Amateur's theory explaining dark energy/matter

Not bad:

A circular reference to what is going on is a great place to start. However if the dark energy is filling up the place so fast and nothing is happening with it, it must not be immediately compatible to this universe. Otherwise it would be out there forming new Galaxies and stuff.

One could take it to the next step and say this Universe is going down the drain and when it is gone the dark matter that is left may/will start the foundations of the next one.

I dunknow where or how people work with dark matter. If it can be quantified and measured then it is only a matter of time till someone thinks of something to do with it.

It just might be too far fetched to say that the universe IS going down the drain...

Hi BMORROW492

A further question is "Does energy have a gravitational force?" After all matter and energy are interchangeable. e=mc^2

If it does,

1/ Is all the energy which is radiated outwards "dragging" the universe with it - accelerating?

2/ Is all the energy which is radiated inwards "dragging" the universe back to its centre - decelerating?

Anyone have an opinion?

Cheers

BigbirdAustralia

Hi BBA,

I always like to hear new ideas. I have a couple of comments:

1. In my understanding there is no outward or inward - every point in the universe is on the same footing. Each point is equally entitled to call itself the center.

2. You said "Does energy have a gravitational force?" What if it has anti-gravitational force? It would cause the expansion of the big bang. As light gets converted to matter as the universe cools, it would change into matter and slow down the expansion. This, of course, does not explain the accelerating expansion that we see today.

Cheers,

S

A couple of questions...

1. What type of matter or energy are you implying that the stuff gets reduced to? One of the tenants of the quark model is that quarks don't like to exist alone. Separate one from another and they create their own new companions.

2. Where are the worm holes coming from? If you're talking about the "foamy" model of space/time, the postulated worm holes connect very small distances in space, like around a few Plank's lengths.

3. These worm holes come back into the Universe several thousand light years away within our Universe? So why is it so cold? It sounds like your worm holes are exiting our Universe.

Just one minor nit: The Universe hasn't recently started expanding faster. If the data has been correctly interpreted, the Universe has always been accelerating its expansion.

It's fun, isn't it!!!

How about if we consider that the gravity is not constant but variable and increase with distance (In light years) .

May be we dont have to include this so called dark matter or energy to explane the velocity and acc of galaxies & the rate of expansion of the universe

Newton invented Gravity to explain Kepler's math. Too many astronomers now struggle to explain Gravity. One pretty good physicist, James Clerk Maxwell, rejected Newton's Gravity in favor of heat. Nobel Laureate, Ilya Prygogin follows Maxwell. And Prygogin has made many converts. Is a black hole analogous to the eye of a gigantic hurricane fed by the heat of it's own stars? Look at the Hubble photos and keep the heat engine in mind.

Anonymous

I too, am an amatuer cosmologist and have a similiar theory. I am working on an experiment that may not prove this, but would go a very long way towards that end. It is great to hear that I am not alone. My theory doesn't involve worm holes, but does indicate that the dark energy is at its absolute smallest elemental particle size and travels at greater than the speed of light, as it slows down, it starts to combine with other particles to become dark matter and as dark matter slows down it becomes what we understand as energy and as that slows down it becomes what we understand as matter, then eventually back through the black hole again in a "circle of life" pattern of the universe. Extrapolating from this, everything is the universe can be explained including light, life, time, gravity etc.

Hi I have some real time dark matter monitor's which were made at LBNL ca. they have a large dia.- silicon detector mounted to a vacuum chamber and cryo pump, all custom made. Also, I have a EG&G Orteck version of the same units. these unit are used to check for small local dark matter generated by cyclotrons. Hope this info helps your experiment.

Mr anomous

Interesting. How does the stuff get out of the black hole?

