As well known in the field, Vera Rubin discovered the flat rotation curves of spiral galaxies using optical spectra, which could be a Noble prize worth discovery. However, very few people noticed that when Vera Rubin interpreted her observational results, she made a very simple mistake: She applied the spherical model to the spiral galaxies (see the paper published in Science by Vera Rubin: Science, New Series, Vol. 220, No. 4604 (Jun. 24, 1983), pp. 1339-1344). Also, when you read the paper published by Fritz Zwicky in 1937 (THE ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL, Vol. 86, No. 3, 217-246) carefully, you will notice that he also utilized a spherical model to estimate the mass of the Coma cluster. As every physicist should know, an object with a spherical mass produces a Keplerian rotational curve, but a disk-like mass distribution will not follow that. Therefore, the key issue is how the mass is distributed in a galaxy. Any galaxy with a spherical (or close to spherical) mass distribution will not need dark matter. The results of NGC1052-DF2 and DF4 are the examples. The flat rotation curves of spiral galaxies are caused by the disk shaped (non spherical) mass distributions. With the latest GAIA data, it has been shown that by using a disk mass distribution model and by solving the Poisson equation of the Galaxy, a flat rotation curve which reproduces the key observed features with no need for a dark halo has been obtained (see arxiv paper 1612.07781.pdf). By the way, MOND is just another way to reflect the effects caused by the non-spherical mass distributions. If MOND is correct, how can Newtonian mechanics work for DF2 and DF4 without modifications? So, dark matter does not exist and it is just a consequence of misusing Newton’s law in gravitational systems with non-spherical mass distributions (see DOI:10.1142/S2424942417500049). Newtonian mechanics does not need to modify when the non-spherical mass distributions are considered.
The simplification of complex systems into models (like spherical or disk models) is a common practice in physics to make the mathematics tractable. However, these simplifications can sometimes lead to incorrect or incomplete interpretations. Rubin and Zwicky's use of the spherical model might have been a simplification for analytical tractability rather than an oversight.
51:10 amazing stuff. 🤡 Self induced virtue signalling, I can't imagine this lecturer virtue hustling in some other country ngl. theres a reason we have degrees understanding social life and society. They're complex and require read of almost 100s of books on history and culture before U open your mouth to "tackle" these things But activists don't need to do that do they?
As well known in the field, Vera Rubin discovered the flat rotation curves of spiral galaxies using optical spectra, which could be a Noble prize worth discovery. However, very few people noticed that when Vera Rubin interpreted her observational results, she made a very simple mistake: She applied the spherical model to the spiral galaxies (see the paper published in Science by Vera Rubin: Science, New Series, Vol. 220, No. 4604 (Jun. 24, 1983), pp. 1339-1344). Also, when you read the paper published by Fritz Zwicky in 1937 (THE ASTROPHYSICAL JOURNAL, Vol. 86, No. 3, 217-246) carefully, you will notice that he also utilized a spherical model to estimate the mass of the Coma cluster.
As every physicist should know, an object with a spherical mass produces a Keplerian rotational curve, but a disk-like mass distribution will not follow that. Therefore, the key issue is how the mass is distributed in a galaxy. Any galaxy with a spherical (or close to spherical) mass distribution will not need dark matter. The results of NGC1052-DF2 and DF4 are the examples. The flat rotation curves of spiral galaxies are caused by the disk shaped (non spherical) mass distributions.
With the latest GAIA data, it has been shown that by using a disk mass distribution model and by solving the Poisson equation of the Galaxy, a flat rotation curve which reproduces the key observed features with no need for a dark halo has been obtained (see arxiv paper 1612.07781.pdf).
By the way, MOND is just another way to reflect the effects caused by the non-spherical mass distributions. If MOND is correct, how can Newtonian mechanics work for DF2 and DF4 without modifications?
So, dark matter does not exist and it is just a consequence of misusing Newton’s law in gravitational systems with non-spherical mass distributions (see DOI:10.1142/S2424942417500049). Newtonian mechanics does not need to modify when the non-spherical mass distributions are considered.
If them is facts, I just got learn-ed. Twice.
The simplification of complex systems into models (like spherical or disk models) is a common practice in physics to make the mathematics tractable. However, these simplifications can sometimes lead to incorrect or incomplete interpretations. Rubin and Zwicky's use of the spherical model might have been a simplification for analytical tractability rather than an oversight.
Guy's woke beyond belief
Decent lecture nonetheless
51:10 amazing stuff.
🤡 Self induced virtue signalling,
I can't imagine this lecturer virtue hustling in some other country ngl.
theres a reason we have degrees understanding social life and society. They're complex and require read of almost 100s of books on history and culture before U open your mouth to "tackle" these things
But activists don't need to do that do they?