Discussion of the article “Dark matter proposal and particle identity”. 2021.

Discussion of the article “Dark matter proposal and particle identity”. 2021.

(https://www.academia.edu/attachments/77755327/download_file?s=sidebar&ct=MTY0MjM0NzcxMywxNjQyMzQ3OTI2LDc2Mzg1ODA2), discussion link – (https://www.academia.edu/s/60c99d49f0#comment_1034497). Article written by Gene H. Barbee, Colorado State University, December 2021. Theoretical Physics

  • Astrophysics
  • Physics of elementary particles
  • Mathematical physics
  • Quantum mechanics
  • Cosmology (physics)
  • Cosmology
  • Gravitational constant

Dear Academy! From the standpoint of neutron sciences (NS), all of the above information is absolutely wrong. According to NS, dark matter is a 2 parallel world in relation to our first one and it is built on neutrinos. Thus, the neutrons of our world cannot be included in the structure of dark matter – these are things that cannot be docked.

Feedback is in the form of magnetic lines of force (MLF) of the 2nd world, which are included in the structure of the chemical elements of the 1st world. Official science has no idea what any elementary structureless particles are, unable to answer “they are solid, liquid or gaseous”, since it is the structure that determines these aggregate states.

They also do not know what a mass is (https://neutronscience.com.ua/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/MASS_OF_A_BODY_%E2%80%93_WHAT_IS_IT.pdf), since the amount of substance is determined by the structure of chemical elements. It is absolutely incomprehensible, for example, due to which the particle-gas and others are moving.

You can continue indefinitely. There are millions of scientists in the world who have been working for centuries and each of them dreams of becoming a Nobel laureate with a status position among his scientific guild, supporting those who are already at the top, and those in turn support any nonsense that the lower layers of the scientific guild come up with.

Let me give you a vivid example. Nobel Prize for Graphene. All Swedish academicians should be sent to courses for metalworkers who specialize in metal processing, and there they would learn what the surface roughness of solids is and whether it is possible to create a surface one atom thick on it.

If we compare the surface roughness of a telescope mirror and adhesive tape, we will get a difference of at least 10,000 times. The overall size of the graphite element is 18 picometers (10-12 meter) and it is ten millionth of the average protrusion of the surface roughness of the telescope mirror.

Now try mentally through such mountains to precipitate graphite from a gaseous state onto adhesive tape and create a surface one atom thick. From this, even mentally, nothing will come of it, not to mention the fact that in a calm state, gas-graphite is a molecule of two atoms, which in principle excludes the production of graphene.

The question is why the whole circus with the Nobel Prize? Does science consider the entire human population of the planet to be stupid animals? Now take a new look at the subject of discussion and your hair will stand on end.