Whats the difference between Dark Matter and God ? Why do scientists

>Dark matter
>Tested, observed, conclusively proven
>God
>Fairytale

Dark matter does one thing. God does everything. When you directly invoke God to explain something, there is no more physics.

Most scientists don't despise God though. Only famous ones seem to, and that's primarily why they were made famous. Atheism is hip and cool these days.

>>7634163
>Dark matter
>Tested, observed, conclusively proven
citation needed

>>7634176
We know it's there. We just don't know what it is.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=evidence+dark+matter

>>7634148
>standard model of le particle physics is totally accurate 100% no errors ever
>says nothing of dark matter
>GR totally accurate 100% no errors ever
>wrong about matter in the universe by orders of magnitude

>>7634172
No one "despises" god. Go away with your lies about fucking christians being persecuted. You are the norm, you are the majority so stop with the lies.

And they just don't believe in it because they have no reason to. They found out that if they ignore the god hypothesis and instead at the universe by themselves with a little bit of help from mathematics, they can make new hypothesis that actually predict stuff.

The god hypothesis will never be able to predict anything.

>>7634148
I think in order to preserve the potential of this thread to be interesting we should forget that he said anything about god.

>>7634194
Every single physicist I've ever heard admits there are flaws in both the standard model and general relativity.
In fact, they get very excited about that because it means there is new shit to be discovered, which is pretty much what they live for.

>>7634179
> the gravitational effects
You can only measure the effects of the thing you assume exists, not the actual thing itself. Literally no different than saying God exists because everything around we see is the evidence of it.

>>7634198
Seconded

To rephrase OP:

1. What evidence have we to go on in support of a finding of dark matter?

2. If all presentable evidence is had by indirect observation, can we be certain that our conclusions are free from error?

Answer to 1: ?????

Answer to 2: Even direct evidence is suspect as every finding is vulnerable to the next newest evidence discovered. We can only work with what we are maximally certain of.

The absolute truth is reserved for pure mathematicians and theologians who both set the terms of the discussion and discover its consequences in isolation from the rest of the world.

>>7634205
It's completely different though. Dark matter behaves like a physical thing, simpler than normal matter even, since it has fewer ways to interact. It's not a black box that does anything and everything with infinite power and wisdom that you can't examine how it works ever.
>>7634212
"Bullet cluster"

File: darkmatter2.jpg (93KB, 720x520px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 720x520px

>>7634176
Open any issue of ApJ in the last decade. Or read a typical popsci article here, but there are too many to really give you a comprehensive list:
> http://scitechdaily.com/dark-matter-filament-in-galaxy-supercluster-directly-measured/

>>7634179
protip:

It's God

>>7634239
:^)

>>7634163
nope m8.

>>7634148
scientists do not support or despise any of them . 'dark matter\energy' is another way of saying 'we have no idea why things are accelerating away that fast but its kind of like the opposite of what normal matter\energy does.
'god' is another way of saying 'there's this universe and we know it all expanded from this one spot really fast a long time ago but we have no idea how or why it 'exists' or was 'created ''

>>7634148
>atheists
>intellectually honest scientists

Pick one

>>7634600
Scientists don't really concern themselves with 'why'

>>7634625
not true ,scientists concern themselves with why things are the way they are because answering that question can reveal more fundamental underlying mechanisms .

>>7634639
I think you mistake science with philosophy.

Philosophy = ask questions, make assumptions about shit

Science = make hypotheses, test them, construct theories

God isn't a predictive model you dumb fuck

>>7634643
>Philosophy = ask questions, make basic assumptions about shit, apply logic
>Science = ask questions, make basic assumptions about shit, make hypotheses, test them, construct theories

>>7634148
>God of the gaps
>2015
So this is what humanity has come to

>>7634600
>its kind of like the opposite of what normal matter\energy does
>it all expanded from this one spot really fast
Popsci fag

>>7634232
how does bullet clusters even indicate dark matter ?

>>7635424
Because the bulk of the baryonic matter is between the two clusters as x-ray gas which has been stripped out. The lensing clearly shows however that the clusters totally dominate in mass over the gas, far beyond what can be accounted for in stars. Most of the mass in that collision felt no pressure, that is dark matter.

This kills every natural modified gravity because there is no nice way to explain why gravity would change on the basis of the state of matter.

>>7634148

People don't pray to Dark Matter thinking it will magically solve their problems.

Or blow themselves up in it's name.

Or murder people in it's name.

Or fight wars in it's name.

>>7635488
>Or blow themselves up in it's name.
>Or murder people in it's name.
>Or fight wars in it's name.

couple hundred years ago, alot of people would have said that about oil.

>>7634199

Basically this. Every credible, working scientist understands that everything we have done up to this point is just an approximation of nature that works under specific circumstances. For general theories, such as the standard model and GR, we work to increase accuracy of the models and expand the domains in which these models work. But they are just that, just models. Just approximations of how the universe works.

>>7636245
I was very surprised to discover that the oort cloud is very much theoretical in terms of size, extending out to a theoretical 2 light years. Also shocked to discover that the gravitational effects of solar systems in our galaxy can affect individual rocks and send them spiralling inwards towards sol.
This (of course) set me thinking, if we dont know the exact limits (predicted by grav effects) whose to say that the entirety of our universe is not 'filled' up with tiny lumps of rock, they are too small and scattered to be detectable by grav-effect with our current technology - however is it possible that the 90% mass of our universe that is missing is actually 'there'?
This could also explain why the hay-lions are not whizzing around the galaxy in star ships - too many pebbles chipping the windshields, which make inter stellar travel impossible.

>>7635502
people are murdered IN THE NAME OF oil? Not to acquire control over it? Are you sure?

>>7634148
There is no evidence for god

>>>/pol/