Podcast and presentations to "Dark Matter: A Debate" and the subsequent TV debate are online

Note added on 6.04.2012: this page has been translated. See the end of this contribution.


The debate had the following format:

First Simon White had 25 minutes to present his point of view. This was followed  by questions to him from the audience (about 5 minutes). Then Pavel Kroupa had 25 minutestime to present his point of view, again followed by 5 minutes questions. Following this, Simon White and Pavel Kroupa were asked to each give five minute statements summarising their positions. The actual debate then commenced, which also included the audience.

The lecture theatre in the Physics Insitute was overfilled; 300 people attended the event, and another room with a TV monitor showing the life proceedings was also overfilled. Late-arrivals did not find a seat nor standing room.

The podcast is now on-line at Uni-Bonn-TV: Dark Matter: A Debate.

Pavel Kroupa’s talk is available here as a pdf file, Simon White’s talk can now be downloaded from his website.

Also available is “Dark Matter in five minutes” which contains the five-minute statement each by Simon White and Pavel Kroupa.  These five minute statements were given after both 25 minute talks and before the actual debate ensued.

UPDATE: Finally, the actual discussion between Pavel Kroupa, Simon White and the audience is online, too: “Dark Matter, the Debate“.

After the Debate, the German TV programme scobel conducted individual interviews, in German, with Simon White and Pavel Kroupa. These are available at “Interviews: Dark Matter: A Debate“.

One week later, on November 25th, a German television conducted another debate on live-TV (see the bottom of our blog “Reactions to the Dark Matter Debate and anohter one in German TV“). This debate is in German and can be viewed on the relevant scobel page “Raetsel Dunkle Materie: Neue Studien stellen ihre Existenz in Frage (translation: “Mystery Dark Matter: New studies raise doubts on its existence”).


Available tranlsations:

This web-page is available in Haitian-Creole at this link: Podcast ak prezantasyon nan “Matter nwa: yon deba” ak deba nan televizyon ki vin apre yo sou entènèt.

 


by Pavel Kroupa and Marcel Pawlowski (02.12.2010): “Podcast to “Dark Matter: A Debate” and the subsequent TV debate are online” in “The Dark Matter Crisis – the rise and fall of a cosmological hypothesis” on SciLogs. See the overview of topics in  The Dark Matter Crisis.

Advertisements

Author: Prof. Dr. Pavel Kroupa

I am a Czech-Australian teaching and researching at the University of Bonn on dynamics and stellar populations. After studying physics at The University of Western Australia, Perth, I obtained my PhD from Cambridge University, UK, as an Isaac Newton Scholar at Trinity College. After spending eight years in Heidelberg I habilitated at the University of Kiel, Germany. I then took up a Heisenberg Fellowship and later accepted the position as a professor at Bonn University in 2004. I was awarded a Leverhulme Trust Visiting Professorship (2007, Sheffield, UK) and a Swinburne Visiting Professorship (2007, Melbourne, Australia). In 2013 I received the Silver Commemorative Medal of the Senate of the Czech Republic, and I took-up an affiliation with the Charles University in Prague in 2016. Pure innovative science can only truly thrive in non-hierarchical societies in which competition for resources is not extreme. Therefore I see the need for the German academic system to modernise (away from its hierarchies) and warn of academic systems that are based on an extreme competition for resources (USA), as these stifle the experimentation with new ideas.

5 thoughts on “Podcast and presentations to "Dark Matter: A Debate" and the subsequent TV debate are online”

  1. Epicycle heaven = a GR+DM+DF+L+INFLATION cosmologyIn the Kroupa et al (2010) paper get into proposing a dark force (DF) and into proposing a new cosmology which they call “GR+DM+DF+L+inflation cosmology.”
    I am all for criticizing the dark matter idea. But I think these competent observational astronomers should stay out of the theory building business. In Pavel Kroupa’s talk he draws and analogy between Galileo’s world when there was a transition between the Geocentric Model and the Heliocentric Model and today’s world where extragalactic astronomy is bringing in information that this disruptive of our world. This is all fine and good to cite all these disturbing facts. However, I do not think it helps matter for Pavel Kroupa to conclude in the end of his talk that MOND and MOG “is where we are seeing new physics worthy of exploration.”
    If Bonn group is going to irritate the long-lived, dark matter community, championing such ideas a MOND, MOG, and a new dark force (DF) in order to deal with the “extragalactic catastrophe” they are doing no more than grabbing the bull by the tail and not by the horns.
    Galileo’s solar system telescope data played an important role the eventual demise of Geocentric model and the final acceptance of the enlightened Heliocentric model. However, Galileo had considerable trouble in getting his fellow astronomers to look through a telescope in order to see the phases of Venus.
    I have four experiments where a 1.9%, 8.9%, 9.6% and a 16% increase in weight of test masses were observed when these test masses were placed between a 1000 W hot source and a cold sink. These results are inconsistent with the 300-year-old mass-based gravitational theory of Newton’s and Einstein’s 100 year old modification of his theory. However, they are compatible a luminosity-based gravitational theory. In any clear night peopled in general, not just astronomers can readily see that the stars interchange luminosity with each other. My experiments have demonstrated that this luminosity is gravitationally attractive. Just because this finding runs against everything astronomers have been taught to believe in, it does not mean that these findings necessarily wrong or invalid. Similarly, Galileo telescope data ran against everything the people of his time were taught to believe in. Eventually cool heads prevailed and some had the nerve to look through his telescope.
    If astronomers are going to have observational data that presents a “serious anomaly” that will not go away, they better start preparing themselves for a revolution in thinking as what had to be done when the aether could not be found and the idea of time dilation had to be adopted. This business of modifying a theory that assumes that “mass attracts mass” is just delaying that time for the adoption of a theory that comprehends the phenomena in a more intuitive, “close to experience” way as was done with the adoption of the Heliocentric model. http://vixra.org/abs/0907.0018

