What are often referred to in articles on this site as galaxy cluster cells because they are more or less like a biological cells with a dense center of orbiting clustered galaxies with increasingly less (baryonic) mass density in plasma gases and galaxies out to its boundaries with neighboring cells. But in the parlance of current cosmology these cells are denominated dark matter halos, because added (although invisible) gravitational matter is required IF the extreme redshift across these cells is to be attributed to centripetal motion. So now we have a ‘created’ universe with halos to account for what are affectionately called ‘fingers of God’ redshift streaks through galaxy cells. Where do they get this stuff? Sunday school? 
There is a volume at which the universe exhibits uniform mass density – that volume is clearly larger than a planet, a star, a galaxy, and even a galaxy cluster, but at the multiple galaxy cell level the universe is observed to be uniformly dense. These representative volumes are considerably smaller than the observed universe itself. There is a representative cell size and mass that represents the universe as a whole. Einstein and Hawking convinced themselves that Newton was wrong about an infinite uniform universe collapsing in upon itself if it weren’t somehow exploding and only being slowed down by gravitation of the whole. Well, they were demonstrably wrong about the implications of the Poisson differential equation. An infinite, uniformly dense universe would NOT collapse as shown elsewhere on this site. A finite universe would collapse – but what’s on the outside of that?. And the only reason to believe in the Big Bang or God saying “Let there be light!” is a recessional Doppler interpretation of redshift in the first case or the Bible in the other. And redshift is not omnipotent it is just a spectroscopic measurement. It is its interpretation as a Doppler effect of recessional motion (or expansion of space as is currently in vogue) that implies an expanding universe that seems to require a Big Bang from a black hole from which we are told there is no escape.
I understand one’s natural reluctance to accept a stationary state, but does creation from nothing or a universe embedded in an infinite void satisfy the intuition? No. Within representative volumes at which the uniform density applies, variation applies – all the dynamic processes of the universe apply within these realms. From each radiation escapes and the same amount of radiative energy enters maintaining the thermodynamic balance. That’s what stationary state implies, not that it’s a static universe or stationary in the sense of standing still. The long ago debunked ‘Steady State’ universe was not a stationary state universe in case that thought arises.
When an interpretation of data necessitates a deus ex machina, it is time to re-evaluate the interpretation.
That takes care of the need for ‘dark’ matter to fill the void of missing matter. Without the recessional Doppler interpretation of redshift, there is no velocity implication to Hubbles constant; it is merely an exponential factor with distance as predicted for the plasma scattering model that determines cosmological redshift. This is described in papers on this site.
But dark matter is invoked to account for other observations. One such is the fingers of God phenomena where the apparent spread of redshifts of galaxies through a cluster would require ten times more mass than observed baryonic matter. So the redshift across a cluster is in part (~10%) due to centripetal motion of the galaxies and 90% due to some other cause, whether it be invisible matter or a mechanism other than Doppler effects of motions along the line of sight. Since plasma density and requisite ‘dark matter’ density have the same distribution, it is reasonable to suppose that there is a plasma scattering redshift mechanism. This is explained in papers on this site.
Another observation attributed to dark matter is spiral galaxy orbital velocities at large radii not trailing off as rapidly as observed stellar matter would imply, but this can easily be attributed to spherical gravitational concentrations of plasma gases in and around such massive galaxies. This also is explained in papers on this site.
One other observation attributed to dark matter is gravitational lensing that requires more than the observed baryonic mass in the lensing object, whether it be a massive gallaxy or galaxy cluster. However, in another blog post it has been shown that two or three aligned massive objects combine to produce the same deflection as a single one that is ten times more massive than any of them.
So, who needs dark matter?
Leave a Reply