So just a thought that popped into my head, and I wanted other peoples opinion on it. What if a fundamental law in science is not quite right, I was thinking about the first law of motion. I realize that sounds stupid, but I was reading an article about dark matter… Link and excerpt bellow… http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=dark-matter-modified-gravity" The bad news is that in order for modified versions of general relativity to work, some sort of unseen—or "dark"—presence must be in play, which in some cases can look a lot like dark matter. "If you try and build a consistent, relativistic theory that gives you modified Newtonian dynamics, you have no choice but to introduce extra stuff," Ferreira says. "I don't think it will be described by particles, in the way that dark matter is described—it may be described in a more wavelike form or a more fieldlike form." Note the comment, “modified Newtonian dynamics”, he means inertia. So ok, then what if there is no dark matter, then what? Thats when this idea hit me…. What if the laws of inertia were wrong, lets say space-time, aether (whatever you call it) had a natural resistance to change, meaning it didn’t like to expand or curve. That very concept could account for dark matter. Then apply to a smaller scale because all matter curves space-time even small pieces of matter, like all the satellites experiencing the pioneer anomaly. Maybe we don’t need dark matter, maybe all we need is to understand that space-time has a natural resistances to change and that could apply a force onto matter…of course that would mean we would have to rewrite the law of motion. What do you all think?