quote: Theoretical physicists have discovered that we live in a universe where dark energy pushes things apart while dark matter tries to pull things together.
from today's post - http://bit.ly/1hfzcJq
Mach's Principle states that only relative motion exists. So if the universe revolved around us (relative to what?) we would feel centrifugal force exactly as though we had revolved within the universe.
Imagine: Some of the universe appears to revolve around us and some of it doesn't. What would we experience then? What would be the effect on local spacetime?
It seems reasonable to weight the effects proportionate to their mass, and inversely proportional to the distance squared.
Fortunately, it is very easy to assess the effects of known matter, because it's nearly all stars and we can detect them by measuring the light.
To determine the dominant mass affecting our own galaxy, all you need to do is go outside on a clear night and look.
With the naked eye, the dominant mass is clearly the Milky Way. With time lapse photography the picture is more complete, capturing feint images of other galaxies, and the Milky Way is utterly dominant.
For the accepted view to be correct: that the Milky Way should be flying apart due to centrifugal force (hence the need for dark matter to bind it together) either General Relativity has the maths wrong, or Mach's Principle is wrong, or both are wrong.
The behaviour of the Milky Way is consistent with Mach's Principle, so I subscribe to the view that General Relativity is wrong. I have two reasons:
1. It doesn't predict the behaviour of the Milky Way.
2. It has a constant G for which there is no explanation.
astronomy, dark matter, photos, physics, relativity