Dark Matter

Nov 19, 2021
41
5
55
Matter determines the shape of space. Space determines how matter should behave. I think I have the idea correct.
But what if we can modify this a little? What if there could be a pre-existing shape to space? What if the shape of space determines where matter can accumulate? Like a dip in the ground would make a pond. Could the dip shape exist without having attracted our common matter? Would we assume matter existed in that shape...Just a thought. And of course any 'dip shape' would have gravity (without common matter) .
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Watcher1
Nov 15, 2021
11
1
35
Well, our scientists don't know the real size of the space, so how matter could determine the shape of the space?

Don't you agree that the first mission is to verify the size of the space?
A theory for a compact size universe can't fit into infinite size Universe.

With regards to dark matter:
Do we really see any dark matter?
Do we have any real evidence for the existence of dark matter?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Watcher1
Nov 19, 2021
41
5
55
We know Dark Matter exists as it exhibits Gavity. So something exists producing Gravity but without evidence of normal matter as its cause. That is, There is gravity but no identifiable cause , so far discovered.
If there is gravity then space must be shaped, not flat.
Refer to the analogy of a weight on a suspended rubber sheet. The sheet is distorted downwards by the weight. Put a ball in it with a push and the ball orbits the centre of the depression. This is just a simplification in 3 dimensions of 4 dimensional spacetime to illustrate the meaning of "shaped spce".
With regard to the Universe as a whole there is no conclusive evidence for any proposed shape I believe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Watcher1
Nov 15, 2021
11
1
35
The dark matter is a direct outcome of misunderstanding.

Our scientists can't explain the spiral shape of the galaxy and they can't explain the requested gravity that holds the sun in its orbit.
They clearly observe the Bulge, Bar, spiral arms - but they can't explain how it really works.
So, instead of finding the correct explanation, they have invented this dark matter and the density wave that do not needed in our real Universe.
 
Last edited:
Nov 19, 2021
41
5
55
A bit harsh Dav but yes it seems the movement of stars on orbit in the Milky Way can only be explained by assuming a new gravity source of mega magnitude. In our experience gravity is caused by mass. Therefore it is assumed that there is some (loads of ) unidentified mass. The missing mass canot be identified and therefore is alloocated a name "dark matter" (dark mass).
My suggestion is to turn it on it's head and imagine that gravity is caused by the 4 dimensional shape of space rather than mass. That is all 'mass things' cause a shape in space which in it's turn causes gravity and also a 'shape in space' may exist indepenently of mass - and thereby cause gravity. Possibly nonsense but as yet not debunked.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Watcher1
Nov 15, 2021
11
1
35
The key point is that there is no need for extra gravity.

The mass in the galaxy and the spiral structure of the arms are good enough to hold the sun in the Orion arm.
Our scientists don't have a basic clue how the spiral galaxy really works.
Let's look at the spiral arms.
At the based they are connected to the ring that is located at about 3KPC from the center.
At that stage the thickness of the arm is 3 KLY.
At our location which is about 8KPC from the center, the thickness of the arm is 1KLY.
At the edge of the arm (about 12-15 KPC) the thickness is 400 LY.
You can't explain that structure just by center gravity mass.

Please also be aware that there are exactly 512 star in a radius of 100Ly around us and 64 in a radius of 50 Ly.

Hence, the density of stars per 50LY sphere in our location is fixed - 64 stars.
That proves that the arm itself holds the stars by its gravity.
Hence, the arms act as propellers in a plan.
There must be some sort of symmetrical shape between the arms otherwise that structure would fail to work.

Therefore, there is no need for dark matter to explain the shape of spiral galaxy.
The gravity in the spiral arm is good enough to hold the stars in the arm.
However, if any star would dare to shift away from the arm it would be boosted away from the arm and the disc plane.
We call those poor stars Hypervelocity stars.


"Hypervelocity stars zoom through space at speeds exceeding 1 million mph (1.6 million km/h) — more than twice as fast as their "normal" cousins. "
 
Last edited:
Nov 15, 2021
11
1
35
Thanks

The density wave can't last for many rotation periods:


"Currently, the theoretical situation is such that quite diverse views co-exist and there is no consensus that a single mechanism is responsible for all of the observed spiral patterns in galaxies. While some experts insist that spiral patterns must last only a galactic rotation or two, other theorists argue that swing amplification can give rise to superposed modes of the system which can last for up to ten rotation periods".

How could it be that the Milky Way last for so long time?
Our scientists claim that it takes 240MY for the sun to set one rotation. In the last 6 BY it had been set about 25 rotation periods.
Hence, how the Milky Way could last for 25 rotation periods while the upper limit of the density wave is just 10 rotation periods.

It also can't explain the full structure of the Milky Way spiral galaxy.
1. Bulge - up to 1KPC
How the density wave could explain the bulge at that specific section?
Why around the SMBH each star orbits at different orbital plan and at different direction?
Why the spiral arms do not start directly from the SMBH?
If the Density wave is real how could it be that there is a bulge at the center?
2. Bar - 1KPC to 3KPC
How the density wave could explain the Bar at that specific section?
3. Ring at 3KPC
How the density wave could explain the ring at that specific section?
4. Spiral arms - 3KPC to 15KPC
Thickness - why at the base (3KPC) the thickness of the arm is 3,000 LY while at the edge (15KPC) it is only 400 LY. This is a contradiction to any real orbital system.
Density - how the density wave could explain the absolutely fixed density in the Orion arm near the solar system? In our location we have found that in each 50 LY sphere there is exactly 64 stars.
So, how could it be that the density wave, which acts as a random activity could set this specific density of stars in our location?
 
