Jakob wrote:Yes, there were intended for you... thanks for trying to answer. But... this is all extremely vague, not really anything of substance. Farsight may be lying, but so far I have to just take his critics at their words. They might be totally in the dark. Which is how it appears to me, because all I get is references to links and comments like 'there are many ways things happen. But I won't get into the mathematical details.' Vaguer than vague.
I hope you note that Farsight is also vague on mathematical details. He is someone that, in his own words, refuses to develop mathematical details.
The reason that my answers may be a bit vague is because Farsight is literally so wrong that he is not really talking about physics. When you ask a question about what alternatives to his theories could be, one can only point to the work that actual physicists do because Farsight refuses to actually produce specific predictions of his theory. If one criticizes Farsight on a particular point, he dodges the questions by discussing something else or by claiming that he means something else. He can't be pinned down because there is really no content to his theory.
I ask him about the rotation curves of galaxies because that is one specific prediction that he has made (perhaps the only one). He is saying that if one calculated the rotation curves of galaxies using general relativity, then there would be no need for the hypothesis of dark matter. Now he has never actually shown how to do this (and there are many papers that actually do this calculation and show that we still need to hypothesize dark matter). That Farsight refuses to support the one prediction he has ever made is a bad sign for his ability to produce a real physical theory.
Anyway, I was under the impression that it is the rotation of galaxies suggest a much greater mass that what is measured, that suggests dark matter. I always found this a bit of a stretch. I am open to the suggestion there is a more elegant solution.
The rotation curves of most galaxies suggests that the visible part of galaxies are surrounded by a much larger distribution of mass. So too does the way that light bends around galaxies. So too do the orbits of galaxies around each other. So too does the bending of light around groups of galaxies.
Looking at the way that galaxies form into clusters in general suggests that there is some sort of dark matter. So too does the behaviour of particles in the early universe.
These are all research projects with a lot of physicists and astronomers making careful observations and calculations. Almost all of these scientists use general relativity. Despite this, Farsight claims that if we used general relativity correctly, we would not have a need for dark matter. So Farsight is saying that all of these scientists are wrong, though he will not show anyone exactly how these scientists are wrong. Even on a message board with dozens of professional astronomers and astrophysicists, Farsight could not produce the relevant calculations.
Farsight does seem good at offering confident statements. Unfortunately, science is often not as confident as we would wish it to be. Additionally, Farsight never delivers on the evidence that his confidence suggests.