<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:ymaps="http://api.maps.yahoo.com/Maps/V2/AnnotatedMaps.xsd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why does it &#8230; matter?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://science.kqed.org/quest/2007/04/09/why-does-it-matter/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://science.kqed.org/quest/2007/04/09/why-does-it-matter/</link>
	<description>Explore science, nature and environment stories from Northern California and beyond with KQED’s multimedia series</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:38:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: QUEST Science Blog - KQED &#187; Why does it &#8230; matter? Part II</title>
		<link>http://science.kqed.org/quest/2007/04/09/why-does-it-matter/#comment-10576</link>
		<dc:creator>QUEST Science Blog - KQED &#187; Why does it &#8230; matter? Part II</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Apr 2007 16:44:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kqed.org/quest/blog/2007/04/09/why-does-it-matter/#comment-10576</guid>
		<description>[...] hour exposure of star trails above the Keck Telescopes taken by yours trulyThe dark matter that I discussed in my last post is quite bizarre, but makes up only a small fraction of the universe. The dominant material in the [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] hour exposure of star trails above the Keck Telescopes taken by yours trulyThe dark matter that I discussed in my last post is quite bizarre, but makes up only a small fraction of the universe. The dominant material in the [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Daw</title>
		<link>http://science.kqed.org/quest/2007/04/09/why-does-it-matter/#comment-10578</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Daw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Apr 2007 11:22:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kqed.org/quest/blog/2007/04/09/why-does-it-matter/#comment-10578</guid>
		<description>Ask can WIMP dark matter exist really? How could particles that need to have significant mass - ie much more massive than neutrinos that have been directly detected - and to comprise at least 90% of all matter in the cosmos, and at the same time evade direct detection after some two decades of experimentation?

And if not, what else could explain the galaxy rotation curves, the behaviour of galaxies in clusters and cosmic lensing?

So there have been serious thoughts about modifying the action of gravity but there are observations of galactic behaviour indicating that such a theory wouldn&#039;t work.

But I haven&#039;t heard of any scientist suggesting that a cause could act universally in addition to the forces.

Yet, despite the spectacular success of the standard model of quantum and particle physics, one can still agree with Richard Feynman, Nobel prize winning physicist extraordinaire, and insist that nobody understands quantum mechanics.

And hence, also, there are still quantum mechanical interpretation as various and conflicting as the Copenhagen, many worlds and de Broglie-Bohm accounts. And the last of these interpretations is a systematic nathematically worked out caount with its own mechanics that does describe a distnct cause acting in addition to the forces, called the quantum potential.

So could all the problems in theoretical physics including those in cosmology boil down to the fact that physics is still stuck with the push or pull causes that can&#039;t, by themselves, be described to explain how the universe is naturally organised either on the smallest or the cosmic scale?

I&#039;ve outlined a theory on my blog that gives quite deatiledreasons to consider that this is so, to find it google&gt; foranewageofreason</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ask can WIMP dark matter exist really? How could particles that need to have significant mass &#8211; ie much more massive than neutrinos that have been directly detected &#8211; and to comprise at least 90% of all matter in the cosmos, and at the same time evade direct detection after some two decades of experimentation?</p>
<p>And if not, what else could explain the galaxy rotation curves, the behaviour of galaxies in clusters and cosmic lensing?</p>
<p>So there have been serious thoughts about modifying the action of gravity but there are observations of galactic behaviour indicating that such a theory wouldn't work.</p>
<p>But I haven't heard of any scientist suggesting that a cause could act universally in addition to the forces.</p>
<p>Yet, despite the spectacular success of the standard model of quantum and particle physics, one can still agree with Richard Feynman, Nobel prize winning physicist extraordinaire, and insist that nobody understands quantum mechanics.</p>
<p>And hence, also, there are still quantum mechanical interpretation as various and conflicting as the Copenhagen, many worlds and de Broglie-Bohm accounts. And the last of these interpretations is a systematic nathematically worked out caount with its own mechanics that does describe a distnct cause acting in addition to the forces, called the quantum potential.</p>
<p>So could all the problems in theoretical physics including those in cosmology boil down to the fact that physics is still stuck with the push or pull causes that can't, by themselves, be described to explain how the universe is naturally organised either on the smallest or the cosmic scale?</p>
<p>I've outlined a theory on my blog that gives quite deatiledreasons to consider that this is so, to find it google&gt; foranewageofreason</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MT</title>
		<link>http://science.kqed.org/quest/2007/04/09/why-does-it-matter/#comment-10577</link>
		<dc:creator>MT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2007 14:54:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kqed.org/quest/blog/2007/04/09/why-does-it-matter/#comment-10577</guid>
		<description>Sure, go ahead and leave us in the dark!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sure, go ahead and leave us in the dark!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