Researchers using the chandra telescope recently discovered the birth of new star formations just outside or near black holes, to their amazement, but I had already predicted it. A supermassive black hole is, in an abreviated description, a huge monopole magnet in the center of each galaxy. the angular momentum just inside the event horizon exceeds the speed of light. as it attracts matter, it pulls with such force as to "strip" matter into its most elemental sized "particle", (hicks boson). as the "particle" (spherical in shape and simply an electromagnetic "shell", oppositely charged inside and out) is accelerated past the speed of light, it is hyper-energized by the friction. (time, being relative, is simply the rate of energy loss of the particle, as in, the greater the particle's velocity throughout the universe, the less the energy loss, the slower the rate of time and visa versa. at above the speed of light the particle in increasing in energy and traveling backward in time) Yes I am proposing that time is quantized and is not a dimension but an effect or factor in all dimensions. consider the effects of relativity! And time appears to stand still at that point. The particle "duplicates" itself through the increase in energy, (just like your body and all other life replicates itself through increase in energy) which would also explain exactly "where" the energy is coming from to accelerate the expansion of the universe! the particle has only a few simply properties. one of them is that it can invert upon imbalance of energy applied. (this also would explain how atoms and molecules convert from solid to liquid to gas and how a single photon appears to "travel" in bands of light and dark as it oscillates at the speed of light which is the balance point of the entire universe.) Some particles are thrown out in to space due to similar charge compared to the black hole, some are attracted to the black hole. A black hole is so dense because the particles that "hit" the black hole due so at such great speed and energy they flatten out with the attracting charge to the inside and repelling charge to the outside. Nebulas are simply black holes that have "exploded" because too much matter was attracted to the black hole faster than it could be "torn" apart to it's most elemental state and particles become trapped underneath other particles but their electromatic alignment is not similar to the rest. after so much pressure is applied they "flip" other particles which in turn causes a nuclear reaction and explodes only to eventually reform back into a "normal" looking galaxy. Most of the particles in the explosion are sent out at greater than the speed of light and are also observed as dark energy. There is so much more to my theory that It would take a book to describe it all and I am working on that as well at the insistance of others who have heard and understand my entire theory. There is also a great deal of scientific research to support it as well.

Wow,

Einstein is rolling over in his grave faster than the speed of light. That means he is going backward in time and will soon be alive again. Watch out! He will soon be knocking at your door.

I can't wait for your book to come out.

It is entertaining to read smart-ass ingnorant comments such as yours, especially by those who don't even expose their identity. For your information, which you obviously lack, it is not I, but world class physicists at CERN who have recently calculated the mathmatical formulas to support the existance and reality of superluminous velocities of particles. Also, the ONLY explanation of how research physicists have found a single particle in two distinctly different locations in exactly the same time frame is by the superluminous velocities of that particle. THAT is indisputable! Science has the propensity to sweep under the rug anything that it cannot explain or would interfere with continued funding of its ideas. Get a reality check! Scientific endeavors are discovering such huge amounts of information and previously unfathonable realities of discoveries at such a tremendous pace that the disemination of that information is not, nor could be, universally known, much less universally understood. What I am saying is that the information is coming in so fast that even previously accepted theories, which are in direct contridiction of the newly acquired factual information, have not been shown to be incorrect, YET! THE FACT REMAINS THAT MOST THEORIES OF QUANTUM AND ASTRO PHYSICS HAVE NOT BEEN PROVEN! The widely accepted "big bang" theory is increasingly being DISPROVEN! since you think you know better, please explain!

Whoa! Lighten up, Francis!!!

This is a board for discussion. If some one disagrees with you, don't take it so hard!

Im sorry, you are right, it just irks me when a comment is made to belittle and not for input or constructive critisism. I do truly appreciate and welcome constructive critisism as it keeps me in check and aware of other points of view and that is why I post here. I do realize what it is that I propose and the contention it brings, however it is only by independent thinking "outside the box" that true revelation and understanding can occur, otherwise we would already have all the answers.

Woof!!! Apparently, you've been really busy! Very interesting.

Just one thing, most physicists and cosmologists tend to state that over the event horizon, we have no idea what's going on, because we're pretty sure that the laws of physics don't work there. So what are you basing your internal black hole physics on?

It is my contention that our laws of physics don't apply past the event horizon because at less than the speed of light, the universe to us exists in the first, second and third dimensions. at above the speed of light, the universe exists in the fourth, fifth and sixth dimensions with a different set of laws of physics that we haven't even begun to understand yet. that is, you still have three dimensional space, but particles exist at more than one point at the same time frame. here is an example: in one dimension, a point exists in a specific time frame on a single point on a line, in the 4th dimension it is still a line, but a point exists at more than one location on that same line in the exact same time frame. in 2 dimensions it would take two points to have two seperate points on two perpendicular planes at less than the speed of light, however in the fifth dimension at greater than the speed of light, it only takes one particle to exist simultaneously on both planes. in the third dimension, it would take 3 particles to exist on three planes in the same exact time frame (hieght, width and depth, but in the sixth dimension it only takes one particle to exist on all three planes simultaneously. It is also my contention that the 7th dimension is where a particle exists in all points simultaneously. In other words, as all religeon has described it, God exists everywhere at the same time and is in the 7th dimension. Yeah, I know it sounds way out there, but logically speaking it makes sense,it is congruent and consistent with my theory and as much as I search, I have not found any hard, absolute evidence to prove me wrong. Until I do, I will keep working on it. One thing Einstien tried hard to do was to prove the existence of God. Although I don't believe that he can be proven by any man ever and that we will never really know until we die, anything I can do to that end, I will try.

