in short, here you need to understand well the Law of Conservation of Energy and its consequences, because this is essentially one of the fundamental properties of the Universe: Nothing appears from nowhere, and does not disappear into anywhere, but is only redistributed and / or transformed from one state to another.

6) Religious worldviews.
The first and most important thing to understand is that the existence of 100% truth, or 100% lies, is impossible. Abrahamic religions (Islam, Christianity, Judaism. . .) - sinners in hell, the righteous in heaven - game over - nonsense. But this does not mean that these religions are completely false.Hinduism and Buddhism, like probably Taoism and Shintoism with the concepts of karma and rebirth, in general, are closer to reality. But this does not mean that these religions are absolutely true.That is, with regard to religion and worldview, it is important to understand to what extent this or that question or phenomenon corresponds to reality, is logical, plausible, and viable.

[Bored chemist]

Overcoming the distance without spending energy (that is, with zero energy expenses) is impossible a priori.

or, we can look at Newton's first law which says "an object in motion will stay in motion unless acted on by a net external force. ".

Are you saying Newton was wrong about that?

[Kryptid]

That's nice and all, but I'd like to focus on what you've already posted. The resistance of a vacuum, for one. What do you think there is in a vacuum that would drain a photon's energy as it travels?

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

Overcoming the distance without spending energy (that is, with zero energy expenses) is impossible a priori.

or, we can look at Newton's first law which says "an object in motion will stay in motion unless acted on by a net external force. ".

Are you saying Newton was wrong about that?

Probably Newton did not take into account all possible reaction forces (and/or the way that forces interact). Perhaps some negligible, but still not zero forces, which he neglected/disregarded.

[Kryptid]

Probably Newton did not take into account all possible reaction forces (and/or the way that forces interact). Perhaps some negligible, but still not zero forces, which he neglected/disregarded.

Again, what forces are there in a vacuum?

[AlexandrKushnirtshuk (OP)]

That's nice and all, but I'd like to focus on what you've already posted. The resistance of a vacuum, for one. What do you think there is in a vacuum that would drain a photon's energy as it travels?

Gravity. Gravitational field. The total interaction (the sum) of the gravitational fields of the objects in the Universe.