Jan 27, 2020
319
97
1,780
The universe mainly consists of a novel substance and an energy form that are not yet understood. This 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' are not directly visible to the naked eye or through telescopes. Astronomers can only provide proof of their existence indirectly, based on the shape of galaxies and the dynamics of the universe. Dark matter interacts with normal matter via the gravitational force, which also determines the cosmic structures of normal, visible matter.

It is not yet known whether dark matter also interacts with itself or with normal matter via the other three fundamental forces—the electromagnetic force, the weak force and the strong nuclear force—or some additional force. Even very sophisticated experiments have so far not been able to detect any such interaction. This means that if it does exist at all, if it has any physicality, it must be very weak.

To more fully illuminate this topic, scientists are carrying out various new experiments in which the action of the non-gravitational fundamental forces takes place with as little outside interference as possible and the action is then precisely measured. Any deviations from the expected effects may indicate the influence of dark matter or dark energy. Some of these experiments are being carried out using huge research machines such as those housed at CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research in Geneva. But laboratory-scale experiments, for example in Düsseldorf, are also feasible, if designed for maximum precision.

The team working under guidance of Prof. Stephan Schiller from the Institute of Experimental Physics at HHU (Heinrich Heine University) has presented the findings of a precision experiment to measure the electrical force between the proton ("p") and the deuteron ("d") in the journal Nature. The proton is the nucleus of the hydrogen atom (H), the heavier deuteron is the nucleus of deuterium (D) and consists of a proton and a neutron bound together.

The Düsseldorf physicists study an unusual object, HD+, the ion of the partially deuterated hydrogen molecule. One of the two electrons normally contained in the electron shell is missing in this ion. Thus, HD+ consists of a proton and deuteron bound together by just one electron, which compensates for the repulsive electrical force between them.

This results in a particular distance between the proton and the deuteron, referred to as the 'bond length'. In order to determine this distance, the Heinrich Heine University physicists have measured the rotation rate of the molecule with eleven digits precision using a spectroscopy technique they recently developed. The researchers used concepts that are also relevant in the field of quantum technology, such as particle traps and laser cooling.

It is extremely complicated to derive the bond length from the spectroscopy results, and thus to deduct the strength of the force exerted between the proton and the deuteron. This is because this force has quantum properties. The theory of quantum electrodynamics (QED) proposed in the 1940s must be used here. A member of the author's team spent two decades to advance the complex calculations and was recently able to predict the bond length with sufficient precision.

This prediction corresponds to the measurement result. From the agreement one can deduce the maximum strength of a modification of the force between a proton and a deuteron caused by dark matter. Prof. Stephan Schiller from HHU comments: "My team has now pushed down this upper limit more than 20-fold. We have demonstrated that dark matter interacts much less with normal matter than was previously considered possible. This mysterious form of matter continues to remain undercover, at least in the lab!"

See: https://phys.org/news/2020-05-evidence-dark-nuclei.html

Meanwhile, the cosmic radio-frequency spectrum is expected to show a strong absorption signal corresponding to the 21-centimetre-wavelength transition of atomic hydrogen around redshift 20, which arises from Lyman-α radiation from some of the earliest stars. By observing this 21-centimetre signal—either its sky-averaged spectrum or maps of its fluctuations, obtained using radio interferometers—we can obtain information about the cosmic dawn, the era when the first astrophysical sources of light were formed. The recent detection of the global 21-centimetre spectrum reveals a stronger absorption than the maximum predicted by existing models, at a confidence level of 3.8 standard deviations. This absorption can be explained by the combination of radiation from the first stars and excess cooling of the cosmic gas induced by its interaction with dark matter. The analysis indicates that the spatial fluctuations of the 21-centimetre signal at cosmic dawn could be an order of magnitude larger than previously expected and that the dark-matter particle is no heavier than several proton masses, well below the commonly predicted mass of weakly interacting massive particles (WIMPs). The analysis also confirms that dark matter is highly non-relativistic and at least moderately cold, and primordial velocities predicted by models of warm dark matter are potentially detectable. These results indicate that 21-centimetre cosmology can be used as a dark-matter probe.

See: https://www.nature.com/articles/nature25791

The simplest mediator widely considered is a dark photon* that couples to the known particles via their electric charges. The searches involve experiments using particle beams delivered by accelerators to produce the mediator. The mediator decays either into (a) known, detectable particles that are sought (visible decays) or (b) into the dark sector, which are undetectable, but whose presence is deduced by observation of a large missing energy and momentum in the final-state (invisible decays). The results of the searches are usually summarised in terms of their ability to constrain the mediator-to-known-matter coupling strength and the mediator mass. At the Large Hadron Collider at CERN, Geneva, Switzerland, searching for evidence of dark matter is a major activity at the three principal experiments6.

Recently, there has been a focus on searching for a mediator with a mass lower than the proton mass. Astrophysical observations and observed anomalies in measurements involving the muon and nuclear transitions hint at this possibility. Existing experiments, primarily using the decay of the neutral pion, have searched inconclusively for evidence of a dark photon. However, a more general fifth force, where the couplings are no longer simply the charges, remains a viable possibility.

Our MIT group is focused on searching for evidence of a fifth-force, with a mediator of mass less than about 10% of the proton’s mass. In collaboration with colleagues, we have proposed the DarkLight experiment at Jefferson Laboratory, Newport News, Virginia, USA to produce the mediator in electron-nucleus scattering and searching for visible decays into a positron and electron. DarkLight requires an intense, bright and halo-free electron beam possible only with a new accelerator technology, called an Energy-Recovery Linac (ERL).

A phase-1 DarkLight experiment has been funded and a search, focused in a specific mediator mass region suggested by a reported anomaly, is in preparation. Jefferson Laboratory pioneered the development of ERLs using superconducting accelerator technology and next-generation ERLs are at present under construction at Cornell University, USA and at Mainz University, Germany. Searches for evidence of dark matter via low-energy signals in electron scattering are being planned at both machines.