I don't find your theory very similar to the other one. I'd like to see you extrapolate a theory of gravity out of this.

read my prior post and understand that absolutely everything is simply made of electromagnetic particles. In very simple terms, gravity is simply the electromagnetic force and interaction of everything.

So you mean to say that Up quarks, down quarks, strange quarks, electrons, Muons, Tau particles, neutrinos, photons, W⁺, W^-, Z⁰, gluons, and Higg particles are all electromagnetic particles? Do you believe in the weak and the strong force? Do you have a Grand Unified Theory (GUT) to share with the scientific world? In my gut I think you're off base. May the force be with you!

Yes, yes and yes. it may be many years until I have completed all my research and work, but I do have a grand unified theory or "theory of everything". It also answers, in scientific reasoning, what Einstien tried in vain to do, which is to include the actual, quatifiable and measurable existing of God and heaven. A little known secret. Einstien acquired his greatest ideas, breakthroughs and information through a unique, and as yet, undeterminable process, by his own accounts. I acquire much of my knowledge in exactly the same way. as to the previous smart-ass post of "guest", read my response.

Hi DR,

I am sorry to have been so negative in my previous post. I am also surprised that you answered yes to the first 2 questions. I am no particle expert, but i have read that W⁺, W^-, Z⁰ transmit the weak force, gluons transmit the strong force, and photons transmit the electromagnetic force.

I don't think that God will ever allow his existence to be proved. That requires faith. Some people know that he exists; it's a one-by-one thing. As far as all religions having the same idea of God, its almost the opposite - no 2 agree completely. Let me give you some advice: keep God in a separate discussion. I had a bad experience a while back by mixing Him into one. it doesn't help your case.

Lots of people like you have an indeterminable process for gathering knowledge. As far as the guest post, ignore him. Lots of scientists have been ridiculed or ignored only to have been accepted later. Learn to accept ridicule and keep on going.

As my English teacher used to say "Don't jump to conjunctions." Good luck.

Regards,

S

Thank you for the supportive comment. As I understand it, one of, if not the largest physics experiment is being set up at CERN. Their goal is to "find" the hicks bosson particle, which, ostensibly, makes up everything else. I am theorizing that it depends upon the combination, configuration and conglomeration of the "hicks bosson" particles to determine the electromagnetic force of the larger particles such as gluons. As I understand the mathmatics, infinity is a possiblity, either large or small. I am postulating that this is not an error or impossiblity, that it is a reality, only that each individual particle reacts to what it is exposed to and this is what makes up the differences of all things. The smaller the particle, the greater the energy it has. if a gluon had a particle inside of it, the particle would be so energized as to have angular momentum greater than the speed of light and again as previously posted, we have no idea of the laws of physics that would even begin to tell us how to even detect it, much less measure it in any way. anyway, I contemplate this 24/7 it seems and could go on for ever in real world (universe) observations and applications of my theory. Most of all, I have to say that I appreciate this website and its contributors. thank you.

I just wanted to share with you one of my observations regarding science and God that hopefully others will read and attempt to understand.

A short time ago I was taking my niece to the airport. I had picked her up from Cal-Tech , where she is now a senior. Our discussion turned toward religion along the way and I asked her what her impression was of the religious beliefs of the other students, (understanding that these are some of the brightest young scientific minds of our time). She indicated that she felt it was somewhat split around 50/50 between believing in God or not. I then quizzed her on her own personal beliefs and she stated that she was in the 50 who didn't believe in God, but that she DID believe in a "greater being". This completely perplexed me. This is the part of religion that I have come to understand that most others don't seem to understand. The concept of religious beliefs and the practice of religious beliefs are not one and the same. Whether you refer to the "greater being" as God, Allah, or whatever, it is still a philosophical and fundamental belief in a "greater being". Now understand that the percentage of the world, (and my nieces observations of fellow Cal-Tech students concur), who believe in a "greater being of any sort", is more accurately represented in the eithtieth or nintieth percentiles, then you can understand the true pervasiveness of "religion" in the real world. It is in the "practice" of religion, and all which that entails, that varies so greatly, not the fundamental belief.

