LCDM fails yet *another* observational 'test'.

[Cargo]

JHL, you nailed it. Well done.

[Michael Mozina]

If cosmic expansion fails does the BB fail?
If the BB fails does Ligo fail?

If Ligo fails does the BB fail?
If the BB fails does cosmic expansion fail?

Heavens no. History tells us that when something fails it's never a wasted opportunity.

1. Issue a breathless press release on the colossal size of your humility. Pepper it with buzzwords like scientists and rethink and wonder and horizons. Adopt great courage at the the sheer mountain of new work your peers, with grace and their vast intelligence, will surely accomplish on your joint noble quest.
2. Remodel the model and rework the math. Throw around enormous figures. Fill blackboards with revisions.
3. Proclaim a new Entity. Play to the Higgs Boson (failure that it was) or the largest collider you can imagine, or something about Einstein. Call this Entity Darkest Nature or something catchy and leave em all spellbound.
4. See that it makes it onto the big screen. Whatever happens, a stint in the next 3 hour Trek Wars spectacular is generally a slam dunk for popular credibility.
5. Although its not in the visible spectrum, bonus points for photographing the real thing. "Scientists color-enhanced Darkest Nature", and so on.

You get the idea. If you're really good you can peddle your celebrity and monetize the thing for years. Get a YouTube channel and a contract with a network. Nobody will remember when the whole cycle plays out the next time.

And fewer than that will remember the definition of the word science.

LOL! Sad, but true.

[neilwilkes]

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/03/ ... 48080.html

... snip ... "For a galaxy this size, it should have 30 times as much dark matter as regular matter," he told AFP news agency on Wednesday.

"What we found is that there is no dark matter at all."

It seems that about twice a month LCDM fails another observational test. You'd think they'd get the hint sooner or later.

True. But what's amazing is that some in the MSM are framing the result as proof of either new dark matter capabilities or suggesting it will make dark matter harder to disprove: https://www.popsci.com/galaxy-no-dark-matter .

Sadly I cannot access that site unless II agree to being bombarded with ALL cookies they set up, and this is unacceptable. Any chance someone who does not value their privacy could please copy the article for me?
Sorry to moan (and I know this is the wrong place) but that site has no way to opt out, which is illegal. It is either accept everything including tracking cookies or no access at all.

[Michael Mozina]

https://today.tamu.edu/2019/05/01/are-n ... asurement/

“We set out on this path to better understand dark energy, but to everyone’s surprise, including our own, we seem to have stumbled upon a new dark component of the universe,” Macri said. “We are about two years away from reaching the critical 5-sigma significance that is the hallmark of a discovery in physics — 1 in 3.5 million of this result being due to chance.”

So essentially astronomers have begun a two year high profile campaign to "sell" the public on the concept that they "discovered" something *other than* a falsification mechanism of the expansion interpretation of redshift, specifically they found yet *another* "dark" component to the universe. Oy Vey. It's bad enough that their model is *already* 95 percent placeholder terms from human ignorance, but apparently they need to add more human ignorance to their model to get it to work right. Sheesh. Let that metaphysical monstrosity die a natural scientific death already.

I love how they are eager to get to a 5+ sigma level so they claim to have "discovered" a new dark component to the universe. All the sigma figure *actually* represent is the likelihood that their expansion interpretation of redshift is wrong.