See: https://www.openaccessgovernment.org/understanding-the-elusive-dark-matter/44569/

The mass of the Higgs particle does not have a single, simple, understood source, and the curious feature is that its mass is so small — this is one aspect of the enormous puzzle called the hierarchy problem.

But in any case, the Higgs field is not the universal giver of mass to elementary particles. The Higgs particle itself gets its mass, at least in part, from elsewhere. And it probably isn’t alone. It is very possible that dark matter is made from particles, and these too probably get at least part of their mass from another source. Dark matter is believed by most physicists and astronomers to be the majority of the matter in the universe; it is believed to provide the majority of the mass of the Milky Way Galaxy that we inhabit. The Higgs field likely provides little of that mass.

Other things get their masses from sources other than the Higgs particle. The majority of the mass of an atom is its nucleus, not its lightweight electrons on the outside. And nuclei are made from protons and neutrons — bags of imprisoned or “confined” quarks, antiquarks and gluons. These quarks, antiquarks and gluons go roaring around inside their little prison at very high speeds, and the masses of the proton and neutron are as much due to those energies, and to the energy that is needed to trap the quarks etc. inside the bag, as it is due to the masses of the quarks and antiquarks contained within the bag. So the proton’s and neutron’s masses do not come predominantly from the Higgs field. [Experts: There is a subtlety here, having to do with how the Higgs field affects the confinement scale; but even when it is accounted for, the statement remains essentially true.] So the mass of the earth, or the mass of the sun, would change, but not enormously, if there were no Higgs field… assuming they could hold together at all, which would not be true of the earth.

And black holes, which are some of the most massive objects in the universe, holding court at the centers of most galaxies, can in principle be made entirely from massless things. You can make a black hole entirely out of photons, in principle. In practise most black holes are made from ordinary matter, but ordinary matter’s mass is mostly from atomic nuclei, and as we just noted, that doesn’t come entirely from the Higgs field.

No matter how you view it, the Higgs field is not the universal giver of mass to things in the universe: not to ordinary atomic matter, not to dark matter, not to black holes. To most known fundamental particles, yes — and it is crucial in ensuring that atoms exist at all. But there would be just as much interesting gravitational physics going on in the universe if there were no Higgs field. There just wouldn’t be any atoms, or any people to study them.

See: https://profmattstrassler.com/2012/10/15/why-the-higgs-and-gravity-are-unrelated/

* Dark photon is a new gauge boson whose existence has been conjectured. It is dark because it arises from a symmetry of a hypothetical dark sector comprising particles completely neutral under the Standard Model interactions. Dark though it is, this new gauge boson can be detected because of its kinetic mixing with the ordinary, visible photon. Its physics can be reviewed from the theoretical and the experimental point of view. We discuss the difference between the massive and the massless case. We explain how the dark photon enters laboratory, astrophysical and cosmological observations as well as dark matter physics. We survey the current and future experimental limits on the parameters of the massless and massive dark photons together with the related bounds on milli-charged fermions.

See: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2005.01515.pdf

In summary, the search for evidence and understanding of dark matter is an intensive, worldwide research undertaking by leading physicists using state-of-the-art accelerator and detector technology on, above and beneath the Earth. Calculations by theoretical physicists are essential for the design of experiments with maximum sensitivity to uncovering the new physics. This research, in turn, drives technological development in high-intensity accelerators, more sensitive detectors, high-rate data acquisition and super computers and their controllers and software to determine the flow of information, to provide calculating power and to render final data and reports.

There are major new initiatives underway worldwide and this area will continue to be a forefront activity for the foreseeable future. This curiosity-driven, fundamental research into understanding our universe will continue to explore the forces driving the expansion of the universe and maintaining the framework on which the galaxies rotate, where stars form and where we thrive.
Hartmann352
 
Last edited:

DMH

Jan 25, 2022
19
0
30
Could Dark Matter be traveling close to the speed of light, which could be the reason why physiscist are able to extrapolate Dark Matters exist but cant actually prove its there?
 
Apr 7, 2022
5
0
30
Matter determines the shape of space. Space determines how matter should behave. I think I have the idea correct.
But what if we can modify this a little? What if there could be a pre-existing shape to space? What if the shape of space determines where matter can accumulate? Like a dip in the ground would make a pond. Could the dip shape exist without having attracted our common matter? Would we assume matter existed in that shape...Just a thought. And of course any 'dip shape' would have gravity (without common matter) .
Well, our scientists don't know the real size of the space, so how matter could determine the shape of the space?

Don't you agree that the first mission is to verify the size of the space?
A theory for a compact size universe can't fit into infinite size Universe.

With regards to dark matter:
Do we really see any dark matter?
Do we have any real evidence for the existence of dark matter?
Dark matter does exist. Dark matter could be nothing more than extremely intense gravity.
 
Nov 15, 2021
11
1
35
Sorry, there is no need for dark matter and therefore it doesn't exist.

It is just pure imagination.
Unfortunately, our scientists don't have a basic clue how spiral galaxy really works.
They think that each star holds itself to the center of the spiral galaxy.
That is totally incorrect.
Each star holds itself by gravity to its local spiral arm.
Therefore, the density of stars around the Sun is exactly 64 G stars per 50 LY sphere.
If any star would dare to move away from its local spiral arm, it would be ejected from the galaxy disc as hypervelocity star.
"Astronomers Discover Hundreds of High-Velocity Stars, Many on Their Way Out of the Milky Way"
 
Nov 15, 2021
11
1
35
The universe mainly consists of a novel substance and an energy form that are not yet understood. This 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' are not directly visible to the naked eye or through telescopes. Astronomers can only provide proof of their existence indirectly, based on the shape of galaxies and the dynamics of the universe. Dark matter interacts with normal matter via the gravitational force, which also determines the cosmic structures of normal, visible matter.
Please be aware that the dark matter can't explain (or create) the disc shape of spiral galaxy. However, the module of the density wave theory starts when the disc shape is already there.
Therefore, when the starting point of the density wave is not realistic, the outcome of this imagination is also not realistic.
In any case, the dark matter can't also explain the High-Velocity Stars on Their Way Out of the Milky Way.
Therefore, the shape of spiral galaxy can't be used as a prove for the dark matter.
As long as Astronomers don't have a clue how the spiral galaxy really work, they can't use what they don't understand as a proof for the existence of dark matter that they don't see.
 