Now for the part that I truly don't understand. As an absolute believer in God, (the name used for reference purpose only as I may attend services of a specific religion which uses this terminology, my actual practicing beliefs are not usually consistent with their insistance that their way is the only way), I must include "God" in any full and true view of anything and everything, including science. I logically and conciously cannot believe in somthing that I don't actually believe is real. I don't believe in magic, the tooth fairy nor santa claus. And if it is real then it exists. If it exists, then it is somehow determinable at least through scientific reasoning, if not measureable and quantifiable. Therefore, any believable GUT MUST include at least an allowance for the possiblity of the real existance of God and Heaven, at least for the eighty or ninty percent of humanity who believe.

The funny thing is, I believe in the actual existance of God and believe that this "greater being" is of some sort of physical nature within our universe, yet in that belief, I could easily be percieved as a lunatic. Yet, it is the remainder of the eighty or ninty percent who also believe in this "greater being, who would be the ones to accuse me so. go figure?

Hi bmorrow492, nice try, but you have a few issues to overcome!

Up to "These worm-holes carry the energy, on average, a few thousand light-years before the energy re-emerges into our universe" your postulate sounds more or less like standard science, although wormholes (a theoretical possibility) are extremely unlikely to exist.

The main problem with your postulate is that it is established beyond reasonable doubt that the total dark matter content remains constant, meaning its density decreases with expansion, while the total dark energy increases, meaning its density remains constant with expansion.

Dark energy is thought to be vacuum energy while dark matter is thought to be exotic particles created during the big bang. Theoretically, there seems to be little chance of the one being converted into the other.

That said, cosmology is such a strange beast that the truth may be very strange indeed!

Regards, Jorrie

To All,

Thanks for the responses. I am enjoying the discussion. Yes, Jorrie, my theory needs some tweaking.

Bill

P.S., I have another theory (not original with me) that has fascinated me for years- a theory of gravity. I have been waiting for someone to bring it up during the numerous discussions on gravity, but no one has mentioned it yet. I will ask about it in a future post.

Jorrie, here's a question for you: Dark matter and energy predate the discovery of the acceleration of expansion of the Universe by many years. So, what was the original phenomenon that sparked the idea of dark stuff?

I love reading these threads with crackpot theories. (I can feel you all bristling at THAT comment!) The difference between wild conjecture and crackpot theory is the time and effort you put into it. Someone suggests that 911 may have been a conspiracy but the guy who devotes his major time and energy is the crackpot.

So, here's my wild conjecture. If time were reversed, would stars and light become the black holes and the black holes radiate light? Would matter and energy then become the dark matter and dark energy that we are barely able to detect and vice-versa? Would a being existing in such a situation see all this?

Before I hit the send key I was thinking of substituting the word "crackpot" with "interesting" but decided to go with it. Free speech is a good thing.

Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble! Rabble!

And that's just for starters!

rab·ble

n.