  2. comment to Peter FredIf gravitation is mediated with or as light, then there is a Gedanken experiment that may shed light on this hypothesis: Take a major planet, e.g. Jupiter or Saturn, and calculate the orbital motions of the moons, taking note of the substantial times they spend in darkness when the planet eclipses the Sun. Would there be an effect in Peter Fred’s hypothesis?

  3. The moon’s of Jupiter and Saturn & the times they spend in the darkThank you for replying. My experiments were performed with a 1000 W hot-plate heat element. The radiation generated by a hot-plate heat element is mostly in the infrared. A person cannot see infrared radiation. So I do not regard the moons of Jupiter or Saturn as “being in the dark”.
    The Stefan-Boltzmann law says that if a body has a temperature it has radiation leaving it. To me the Stefan-Boltzmann law is the artifact that has given credence to the mass-based theories of Newton and Einstein for 300 years just as the earth-rotating-on-its-axis-every-24- hours was the artifact that gave credence to the Geocentric Model for 1500 years.
    In my paper I consider the possibility that the sun’s “attractive” radiation makes the earth’s dayside surface gravity less than its nightside surface gravity by 0.08%. Then taking this 0.08% diurnal change in the surface gravity, I derive Newton’s Law
    F = Mm/r^2
    where M is the Sun and m is the earth. To do this I use the effect that a slight change in the surface gravity has has on earth’s central pressure. In my paper I also mention Maurice Allais 1957 observation of a “diurnal variation in g”. Even though he is a Nobel Laureate in economics, scientists have been so blindsided by the venerated mass-based theories of Newton and Einstein that they have chosen to give Allais’ anomalous diurnal effect about as much attention as they have given my anomalous weight-increase effect.

  4. Eclipse effect on Jupiter’s or Saturn’s moon’sThe Allais effect has been researched to death. In the 1970 solar eclipse where Saxlobserved a %5 increase in the period of his torsion pendulum there was a 2 degrees Celsius drop in the ambient temperature with concomitant pressure changes.

    Researchers who have attempted to replicate Allais’ and Saxl’s work, in my opinion, have not been very careful in what they thermally isolated. If they were cognizant that gravity may be due to heat transfer as I have been, then they might make better decision as to what to thermally isolate and what not to.

    With Allais diurnal “diurnal change in g” effect and Saxl’s Solar eclipse effect, there is also a concomitant change in the outside ambient temperature and atmospheric pressure. So my experimental results have similarities with other experimental results that also may be due to temperature effects.

    However, with experiments where the effects of heat transfer is investigated, I put the “petal to the metal”. I do not fool around with the small, difficult-to-measure effects as has been done with the Allais and Saxl experiments.

    With 1000 W heat source and a heat sink made of ice and water enclosed in a copper container, I have achieve a significant change in weight of the test masses involved.

    However, I may be getting too much of an effect. This large percentage-change in weight may be the reason why my results are ignored by most physicists. Scientist, who are so transfixed by every word in the textbook, probably think that my 2-16% increase in weight has never been observed before and therefore it must be spurious.

    The dictator Louis Phillipe forced the French Royal Society to back the amateur Leon Foucault’s pendulum experiments that finally showed that the earth rotated on it axis. All I need a is a PhD in physics, who will serve the same purpose as Louis Phillipe, to dare risk his reputation and attempt to replicate my experimental results. The science community has already spent a billion dollars on experiments and observational work to deal with the “extragalactic catastrophe” that has been around for the last 80 years. Why wont just one scientists spend two or three hundred dollars on a simple experiment that might finally resolve this long-lasting problem that now seems like its never going to go away.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s