Apr 7, 2022
5
0
30
The exiting high velocity stars could have enough momentum to be able to overcome the pull of dark matter.
 
Mar 4, 2020
498
70
1,780
I would like an explanation and a physical description of what regular matter is, before they try to describe dark matter or anti-matter.

Comparing math equations has no meaning. No one can give a physical description of regular matter at this time. So, we have nothing to compare dark matter or anti matter to. It's a meaningless comparison.

If we truly knew what matter was, it might not be necessary for these other forms of matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Watcher1
Nov 15, 2021
11
1
35
The exiting high velocity stars could have enough momentum to be able to overcome the pull of dark matter.
Sorry, you miss the key issue.
How those stars have got their ultra high momentum/velocity at the first place?
Please be aware that those stars were orbiting at the galactic disc around the center at relatively low velocity/momentum (Similar to the Sun orbital velocity/momentum).
At some point they get ultra high boost that kick them out from the galactic disc at Ultra high velocity/momentum.
So the question is:
How could it be that a star with law velocity/momentum which orbits at the galactic disc (while it is assumed to be under the gravity force of the dark matter) would suddenly get so strong boost that would overcome the dark matter gravity and kick it out at that ultra high velocity/momentum.

What is the source of that boost which is needed to overcome the Dark matter gravity?
 
Last edited:
Nov 15, 2021
11
1
35
No one can give a physical description of regular matter at this time.
If we truly knew what matter was, it might not be necessary for these other forms of matter.
Yes we know!
Proton is the base for regular matter.
The structure of a proton is very clear.
"A proton is a stable subatomic particle, symbol p,p+, H+, or 1H+ with a positive electric charge of +1e elementary charge. "
The quark structure of the proton. There are two up quarks in it and one down quark. The strong force is mediated by gluons (wavey)
The gluons is all about energy that contributes more than 99% of the proton mass, while the three quarks together contribute less than 1%.
Therefore, proton gets is mass mainly from the Gluons.
However, the gluons is all about EM energy.
Hence, proton is all about EM energy is a cell (or cell of energy).
In the same token, As proton is the base for all the matter then matter is all about EM cell.
The antiproton has a positive mass (as proton) but with negative charge comparing to the proton.
Therefore, regular matter and regular antimatter are all about cells of EM energy that have real mass but with negative electric charge to each other.
There is no dark matter with negative mass.
This is a pure IMAGINATION.
 
Mar 4, 2020
498
70
1,780
"Yes we know!" Really? You are the first person I've ever heard of, that knows what a proton is. Can you draw a sketch of one? Please draw me a quark, and show me what they look like. What is a quark made of? And please show me a gluon, you say it has the mass. What does mass look like? What is it made of? How are the quarks bonded together with the gluons? How many gluons are needed for that bond?

What is energy? Can you tell me? Is energy an entity.......or is energy a property of an entity? Is energy a thing?.....or is it a variable character of a thing? What is energy, precisely?

How about mass? Is mass an entity.....or the variable character of an entity? What exactly is mass?

Why do protons spin and rotate? What potential, what energy, what power causes the proton to continuously spin? Why doesn't it slow down? A proton not only spins.......it never slows down. Why does a proton, only rotate at certain frequencies and no other frequencies?

We have solid, liquid, gaseous and plasma matter states....what is the micro-second life state of a quark?

Is a dissolving particle fragment, a real thing? Does it have any meaning? While it is dissolving?

Do you believe that there are free quarks floating around in the sun? Are there gluons floating in the sun? Do you believe that the static of space, is popping particles in....and out...of existence?

The standard model's failure can only be exceeded by the false modern concept of light.

We live in a two bit universe. A left handed bit and a right handed bit. That's all that's needed. ADD that to the discreet intermittence emission of light, and we have a universe of perfection. No space-time needed.
 
Mar 4, 2020
498
70
1,780
This two bit theory of matter was the Zenith Theory of classical physics. And I'm sure you never heard of it. This model shows a physical model, of mass and matter. It shows a physical structure, a physical motion, and a mechanical explanation of how all the properties of matter are manufactured and what powers all the dynamics. And why all the properties are ratio-ed together.

Parson Magneton 1915

There are groups of scientists that study and update this model. And have found some very interesting possibilities that could answer many of today's mysteries.

For this universe to work so consistent, for so long, it has to be simple.
 
Nov 15, 2021
11
1
35
And please show me a gluon, you say it has the mass. What does mass look like? What is it made of? How are the quarks bonded together with the gluons? How many gluons are needed for that bond?
Let's try to verify the structure of a proton:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton#/media/File:Quark_structure_proton.svg
"The quark structure of the proton. There are two up quarks in it and one down quark. The strong force is mediated by gluons (wavey)."
Let's verify what is the meaning of gluons?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gluon
"A gluon (/ˈɡluːɒn/) is an elementary particle that acts as the exchange particle (or gauge boson) for the strong force between quarks. It is analogous to the exchange of photons in the electromagnetic force between two charged particles."
So strong force of the Gluon is analogous to the exchange of photons in the electromagnetic force between two charged particles.
Hence, the gluon is the Strong force of the nature that holds those three quarks.
This strong force is analogous to the electromagnetic force.
However, that gluons contributes 99% of the proton mass.
The total mass in three quarks is about 9 Mev/c^2.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/00/Standard_Model_of_Elementary_Particles.svg
However, the total mass of proton is 938 Mev/c^2.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton
"Mass: 938.27208816(29) MeV/c2[2]"
Hence, the mass contribution of the three quarks in a proton is 9/938 = 0.0095 while the contribution of gluons is 929/938 = 0.9905.