1. A tumultuous crowd; a mob.

2. The lowest or coarsest class of people. Often used with the.

3. A group of persons regarded with contempt.

I hope you (guitarhunter) actually read this, although I seriously doubt that you can even begin to understand all that it is that I attempt to teach you. You use the terminology "crackpot" in a condesending manner. WOW! Because you KNOW better? NO. psychologically speaking, it is relatively safe to say that you are either unable (which would be my personal belief) or unwilling to even attempt to understand new and complicated ideas which are not presented to you by an authority which you have previously accepted as an absolute trusted source. That is to say, your mind is confined within a box and is incapable of independent thought and evaluation. I also believe that this alone puts you in the 90th or greater percentile of people who inhabit this world, who should be considered the "sheep" of the flock, who only follow the herd. Consider this if you can, if any or all of science, or even any part of mankind, had the full understanding of everything, then none of us would even bother to visit a website such as this, to debate the possibilities of our, and all other, existance with and within our universe. I tell you now, the fallacy of all of science is in its failure to even attempt to include everything that it is aware of, even that of which it has not even begun or attempted to see, measure, quantify, qualify or evualuate, in its futile attempt to fully explain anything! To completly (and I truly mean completely and totally in every possible way) explain something, it would require the full and absolute understanding of everything else, and every possibility of how, how much and why anything and everything else had an effect on this something which you consider. (simple, yet deeply contemplated and understanding logic which I seriously doubt that you, or even most people can even begin to understrand!) If you know something specific that the rest of us don't, please enlighten us all. If you have your own ideas, please share them in an evidentrury process, either in contradiction or agreement to ... anything! If you have absolute proven scientific evidence evidence, congruent or contradictory, please share as well, but I ask of you to keep it to absolute knowedge, not conjectory. Interestingly, as posted earlier in this thread, the term "beyond reasonable doubt" was used. That is a term and process which has been determined to be "adequet" in the expelling of justice in our large and democratic nation. It is not, and should never be, considered positive proof of anything, ever! Wisdom, not just knowedge or belief, is necessary for true understanding. Consider this; Utilizing the total of all knowledge and information that mankind has acquired over the melenium, and even continues to acquire, his combined descisions have continually, rapidly and acceleratedly resulted in the precarious situation in which the world exists today. This is simply and calcuatedly derived by a combination of greed and lack of wisdom. To describe the mannerism and propensity of all humanity today would most certainly begin with the prefix "self". With this one-dimensional outlook on everything, the wisdom of even considering the concept of "just because I can, should I" doesn't enter the corporate mentality, if the word "profit" is larger than the potential "negitive effects and perception thereof". This lack of understanding will well serve mankind to his rapidly accelerating end. If you even begin to surmise that you have true intellect, please use it in your little "corner of the world", to propagate wisdom and understanding to others of the real effect of that in which you and they participate, to those who decide what it is that you and they do. If we could only all understand that concept and participate in the desicions, or at least contemplation of what it is we do, we could correct the path we exist upon. Today, at the absolute best, we have 800 or so years until mankind will no longer exist, or at least be able to exist, on this earth. Without constraint or wisom applied, that figure rapidly decreases. Wake up, people!!!!!

I have never, in my entire lifetime, complained or ridiculed that of which I did not have a better answer to, process for, or explanation of. If viewed completly and absolutely, and without bias, even the most opposite of truths can teach us all something. In a nutshell, "Science is the process, religion is the meaning, philosophy is the understanding, of everything!" In the balance of the three, you find the balance of the entire universe.

Yes, I have the mathmatical equations, yes, I have the religious beliefs and yes, I have the univerals phycological understandings to congruently support my beliefs.

In scientific response to your post, Yes, everything within the realm of superluminous velocities would "view" this 94% of the universe that mankind understands as dark energy and matter, as being illuminated. In science that would be to say that everything that is dark to us, existing at less than the speed of light, would appear as light to a "viewer" existing at greater than the speed of light and visa versa. Our physical bodies are of our planet which exist at less than the speed of light. Our Souls are of Heaven, which exists at above the speed of light. They are of two seperate and distinct energies. Electromagnetically they are opposite in polarity and therefore, attract. When the body ceases to exist, that is, loose its energy and therefore, electromagnetic field, it "releases" the sole. Hence, all of mankinds recounts of "dying" and yet, still existing and even coming back to life are virtually identical. Even the scientific and measurable recounts of these events of dying and coming back to life are virtually indisputable as the physiological measurements of these events directly coincide with the tales of the observer. The recounts tell of a darkness and light at the end of a tunnel. After reaching the end of the tunnel, everything is in a "light". When you die, your soul literally travels to the center of our galaxy (our interpretation is the valley of the shadow of death), is accelerated past the speed of light (the tunnel) and is then physically entered into the realm of heaven. This is not science fiction, this is the reality of all existance and has been documented in countless occasions.

In summary, We, as a planet of inhabitants, no longer have the time to "fugure it out". It is NOW time to apply everything that we know, to the understanding all that we can, and to believe in all that is considered possible, to the systematic application of all that we do, in order to sustain what it is that we all want... life.

The final note of any full understanding of anything will always have to include a reference to everything else. Scientific, religious and philosophical views will have to be congurent. Real understanding can only be a result of these three distinct, different, and yet congruent views.