Dark Matter Evidence

the following gives Barry's responses to standard answers (as per the link given) regarding evidence for dark matter. Barry's responses are in bold.


Question: What is the evidence we have for dark matter?

Standard Answers: from

Well, we may have no unambiguous proof, but we have many strong clues, that all point towards existence of dark matter. These include:

1. dynamics of galaxies (famous "rotation curves"): in spiral galaxies most of visible mass is concentrated in the central bulge, further from the centre there is less and less matter. If most of the mass is concentrated in the centre, then stars further away from it should have lower orbital velocity. In reality they have similar or even higher velocity, meaning that there must be lots invisible mass in the galaxies, distributed in a large spherical halo around it.

Setterfield: This answer pre-supposes that gravity is the main force driving galaxy dynamics. Plasma physics has a different answer. Experiments in the lab with plasma filaments produce miniature galaxies where the filaments interact. These miniature galaxies have rotation characteristics exactly the same as the galaxies we see in the universe. In other words, since plasma phenomena are governed by electricity and magnetism the dynamics of galaxies in the lab are electro-magnetic in origin, This suggests that the dynamics of galaxies in space are not primarily gravitational in origin but rather electro-magnetic as we have in the lab.

2. Dynamics of galaxy clusters: you measure velocities of galaxies in a cluster and they come out so high, that the cluster would not be gravitationally bound if there was no "invisible" mass in it.

Setterfield: Several issues here. First, the “velocities” of galaxies in a cluster are measured by their individual redshifts compared with the average redshift for the cluster at their given distance. The whole argument depends on the redshift being an actual velocity of recession of the galaxies. If it has some other cause, such as the effect on atomic emitters by the lower Zero Point Energy (ZPE), or some other effects such as those suggested by Arp, then the whole argument falls through. Indeed, with both the ZPE and Arp interpretations of the redshift, it has been stated that this makes for very “quiet” galaxy clusters with very little actual motion. The reason is that the redshifts of galaxies in clusters reflect a change in ZPE strength and not an actual velocity.

There is a second argument used by some in the creation community who insist on gravitational dynamics playing their full role and a redshift due to velocity of expansion. If these galaxy clusters have only been there for a relatively short time, even say a million years, then there has not been enough time for the cluster to disrupt at the observed velocities.

3. Gravitational lensing. We know many cases of gravitational lenses where you can see images of more distant galaxies distorted by gravitation of closer ones bending their light. You may calculate the mass needed to bend the light in the way we observe and again, it comes much higher that visible in form of stars and gas.

Setterfield: This answer again depends purely on gravitational physics. When the physics of plasma filaments is taken into account, the bending and focusing of light along the axis of plasma filaments can readily occur.

4. (Really a subcase of the above): colliding galaxies. We see cases (like the famous bullet cluster) where galaxies have collided with high velocity. While the stars from both galaxies mostly went past each other and the galaxies after the collision retained roughly their shapes, all the gas present it them has collided, stopped and formed a large, hot cloud, between them (observable in X rays). When you now look how the light from more distant galaxies is lensed by that cluster, you discover, that most of the mass responsible for the lensing remained roughly where the stars are, not where the gas is. This means halos of dark matter around galaxies don't collide, they go through each other.

Setterfield: This answer again depends purely on deductions from gravitational physics. The interactions between galaxies on plasma physics is due to electricity and magnetism and the fields they produce. These fields trap the large hot clouds that produce the X-rays. However, the main interacting filaments which produce the galaxies and stars are the ones which do the lensing. So it is not necessarily evidence for the existence of dark matter.

5. Formation of structure of the universe. You have to explain how in the early universe all the hot and almost uniform gas collapsed into galaxies and galaxy clusters. It turns out, that you can simulate the process and recreate the actual observed structure only if you assume that most mass is in the form of dark matter, consisting of relatively heavy (and therefore slow) particles.

Setterfield: The distribution of galaxies and galaxy clusters is acknowledged to be filamentary in structure. To get this filamentary structure from a smooth distribution of gas gravitationally, the gravitational astronomers require the action of dark matter. But that action has to be so finely tuned as to be unreasonable scientifically. It is much easier to account for the distribution by the action of plasma filaments when no special pleading for dark matter is needed.

6. Fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background. When this radiation formed, the temperature of the universe was much higher than present and any density fluctuations of primordial gas would have been smoothed out by radiation pressure. In order to explain the observed fluctuations you have to assume, that most of the matter at that epoch did not feel the radiation pressure and the primordial fluctuations could not be therefore destroyed by it. Precise measurements of those fluctuations allow to measure the ratio of baryonic to dark matter.

Setterfield: This again assumes that gravitational laws were operating along with radiation laws. The fluctuations in the Cosmic Background can be accounted for very simply by the action of electric and magnetic fields in plasma at high temperatures. It need not require dark matter at all.

7. Big bang nucleosynthesis. In the very early universe, minutes after the big bang, you had a mixture of protons and neutrons and once the temperature dropped below the binding energy of nucleons, atomic nuclei formed. Those were mostly hydrogen and helium-4, but some deuterium and helium-3 formed as well. We can measure the abundances of those isotopes in pristine gas present in the galaxies and between them. And you can calculate how much of each of those isotopes you should get. It turns out, that without dark matter being present during nucleosynthesis, you'd get much less deuterium than actually observed. Only assuming existence of dark matter you can explain the isotope abundances.

Setterfield:Those abundances of elements can form by fusion in plasma filaments under strong electric and magnetic fields. You do not need to assume dark matter, just strong fields. In fact all elements can be built up this way, including the element iron which is found in the most distant objects. This presence of iron is a problem for standard Big Bang modelling as it can only form in the observed abundances after a number of generations of stars have gone through their life-cycle. This suggests that the plasma alternative is better than current Big Bang modelling.

So, as you see, lots of evidence from different measurements, different scales and different time since the big bang all points to the same conclusion.

Setterfield: This conclusion is strongly disputed by plasma astronomers! Finally, this July (2016), it was announced that after an extensive search using highly sophisticated equipment that dark matter still has not been found. See here:  http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/scientists-invisible-dark-matter-find-40767195?yptr=yahoo

from the article linked: "Scientists have come up empty-handed in their latest effort to find elusive dark matter, the plentiful stuff that helps galaxies like ours form.
For three years, scientists have been looking for dark matter — which though invisible, makes up more than four-fifths of the universe's matter — nearly a mile underground in a former gold mine in Lead, South Dakota. But on Thursday they announced at a conference in England that they didn't find what they were searching for, despite sensitive equipment that exceeded technological goals in a project that cost $10 million to build."

I hope this helps