Therefore, proton mass is mainly due to Gluons energy.

That proton has electric charge:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elementary_charge
"The elementary charge, usually denoted by e or sometimes qe is the electric charge carried by a single proton"
Electromagnetism in the energy that carry electric charge.

In the following article we can see the animation of the gluon-field in the proton:
http://www.physics.adelaide.edu.au/theory/staff/leinweber/VisualQCD/Nobel/
The animations to the right and above illustrate the typical four-dimensional structure of gluon-field configurations averaged over in describing the vacuum properties of QCD.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_fluctuation#/media/File:Quantum_Fluctuations.gif
That filed is also called "quantum fluctuation":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_fluctuation
"In quantum physics, a quantum fluctuation (also known as a vacuum state fluctuation or vacuum fluctuation) is the temporary random change in the amount of energy in a point in space,[2] as prescribed by Werner Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. They are minute random fluctuations in the values of the fields which represent elementary particles, such as electric and magnetic fields which represent the electromagnetic"

Therefore, we can consider the proton as electromagnetic in a Box/cell
Or in other words - proton is a cell of EM energy and it get it mass mainly due to that EM energy.
Therefore, without EM energy there is no way to get the Gluons or create any proton.

Hence, if you wish to create a matter - you must have electromagnetic source.

Hence, all the regular matter in the entire Universe could be created ONLY by EM Power.
Without EM there is no Gluons, No electric and magnetic fields in proton and no Atom!!!
 
Last edited:
Nov 15, 2021
11
1
35
We live in a two bit universe.
There is no curvature in space.
Therefore there is no other Universe, no other space, No Multiverse and no any sort of other space-time layer.
We live in a single infinite Universe that its age is also infinite!

For this universe to work so consistent, for so long, it has to be simple
Our universe has to be simple
In order to get our wonderful universe by simple activity, all is needed is source of EM energy!
 
Last edited:
Jan 27, 2020
319
97
1,780
Dav Lev said: "Therefore, the shape of spiral galaxy can't be used as a prove for the dark matter." Also, see further below, the definition of Milgromian dynamics, which seeks to replace the ideas of dark matter and Newtonian mechanics in galactic rotation.

However, the OCTOBER 22, 2016 Blog from Harvard states: Galactic Rotation Curves Revisited: A Surprise for Dark Matter

Historically, galactic rotation curves have suggested that galaxies are surrounded by a vast amount of invisible matter, otherwise known as a dark matter halo. A few weeks ago, a team of astrophysicists published a result that completely contradicts these halo models and could even change the popular understanding of dark matter. The team found that galactic rotation curves can be calculated explicitly from a simple equation that only depends on the amount of visible matter in the galaxy. The exact implications of this finding are still unclear, but the authors do suggest a few possibilities.

flatrotationcurve- galactic.jpeg
A galactic rotation curve is the radial velocity of the stars, dust, and gas that make up a galaxy plotted as a function of their distance from the galaxy’s center. Based on visible matter alone, one would expect that stars closest to the center of the galaxy would move faster than the stars near the galaxy’s outer edge (dashed line). However, in most galaxies inner and outer stars move at roughly the same velocity (solid line). There is some additional gravitational pull on the outer stars that isn’t fully described by the amount of visible matter in a galaxy. Most scientists have interpreted these rotation curves to mean that galaxies are surrounded by a halo of invisible dark matter. Image obtained under Creative Commons License. Credit: Gemini Observatory

At first glance, the group’s result suggests one could successfully develop a model of galactic rotation curves by modifying gravity, rather than adding in dark matter. However, astrophysicists have made several other observations of the universe that imply modifying gravity isn’t the best way to successfully describe nature. Alternatively, this result could imply a surprising coupling between regular and dark matter, making the two types of matter more correlated than expected. If this scenario were the case, the next step would be to try and probe this coupling in other dark matter experiments.There is a great deal of excitement surrounding the announcement. It is rare in science to find such a simple equation, with no adjustable parameters that describe observed data. The finding also appears to apply to all spiral and irregular galaxies, regardless of shape or size. Such an elegant and universal relationship suggests a new discovery could be just around the corner.

Acknowledgements: Many thanks to Emma Tolley, a PhD graduate student in Physics. Emma is a member of the Harvard ATLAS group, and is currently searching for dark matter signatures at the LHC.

Managing Correspondent: Karri DiPetrillo

"Galactic rotation curves, the baryon-to-dark-halo-mass relation and space-time scale invariance"

by Xufen Wu, Pavel Kroupa
Low-acceleration space-time scale invariant dynamics (SID, Milgrom 2009a) predicts two fundamental correlations known from observational galactic dynamics: the baryonic Tully-Fisher relation (BTFR) and a correlation between the observed mass discrepancy and acceleration (MDA) in the low acceleration regime for disc galaxies. SID corresponds to the deep MOdified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND) limit. The MDA data emerging in cold/warm dark matter (C/WDM) cosmological simulations disagree significantly with the tight MDA correlation of the observed galaxies. Therefore, the most modern simulated disc galaxies, which are delicately selected to have a quiet merging history in a standard dark-matter-cosmological model, still do not represent the correct rotation curves. Also, the observed tight correlation contradicts the postulated stochastic formation of galaxies in low-mass DM halos. Moreover, we find that SID predicts a baryonic to apparent virial halo (dark matter) mass relation which agrees well with the correlation deduced observationally assuming Newtonian dynamics to be valid, while the baryonic to halo mass relation predicted from CDM models does not. The distribution of the observed ratios of dark-matter halo masses to baryonic masses may be empirical evidence for the external field effect, which is predicted in SID as a consequence of the forces acting between two galaxies depending on the position and mass of a third galaxy. Applying the external field effect, we predict the masses of galaxies in the proximity of the dwarf galaxies in the Miller et al. sample. Classical non-relativistic gravitational dynamics is thus best described as being Milgromian*, rather than Newtonian.
Milgromian dynamics MOND - Since its first formulation in 1983, Milgromian dynamics (MOND) has been very successful in predicting the gravitational potential of galaxies from the distribution of baryons alone, including general scaling relations and detailed rotation curves of large statistical samples of individual galaxies covering a large range of masses and sizes. Most predictions however rely on static models, and only a handful of N-body codes have been developed over the years to investigate the consequences of the Milgromian framework for the dynamics of complex evolving dynamical systems.
MOND is an alternative paradigm of dynamics, seeking to replace Newtonian dynamics and general relativity. It aims to account for the ubiquitous mass discrepancies in the Universe, without invoking the dark matter that is required if one adheres to standard dynamics.

MOND departs from standard dynamics at accelerations smaller than a0: a new constant with the dimensions of acceleration that MOND introduces into physics. Such accelerations characterize galactic systems and the Universe at large. The other central tenet of MOND is space-time scale-invariance of this low-acceleration limit. MOND has predicted many clear-cut laws of galactic dynamics (analogous to, and extending Kepler’s laws), most of which involve a0in different roles. In this way, MOND has unearthed a number of unsuspected laws of galactic dynamics, predicting them a priori, and leading to their subsequent tests and verification with data of ever increasing quality. One of these phenomenological laws is the baryonic Tully-Fisher relation, which is underlaid by the MOND mass-asymptotic-speed relation (MASR). This is a relation between the asymptotic rotational speed around a galaxy, V∞ (predicted by MOND to be constant), and the total (baryonic) mass, M, of the galaxy: V4∞=MGa0. Another prediction of MOND is a tight correlation between the observed mass discrepancy in galactic systems, and the accelerations in them. This predicted mass-discrepancy-acceleration relation (MDAR), aka radial acceleration relation (RAR), has also been confirmed by many subsequent analyses.

For galaxy clusters, MOND reduces greatly the observed mass discrepancy: from a factor of ∼10, required by standard dynamics, to a factor of about 2. But, this systematically remnant discrepancy is yet to be accounted for. It could be due to, e.g., the presence of some small fraction of the yet undetected, “missing baryons”, which are known to exist (unlike the bulk of the putative “dark matter”, which cannot be made of baryons).

MOND, as a set of new laws, affords new tools for astronomical measurements–such as of masses and distances of far away objects–in ways not afforded by standard dynamics.

For galaxy clusters, MOND reduces greatly the observed mass discrepancy: from a factor of ∼10, required by standard dynamics, to a factor of about 2. But, this systematically remnant discrepancy is yet to be accounted for. It could be due to, e.g., the presence of some small fraction of the yet undetected, “missing baryons”, which are known to exist (unlike the bulk of the putative “dark matter”, which cannot be made of baryons).

See: http://scholarpedia.org/article/The_MOND_paradigm_of_modified_dynamics

See: https://arxiv.org/abs/1410.2256

The Milky Way is our home galaxy, one of billions of known galaxies in the Universe. In addition to our Sun, the Milky Way contains around 400 billion other stars - that's about 57 stars for every human being alive on Earth today! Even though that sounds big, the Milky Way is actually thought to be an average-sized galaxy.

The Milky Way is currently understood to be a barred spiral galaxy (Hubble type SBbc) that is 100,000 light-years across - that is, it takes 100,000 years for light (the fastest thing known to exist) to travel from one end of the Milky Way to the other. For comparison, light takes 8 minutes to get from the Sun to the Earth. While the light-year is a physically useful unit, astronomers tend to use "parsecs" when measuring distances. A parsec (short for "parallax-second") is 3.26 light-years, and is related to one of the most precise methods of determining distances to other stars ("parallax"). In Galactic astronomy, we work with truly astronomical distances, as so we use "kiloparsecs" (kpc), or thousands of parsecs, as our distance units. The radius of the Milky Way, then, is 15 kpc, with our Sun being 8 kpc from the center of the galaxy.

The modern view of the Milky Way galaxy contains four major components: The disk, bulge, stellar halo, and dark matter halo:

MW_cartoon.milky way.png

The disk is the most obvious component of the galaxy, and is considered to consist of two parts: the thin disk and the thick disk. The thin disk is about 0.3 kpc thick and contains almost all of the dust, gas, and young stars (including the Sun) in our Galaxy. The thick disk is about 1 kpc thick, and marks the thickness where star densities drop dramatically.

The bulge lies at the center of the disk, has a radius of only a few kpc, and contains both old and young stars. Recently, it was determined that the bulge contains a prominent bar. Additionally, a super massive black hole resides at the center of the galaxy - with a mass equal to that of 4 million Suns!

The stellar halo is a nearly spherical spheroid of stars that surrounds the entire galaxy. The density of stars in the halo is very low compared to densities found in the disk, and the majority of halo stars are found within 30 kpc of the galactic center. The stellar halo is the focus of Milkyway@home.

The dark matter halo is the most mysterious of all the galactic components. Information from galactic rotation curves, galaxy collisions, and dark matter simulations all strongly indicate that there is a large amount of invisible mass surrounding every galaxy. Modern astronomers hope to gain clues about the shape and composition of the dark matter halo from structures in the disk and stellar halo.

Dark Matter is the mass that is needed to make up for the unseen mass in physical observations. Although other solutions to these discrepancies have been proposed, such as modifications to Newton's and/or Einstein's theories of gravitation, dark matter is the only solution that describes all of the observed scientific anomalies simultaneously. Therefore, understanding dark matter is currently one of the major goals of science.

To understand what "dark" matter is, we need to understand "light" matter (the stuff we are used to). "Light" matter is made of baryons, which are particles that are made of quarks. The most important consequence of baryons being built of quarks is that they interact electromagnetically. This means that light, which is an electromagnetic wave, can interact with baryons. Light waves have a large variety of wavelengths that make up the electromagnetic spectrum (See Figure, from Wikipedia). Depending on how the baryons are arranged, baryonic matter will absorb, reflect, or emit certain wavelengths of light. In fact, all baryonic matter will emit some wavelengths of light based on its temperature - stars, for example, are very hot, and so they can emit visible light. The higher an object's temperature, the shorter the wavelengths that can be emitted. Therefore, all baryonic matter "glows" at certain wavelengths (including humans! We glow in the infrared).

Dark matter is different. Dark matter does not emit light at any wavelength. Dark matter does not absorb light, and it doesn't reflect it, either. Dark matter, then, does not interact electromagnetically at all. This is why it is "dark:" light waves can never even know it's there.

Since dark matter doesn't interact with light, the only way that we can currently study it is through gravity. By studying the distribution of baryonic matter (stars and gas) in the Milky Way, we will gain insight into the arrangement and composition of dark matter. Milkyway@home furthers this goal by studying stars in the stellar halo, using data from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey.

Astronomers seek to understand the Galactic potential of the Milky Way, which is a measure of how the Milky Way's gravity affects other objects, and therefore, a measure of the distribution of mass (matter) in the galaxy. If we can compare the galactic potential to the potential of the known (baryonic) matter, we can then determine the potential of the dark matter - which will tell us how dark matter is distributed in the Milky Way.

Astronomers use the physics of gravity to determine the potential of the Galaxy. In a simple analogy, let's look at how someone would go about investigating the potential of our sun. The Sun is massive and spherical, and so its potential will be simple - 'spherically symmetric,' in physics lingo. The measured strength of this spherically symmetric potential depends only on the mass of the Sun, and the distance that you are away from it.

The spherically symmetric gravitational potential of the Sun leads to Kepler's Law. If we plot the velocity (or orbital speed) of planets orbiting the Sun versus their radius (or orbital distance) from the Sun, we get the rotation curve of the Solar System. For a system obeying Kepler's Law, such as the Solar System, a clearly "falling" (decreasing with distance) rotation curve is observed:

ss_rotation_curve.png
Source: Matthew Newby, Milkyway@home

A Galaxy is a bit more complicated. Since there's not just one big mass at the center, the rotation curve should look different then that of the Solar System. When astronomers add up all of the light from stars in a Galaxy (even other Galaxies), we find that most of the light comes from near the center, with the amount of light decreasing with distance from the center. From this "light curve," we can calculate the distribution of light matter, which lets us calculate what the rotation curve of a Galaxy should look like. What we find is that the curve should fall with distance - but when astronomers actually measure the rotation curve of the Milky Way (and other Galaxies), we find that it is almost flat, and not falling much at all!

gal_rotation_curve.png
Source: Matthew Newby, Milkyway@home

The rotation problem actually goes back to the 1930's, with an astronomer named Fritz Zwicky. Zwicky measured the velocities of galaxies rotating around a galaxy cluster, and concluded that there was "missing mass" that wasn't being seen in the cluster. In the 1970's, astronomer Vera Rubin measured the rotation curves of other Galaxies, and showed definitively that there is, indeed, more mass in each galaxy than can be seen.

So, how do we find this dark matter? Our best bet seems to be gravity. Using gravitational lensing, or the fact that dense pockets of matter can cause the path of light to warp around them, astronomers can actually map dark matter within very dense galaxy clusters, such as the Abell Cluster:

opo1407b.abell.jpeg
Abell galaxy cluster, Hubble ST

See: https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2016/galactic-rotation-curves-revisited-surprise-dark-matter/

G.O. Ludwig, in his 23 February 2021 paper "Galactic rotation curve and dark matter according to gravitomagnetism", explains:

The existence of dark matter has been postulated to resolve discrepancies between astrophysical observations and accepted theories of gravity. In particular, the measured rotation curve of galaxies provided much experimental support to the dark matter concept. However, most theories used to explain the rotation curve have been restricted to the Newtonian potential framework, disregarding the general relativistic corrections associated with mass currents.

On the other hand, the gravitomagnetic field produced by the currents modifies the galactic rotation curve, notably at large distances. The coupling between the Newtonian potential and the gravitomagnetic flux function results in a nonlinear differential equation that relates the rotation velocity to the mass density. The solution of this equation reproduces the galactic rotation curve without recourse to obscure dark matter components, as exemplified by three characteristic cases. A bi-dimensional model is developed that allows to estimate the total mass, the central mass density, and the overall shape of the galaxies, while fitting the measured luminosity and rotation curves. The effects attributed to dark matter can be simply explained by the gravitomagnetic field produced by the mass currents.

Using different assumptions for the mass distribution and possible combinations of spheroids and disks, the above theoretical models failed to convincingly reproduce the observed flat rotation curves. The discrepancy between models and observations was more evident in the measurements of the rotation curve using the Doppler shifted 21 cm neutral hydrogen line (HI) outside the galactic central portion. Most of the visible mass is located in this central region. The only way to eliminate the discrepancy using the existent models was by the introduction of a halo of non-observable matter (dark matter) concentrated in the outer region of spiral galaxies. The role of this dark matter component was detailed by van Albada et al. using improved HI data obtained by Begeman for the extended rotation curve of NGC 3198. The main conclusion was that “the amount of dark matter inside the last point of the rotation curve, at 30 kpc, is at least 4 times larger than the amount of visible matter”. Subsequently, the methods of analysis became more sophisticated, but invariably introducing the dark matter component as detailed, for example, by Sofue et al. , Eadie and Harris, Sofue and so many others. A detailed presentation of gravitational potential theory applied to several geometrical configurations of a large collection of stars, including the dark halo contribution, can be found in the book by Binney and Tremaine. More recent models were advanced by Cooperstock and Tieu, Balasin and Grumiller, and Crosta et al., considering general relativistic effects to describe the galactic dynamics. The relation between these papers and the present one is discussed later in this Introduction.

The motion of either stars or dust particles in a galaxy is determined by the gravitational interaction between masses only. The galactic system formed by a very large number of stars plus the surrounding gas can be approximated by a continuous mass distribution. This continuous fluid is essentially collisionless since binary encounters between stars are very rare (although long range encounters between passing stars determine the evolution of the system towards thermodynamic equilibrium on a very long time scale). Without binary encounters the interaction is described by collective Vlasov fields. Assuming steady-state the basic assumptions are established to describe the distributions of matter and of fluid velocity in a typical galaxy.

The balance between gravitoelectric, centrifugal, and gravitomagnetic forces in the moving fluid defines the mass distribution and affects the shape of the galactic disk. The actual shape is determined by the boundary condition matching the gravitoelectric potential and its gradient at the fluid-vacuum interface. Inside the dust equilibrium the gravitomagnetic field provides rotational flow in the absence of viscous forces. The Cauchy invariant demonstrates how the flow vorticity, gravitomagnetic field and mass density should distribute inside the galactic dust configuration during the time evolution.

The coupling between the gravitoelectric Newtonian potential and the gravitomagnetic flux function leads to a nonlinear relation between the rotation velocity and the mass density. The rotation velocity along the equatorial plane is governed by an Abel equation of the second kind, which reproduces the observations. Near the origin, where the gravitational field did not build up yet, the rotation curve shows a linear rise. Farther away from the origin the rotation speed shows a transition to a nearly constant value. At large distances the gravitomagnetic field is sufficiently intense to balance the decaying gravitational and centrifugal forces. Although the relativistic effects are weak (with a beta ratio of the order of 1/2000), the nonlinear coupling provides the mechanism that drives the transition in the rotation profile. This is similar to a soft phase transition, driven by weak perturbations, between asymptotic states. This transition between states should occur during the initial stages of formation of the galaxy, when the density rises at the origin and the potential well deepens. Near equilibrium the galaxy has been squeezed to its nearly disk-like shape bulging at the origin. This time evolution is a complex problem that requires much further study.

The galactic rotation curves were reproduced simply including the relativistic effects described by the gravitomagnetic field, without obscure dark matter components. The widely used one-dimensional circular-velocity thin disk model is clearly inadequate to find the galactic mass distribution. Possibly all calculations performed up-to-date using the thin disk circular velocity model must be reexamined, and the dark matter concept questioned, at least concerning the galactic rotation curves.

See: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-08967-3

It is interesting to view Newtonian mechanics, dark matter theories, and Milgomian dynamics as they explain the velocity of stars at given distances from the galactic center. The work of Vera Rubin first began to show the inability of Newtonian mechanics to explain the discrepancy between them and the actually observed stellar veloceties, which gave rise to dark matter theories. Of late, Prof. Mordehai Milgrom of the Weizmann Institute of Science in Israel has postulated a new set of gravitomagnetics to explain Rubin's work rather than dark matter.
Hartmann352
 
Mar 4, 2020
498
70
1,780
The Parson Magneton shows why modern science mistakenly believes the electrons orbit(or are on the outside of an atom) the nucleus of the atom. And why the Heisenberg principle is completely false. The position and momentum of a particle is strictly set and controlled in an atom. And why the right handed bit has the "mass" of the universe. It shows how neutrons are built by Sol and why they are necessary for atoms larger than H2 can exist.

It also explains where anti-matter comes from. And how to easily make some.

But by far, the most important dynamic is exposes is emission. Man's understanding of light and emission is completely wrong, and has led to some incredible cartoon theories.

Light is not a wave and it does not have a constant velocity. The RELATIVE velocity of light can be measured, once you understand what is is.

But this space-time dogma is so well ingrained, science won't except an experiment to disprove it.

The people that re-studied and updated this theory are the same people who were trying to stir plasma in a toroid pot about 20 years ago. QM and the Standard model was a complete failure in this endeavor. And once they simulated this classical model, the left the space-time click, and pursued this model, for the explanations it was providing. Which is much more important than fission.

Matter-anti-matter reaction is the way for clean cheap inexhaustible energy production.
 
Apr 7, 2022
5
0
30
Sorry, you miss the key issue.
How those stars have got their ultra high momentum/velocity at the first place?
Please be aware that those stars were orbiting at the galactic disc around the center at relatively low velocity/momentum (Similar to the Sun orbital velocity/momentum).
At some point they get ultra high boost that kick them out from the galactic disc at Ultra high velocity/momentum.
So the question is:
How could it be that a star with law velocity/momentum which orbits at the galactic disc (while it is assumed to be under the gravity force of the dark matter) would suddenly get so strong boost that would overcome the dark matter gravity and kick it out at that ultra high velocity/momentum.

What is the source of that boost which is needed to overcome the Dark matter gravity?
I’m sure that you already know that the high velocity stars were part of a binary or trinity star system. When one of these systems approaches Sagittarius A star, it rips the system apart and can sling shot one or all of these stars out of the galaxy, at high enough velocity to escape the extreme gravity of dark matter. Dark matter could be extreme gravity ribbons and form galaxies when it whirlpool, similar to a liquid.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY