I have long found, I get as much understanding out of reading many of the comments, as I do from the lecture itself. The questions raised are answered by other watchers, or the presenter, and they typically are questions beyond and outside of the direct aspects of the lecture. This is certainly true regarding this lecture. Thanks!
The missing mass is dilated mass. We have all heard the phrase "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light" this phenomenon is illustrated in a common relativity graph with velocity (from stationary to the speed of light) on the horizontal line and dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) on the vertical line. Mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside/stationary/Earthbound observer. Wherever you have an astronomical quantity of mass, dilation will occur because high mass means high momentum. There is no place in the universe where mass is more concentrated than at the center of a galaxy. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" Einstein wrote about dilation occurring in regions that would have less mass than that which would exist at the center of common spiral galaxies. Therefore it is safe to say that according to Einstein's math the mass at the center of our own galaxy must be dilated, in other words that mass is all around us. It was recently discovered that low mass galaxies (like NGC 1052-DF2) have normal star rotation rates. This is what relativity would predict because there is an insufficient quantity of mass at the center to achieve relativistic velocities. A simple way to confirm this would be to calculate the star rotation rates of a large number of galaxies. This would show that all the high mass galaxies would have star rotation rates that seem to defy the known laws of physics and all the low mass galaxies would have predictable star rotation rates.
"We know dark matter exists by the way the universe is shaped." ...Which we don't actually KNOW at all, but have calculated mathematically and also built a whole mathematical framework to support, and if that's wrong, well, we know nothing. We made our equations agree with each other and input variables we can't explain to make them come out right. Proof! Great science there.
All observations over long distances indicate that gravity works according to general relativity. There is plenty of "invisible magic stuff" in the universe. We call it neutrinos. Please learn some physics, kid. ;-)
if the expansion of the galaxy is counteracted by gravity, so we're not getting bigger, what would happen if you were just floating between galaxies? would you expand?
This picture seems to suggest that matter is reducing over time (into black holes) and the vacuum energy or the space between matter and things is expanding - the less matter of both kinds, the bigger the vacuum thus increasing that vacuum energy and the expansion
Gravity Defined: Gravity can be defined as the Electromagnetic force that matter excerpts on the Universe, on Dark energy, that causes a "Dark Energy Field Effect" or "Gravity"
Once two galaxies' Halo's have significantly begun to merge what is the probability that the two galaxies' will fully merge? Is the bullet cluster going to regroup into the dark matter or will a significant portion of each galaxy continue on and escape the dark matter in the middle?
"Information is information, not matter or energy. No materialism, which does not admit this, can survive at the present day" by Norbert Wiener, the Father of Cybernetics. If physics wish to survive, than have to recognize the same ontological status of Information, Matter and Energy. That is a key for paving the way to new physics. Because of the fact that physics treats the information as just an artifact of interaction of matter and energy, even at quantum level - no way to detect Dark Matter. Physics should embrace the idea that information can play also a cause role, not only as an effect's one. Thanks for nice and instrumental talk - very interesting.
Humanity needs a major breakthrough in particle / Quantum physics. I know it is a marathon, not entirely under control...but without a major breakthrough, the knowledge and this branch of science are becoming stagnant. To be clear, I am not undermining the objectives of countless physicists, and scientists working in the field. I hope we find a major breakthrough soon.
several breakthrough happened years ago....thats not the issue ....the issue is governments label them disruptive technologies and quash them ...dont be so naive
Whilst true that most of this is already available in many other lectures with the only addition being some unique speculation by the speaker we should see it as a good thing! Keeping it in the mouths of the scientific community keeps the research alive!
Dark matter is a hypothesis which allows a mathematical description of "local" anomalies in the fabric of space-time. Dark energy allows a description of the observed anomaly of accelerating cosmic expansion. Both hypotheses require a total of 20 times more stuff than the observable universe to fudge a correspondence between observation and theory. New physics is needed, but I don't know what it would look like.
Imagine radiation never ever expiring. That light, whether you think it's a particle or not just goes on forever even if the source is kaput. Pretty hard to believe. But radiation finally expiring isn't so hard to believe. Then believing dark matter is expired radiation is easy to believe.
Over-Unity of energy is the only solution to every observation, from the beginning of time till now with distant galaxies receding away from us faster than light in every direction. I came up with a slow acceleration that occurs only to stars and galaxies over time because they radiate million mi/h solar winds full of hot, charged particles at a constant while spinning like a top. It's a slow 1 mi/h (1.609 km/h increase in velocity every 10,000 years.
@@sclogse1 expired "light" would simply be the Aether since "light" is the aether moving in a way we can perceive and measure but at least for now we can never measure the "super fluid" aether...we only perceive it once it hits certain vibrational frequencies seems dark matter/energy is just another way for main stream science to further itself about from aether
Just throwing out an idea here: we're told that large bodies create gravity by 'bending' space-time, like a bowling ball on rubber sheet, to use a common analogy. Maybe the reason the galaxies spin the way they do is because, instead of bending, the fabric of space-time itself is spinning like an enormous disc, carrying the stars and galaxy with it. That's why they all move at the same speed. I fully expect any half-way competent astrophysicist to explain why I'm wrong. I'd appreciate the lesson.
Could anyone enlighten me, “ghost” particles are emitted from all stars, and the shear numbers emitted are beyond comprehension, where do these particles end up in the fabric of space, one assume’s that these tiny neutrinos have mass so given their numbers over time will cause gravitational effects, since the birth of the very first stars the number of neutrino’s must be colossal plus I wonder if neutrino’s are recycled in any way or do they simply exist as massive ash heaps (so to speak) between the stars and the galaxies.
I ain't a scientist and was looking for something more on black matter but came across this. I found it interesting and thanks for the video. Merry Christmas from Canada
Last years Nobel prize in physics was won by three physicists who proved that quantum entanglement effects are instant or faster than light across vast distances meaning it’s possible that aliens are communicating with quantum entanglement which possibly has the added advantage/disadvantage that not only will the receiver know the question before he’s received the question but the transmitter will know the answer before he’s sent the question.
False sending information through an entangled pair of particles is not possible as this would break causality. As we have no way to know if our particle will be the spin-up or spin-down , and we have no control over the collapse, it is not possible to send information through the collapse of the function. Once the function has collapsed, the quantum entangled state will be gone. What they proved was that our Universe is not locally real, which has to do with entanglement, but this is still not a way to brake causality.
General relativity is wrong, special relativity is correct. General relativity says it takes time for light to travel, hence a light year is the distance it takes ight to travel in one year. But that is not completely true under certain conditions. Like according to James Maxwell's equations on EM fields, when the observer or telescope is contained inside the EM field they are measuring, light information takes zero time to travel any distance. It brought on quantum entanglement's spooky action at a distance idea and the Einstein Rosen-bridge postulate about wormholes. General relativity says light takes time to travel. Quantum mechanics was right, general relativity was shown to be wrong. But like I said, only under certain conditions, like when the observer or telescope is contained inside the EM field they are measuring. Light information then happens instantly at any distance. According to Maxwell when the observer is contained inside the EM field being measured light has an infinite velocity. It's what sparked the EPR thought experiment into being called the EPR Paradox. It also sparked the Copenhagen Interpretation in quantum mechanics.
Coming at this as a layperson, I find it fascinating that the fact dark matter forms a halo suggests it acts like a field; perhaps even the "donut," if you will, to the "donuthole" of the galactic matter that the former flattens or locks together gravitationally. I often wonder if the supermassive and other black holes might create this halo by some quantum or other effect. Questions I have include: How are we sure dark matter is even present WITHIN our galaxy? Do we see absolutely NO hesitation before galaxies collide that might reveal dark matter? If not for dark matter, would stars near the edge of galaxies simply fly away moving at 220km/s? And would the universe then be more uniform (chaotic) with rogue stars and planets? What part of a spiral galaxy still remain in that case? About a half? A third? 3/4?
We always see the graphics of mass warping a space time grid. What if when extremely massive objects (galaxies, black holes, etc) warp space time, it doesn’t just pop back to “neutral” when they move on? If it left a trail, something like a ditch on the space time grid graphic, wouldn’t gravitational effects still be observed? I don’t even know if this makes sense mathematically, I just like to brainstorm.
It would be exremley interesting if it is a text in english languagae to the video. I am swedish and understand much better written english than a lot of strange dialects!
Once it became a business, all those scientists take the billions of funding. Besides, you must not by the book he presents, I can give you the answer to the title right now: we don’t know. The ideas and formulas developed by Nassim Haramein make far more sense without violating ART and QED but don’t need abstract constructs like dark matter or dark energy.
@@rolandrick It's pretty ironic you're criticizing this guy on a subject you obviously know nothing about by saying he's doing it to get rich...and then advocate for a snake oil salesman who started his own vanity project "foundation" to take money from rubes by telling them that he's the only honest one and everyone ELSE is just trying to take their money for vanity projects. Yeah, it's the peer-reviewed science that we should be more suspicious of, rather than the one guy and lady who can't get anyone with a shred of respectability to vouch for their work.
You don't know dark matter exists because of the way things are shaped in our universe, you know there is an extra gravitational effect, you then make a rational presupposition (the bane of Science), & conclude it's because of some type of extra matter, I've come up with five hypotheses that don't require it, relative mass caused by dark energy, probability mass of the quantum wave-functions, nested gravity wells or contextual gravity, ambient mass of the photonic & phononic energy coming into our Galaxy from outside of it & curvature differentials between the negatively curved galactic space-time & the positively curved intergalactic space-time, it's tufted space-time.
At 3:16 Dr.Fisher refers to the expansion of the universe as acceleration, several times,which took me a while to tease out what he was actually saying. Kind of cast a pall over the rest of the lecture
I do not understand the thought that "we know dark matter exists". We know that there are some gravitational anomalies around and within normal matter bodies in space. Whether this is matter or not doesn´t seem to be proved as far as I know. Please explain.
Seems no surprise that the past is getting further away faster in order to prevent time travel and all the complex paradoxes that would create. It's a natural barrier to stop us screwing with the past.
Perhaps because we cannot still quantify dark matter with the standard model, we may have to find another field of matter in the space/time metric from which we can propose a dark matter particle related to but not included in the standard model. Just a thought.
so at first you said there are no working Models for Dark Matter with Quantum physics. okay.... later on you explained how dark matter and quantum Mechanics made the Temperature difference in the CMB. How can you guys know if there are no Working Theories?? it always gets me I'm alone?
The structure of the CMB is a classical effect. The only way to get it down to the quantum level is with inflation, which has absolutely nothing to do with dark matter. If anything, that would be a dark energy related dynamic.
@@schmetterling4477 listen to 15:50 till 16:07. I don't know if you even watched his video. He literally said "its because of the Quantum Mechanical uncertainty of Dark Matter." get some education first before you are trying to say something Intelligent. The Early Universe was Dark Matter dominated. Dark Energy dominance began way after. it was literally his first slide dude.
@@koilerREC I don't need to watch these videos, kid. I am a physics PhD who used to work in high energy physics. Dude, you simply don't know what you are talking about and that's that. ;-)
@@schmetterling4477 what an absolute disrespectful guy. Calling somebody something without having any background really shows your Physics degree buddy. just another troll yikes...
@@koilerREC I don't owe you respect, buddy. I owed you the taxpayer dollars that paid for your K-12. That you didn't use them wisely is none of my problem. Are we cool now or do you need another dressing down? ;-)
Given there is no wiki page about him, I don't think his findings are very significant. All I can find about him is awards and that he has among other things an interest in dark matter.
It seems at times as though "dark energy" is simply code for the mystery of how space itself expands. Space grows and is warped by mass. Space is rather more "thing like" than one would ever have guessed.
Let's put it another way. Dark Energy is EQUAL to Regular Energy PLUS time being, for our purposes here, "heavy time." Mira, look, we're looking at any form of energy "vibrate, rotate," whatever you want to call it. We see this electron revolve 1000 times a minute. We set that as our base or 0 reading. But in this pocket of dark energy we get readings a billion times a minute. Or after you convert it back to our time it becomes readings of energy where there shouldn't be. That's because in that same minute that atom aged a million times faster and therefore has given off readings of a billion instead of 1000. Or energy from somewhere that should not be giving off any readings. It's TIME that brings it all together or in this case tears us apart. Maybe. Numbers used for reference only. TI-I-I-IME IS ON MY SIDE! YES, IT IS! it would also track that dark matter, as it attracts, then being in pockets of "Light Time." Mira, look, if heavy time is "full" then light time is "starving." In this case "starving" is the same as creating a vacuum for time. Since everything outside this pocket of dark matter is in a "heavier time," it makes it appear dark matter is attracting when really it's just a vacuum trying to equalize. Making it stand to reason, by very simplified reasoning, that Dark Matter is EQUAL to Regular Matter PLUS "Light Time." Maybe.
Working on the fundamental question how universe is created and is working since its creation is a tribute man pays for immense favours showered on him by the creator. I salute you and the people like you who selflessly spend their days and nights hunting for truth. Thank you very much sir.
I would like to have a final answer. Imagine you've been investigating this your whole life, and you've always been wrong. I wouldn't thank him for that.
A fascinating talk - thank you. As dark matter is proving so elusive, is the notion of Modified Newtonian Dynamics - MOND- becoming a viable option? And as an aside, is the model ship behind you the Titanic? Lets hope the standard model proves more unsinkable !
Of course modified theories of gravity are always an option. Why wouldn't they be? The problem is that in terms of fitting the available data they aren't very good, either.
Existential Physics: Do all galaxies eventually collapse in upon themselves? Modern science claims that 'gravity' is matter bending the fabric of spacetime. There is a lot of matter in a galaxy which would make a huge dent in spacetime. How could galaxies not eventually collapse in upon themselves if spacetime were bent to make it so? (Or is modern science wrong about 'gravity', 'space', and/or 'time'?)
We know a huge amount about what dark matter does and where it is, and a great deal about what it isn't, but its microscopic properties are a complete mystery! If you're a physicist these days, then this is reason to be both frustrated (because of the lack of positive data) and creative (since there is a great deal of freedom to theorize). It's an interesting time
I saw something about interesting effects of dark matter shown by galactic collisions. It behaves differently from the known matter which passed through .. so it's interesting
@@Reptex_cs We know it does not interact electromagnetically or (probably) via the weak force. We know it is stable. We know it is cold, therefore likely to be massive. We know it can't be any of the particles we know about.
Based on our limited knowledge of this subject, is it possible that the "Stuff we know about" and dark matter is 50/50 with dark energy? Entangled pairs could be split into matter and energy.
Missing mass? Something that should be there but can not be uncovered? What changes if the speed of light is not a constant? Can you really age the universe by Doppler shift of light? Of course there are things we can not see, consistent in our reality; The air we breathe, the forces of gravity, magnetism, electricity, and more. Physics is the study of properties of matter. Can we uncover dark properties of our universe?
Three scientific lines without dark substances - 1. "First test of Verlinde's theory of Emergent Gravity using Weak Gravitational Lensing measurements" "Understanding galaxy rotation curves with Verlinde's emergent gravity" 2. "Testing the Strong Equivalence Principle: Detection of the External Field Effect in Rotationally Supported Galaxies" 3. "Galactic rotation curve and dark matter according to gravitomagnetism"
when they realise that they have got the calculations for gravity wrong , quantum standard model does not contain a parameter for gravity , so if what is more likely , a mysterious substance we cannot see touch detect or reflect light , or something we know is there but is not on the standard model , IE GRAVITY
The particle mass seems to be a mathematical solution for something like Andromeda data, but they never give the math of the first 500M years and galaxy formation from maybe a sphere 100 time the galaxies eventual size with very very weak initial gravitational attraction. You turn on a switch and the dark matter makes a quick trip 100 times the size of the galaxy in 500M years, then the switch is turned off and parks in position to make the Andromeda calculations work for the next 5, 10, 100 billion years with maybe a massive black hole pulling on it at a much closer distance than that original 300M years. It doesn't make sense that it would move so fast to a very weak gravitational force and sit in some theoretical perfect position thereafter.
I like his point on the time between Newton and Einstein .... Don't expect any new events here on this subject till another real genius is on the scene.
Occam's razor I think we are just wrong about the masslessness of photons and we are trying to find the mass of a spec of dust on a home bathroom scale we need too a better tool before we can find is tiny tiny tiny mass. Super ironic name for it if true
Just forgot to mention Neutrinos. They according to our ability to measure, have infinite speed, no mass no charge. Could it be, that we are not yet in the higher orbit of clear thinking. Would Tesla double coil help, by slowing neutrinos down and give them charge, so Power is in abundance. Am I talking to much?
I think dark matter is Like ordinary matter but its existing in the dimensions WE dont see...IT can interact with matter in our 3d world though. U see, so easy IT is 😊
If dark matter can polarize light through gravity, then could our sun's light that reaches earth be effected by having different polarization, would the earth heat up or cool down? I know someone did a study on solar panels about using polarized light .
I greatly enjoyed your descriptions of your work. This dark matter and energy stuff - well - I think we need to remain skeptical. Last year I read an article by an E. European scientist who claims dark matter clearly doesn't exist. For dark matter, he argues, to "work" - to explain galactic rotation - it has to be a sort of donut structure outside our galaxy. But, this scientist maintains, almost everyone in physics ignores the obvious problem, that small galaxies or clusters orbit galaxies where this donut of dark matter is supposed to be. And these small galaxies or clusters are NOT impacted by this supposed dark matter. So dark matter can't exist. Well, that's one argument. MOND is looking better and better. There is a great chance that Dark Matter isn't real - doesn't exist. Dark Energy may also not exist. The universe may not be expanding in an accelerated sense. The so-called acceleration we seem to detect may be related to the idea that "uniformity" or "sameness" - that our assumptions about how this works in space were wrong. That you need a much, much bigger region of space before uniformity is real. We have detected structures that definitely throw off our old data, which was used to guesstimate uniformity of space. If space is not uniform at the vast region we thought it was, then some of the galactic redshif/blueshift we detect may be caused by something much simpler than "dark energy". Dark energy - and acceleration of expansion - may very well be myths/errors. There is a prominent physicist at Oxford, iirc, advocating what I'm saying."" Super symmetry has suffered a number of serious disappointments in the past 10 or so years. I don't want to sound disrespectful, but Dark Energy and Dark Matter are under serious attack in academia. There are strong reasons to believe these are flawed theories.
On my astronomy exam was a multiple choice question, What is dark matter. I picked invisible particles with heavy gravitational mass [or some such] and got marked wrong. Correct answer was, We have no idea. I like that.
@@annprehn Dark matter is nothing more than an Accelerated Propulsion that only occurs to stars and galaxies, at a rate of 0.0000002007 in/s (0.000000509778 cm/s). This acceleration is way too small to be measured directly. It can only be measured over a span of around 1 million years. In 1 million years the star or galaxy would have gained an extra 100 mi/h or 160.9 km/h in it's velocity. The older the star or galaxy is, the more motion they will have gained. This acceleration is the same for all stars and galaxies, regardless of their mass or missing mass. There is no missing mass or missing energy in the universe. Have you ever measured the ratio between the age and velocity of stars and galaxies? It's the same for every star and galaxy in the universe. Dark matter and dark energy is not causing it. One single action is causing it all, gravity, dark matter, dark energy and even the high velocity dispersion of matter in galaxies. One action explains it all.
The problem of modern physics is they're trying to explain everything with particle physics and the physics is being cornered more and more to the dead end. To escape the dead end, they invent or design another imaginary particle in vain instead of trying to revise their way to approach to the problem. I agree to that idea that the interaction between mass and space must be explained with quantum mechanics. But that doesn't mean gravity is the QM phenomena. That's because gravity is not a force. Gravity is just a joint effect of the expansion of the Universe and the curvature of spacetime. Details are given below. Alternative Explanation of Dark Matter and Dark Energy - Newly proposed model of Universe can explain both of Dark Matter and Dark Energy Einstein’s theory of General Relativity states that spacetime is curved by the presence of mass. This curvature influences the motion other objects with mass and gives rise to gravitation. Thus, gravity is a result of geometric features in spacetime. However, we also observe gravitational effects - curvature of spacetime - in areas without any detectable mass. This has given rise to the concept of dark matter, which is matter that does not interact in any detectable way with normal matter, except through gravity. So, there is some large quantity of dark matter scattered throughout the universe, which curves spacetime and causes gravitational effects just like normal matter, but we cannot see or detect it with any known method. An alternative theory to the identity of dark matter is proposed - it is not matter at all, but rather an intrinsic curvature of spacetime. In other words, spacetime is not naturally flat. Even in the absence of matter, we observe some inherent curvature of spacetime. So, the question is now - why is spacetime naturally curved? Why is it not flat in the absence of mass? The universe is 4-dimensional, with 3 spatial dimensions and one dimension in time. Rather than consider time as a linear dimension, we can consider it as a radial one. Therefore, rather than describing the universe with a Cartesian coordinate system, we describe it with a 4-dimensional spherical coordinate system - 3 angular coordinates, φ1, φ2, φ3, and one radial coordinate in time, t. We live on the 3-dimensional surface of a 4-dimensional bubble which is expanding radially in time. Thus, the Big Bang represents t=0, the beginning of time. The crucial point is that the expansion of the universe is not homogeneous in all directions. The expansion rate at one point on the bubble’s surface may differ slightly from another point near it. The universe is only roughly spherical in 4 dimensions, the same way that the Earth is only roughly spherical in 3 dimensions. The same way we observe local mountains and valleys on the surface of Earth, we observe local “mountains” and “valleys” on the surface of the universe bubble. The inhomogeneity of the expansion of the universe has given rise to natural curvature of spacetime. This natural curvature causes the phenomenon of “dark matter”. “Valleys” in spacetime pull matter in, similarly to the warping of spacetime of massive objects. So “dark matter” is really “valleys” in spacetime that are expanding slower than the regions surrounding it. These valleys tend to pull matter in and create planets, stars, and galaxies - regions of space with higher-than-average densities of mass. Conversely, “mountains” in spacetime will repel matter away, an “anti-gravitational” effect, which gives rise to cosmic voids in space where we observe no matter. Each point on the surface of the universe bubble traces out a time arrow in 4-dimensional space, perpendicular to the surface. These time arrows are not parallel to each other since the universe is not flat. This causes points to have nonzero relative velocity away from each other. It is generally accepted that the universe is expanding faster than observable energy can explain, and this is expansion is believe to be still accelerating. The “missing” energy required to explain these observations has given rise to the theory of dark energy. The time dilation caused by non-parallel time arrows can be proposed as an explanation for dark energy. Alternatively, dark energy is real energy coming from potential energy gradients caused by non-parallel time arrows. As a sanity check, we can calculate the expansion rate of the universe based on the universe bubble model. Since the radius of the universe bubble is expanding at the speed of light in the time direction, it increases at 1 light second per second. Therefore, the “circumference” of the 3-dimensional surface increases by 2π light seconds per second, or about 1.88*10^6 km/s. This expansion is distributed equally across the 3-dimensional surface, so the actual observed expansion rate is proportional to the distance from the observer. At present, the age of the universe is estimated to be 13.8 billion years, so the radius of the universe bubble is 13.8 billion light years, or about 4233 megaparsecs (3.26 million light years to 1 Mpc). Thus, we can calculate the expansion rate of the universe, per megaparsec from the observer, as: Expansion rate = ((d(circumference))/dt)/radiusofuniverse=(1.88*〖10〗^6 km⁄s)/(2π*4233Mpc)=(1.88*〖10〗^6 km⁄s)/26598Mpc=70.82(km⁄s)/Mpc The popularly accepted empirical expansion rate is 73.5 + 2.5 km/s/Mpc, so our calculated value is close. There may be some additional source of expansion (or observed red shift) to make up for the discrepancy. For example, if two adjacent points have some gravitational gradient due to non-parallel time arrows, then light passing through these points will be red-shifted. - Cited from www.academia.edu/82481487/Title_Alternative_Explanation_of_Dark_Matter_and_Dark_Energy
I have heard that there are at least a couple of galaxies that appear to have no dark matter. If this is the case, then it seems to me that perhaps ironically these galaxies seemed to disprove theories such as MOND because surely gravitational laws should be consistent across all galaxies?
Maybe inflation happens faster as you get away from the blackhole. The rate of inflation keeps the star systems moving at a faster pace the further they get from the galaxy. This is how galaxy systems are kept stable inspite of the gravitational and inflationary forces. How exactly do black holes interfere with the process of inflation?
Dark matter = we have no idea wtf it is... Update today = we still have no idea wtf it is.. until next time. Brought to you by experts you have to trust.
You're right. Everyone should quit trying to figure it out. Maybe go out for a picnic instead. That's the kind of scientists we really need. Just think about the picnic industry! Teach me more about how scientists should not discuss research.
You did not get any responses, so check this video out. It is in portugeuse for the first two minutes or so, and then it is english. It shows that yes, dark matter interacts with the higgs, and it shows how exactly it interacts.
I may be a bit OCD, but as I'm trying to listen to your talk, that model behind you is bugging me. Smoke didn't come out of the fourth stack from the boilers (maybe a bit from the kitchen and smokers lounge, which wouldn't have been visible). Could the amounts of matter between stars be, underestimated? Our star (and the planets) have cleared the local area of stray molecules, but could interstellar space have more than we have estimated in our calculations?
“We know that dark matter exists.” LOLno. We know that some observations don’t match what we expect from certain physical models. That doesn’t mean we should go drawing epicycles.
Very interesting stuff. However all the math falls apart at the point of origin so the big bang is not proven. It's still a theory, not a law. And the fact we can only account for 4% of energy/matter/gravitational forces suggests that we know so very little still about all the laws, forces, and particles at work in the Universe. We simply have a lot to learn and discover still.
What if our universe is "just" another form of black hole, and both the expansion we observe, the background radiation, and the regions of more and less clustered areas that are attributed to dark matter are all just the effect of the internal fabric of our universe being twisted and crumpled under extreme forces that we don't observe because of our frame of reference? That there is no dark matter or actual expansion, only corruption of the laws of physics caused by us being inside a black hole like extreme event inside another universe? These are just shower thoughts, but it would make sense and be coherent with everything I know about astronomical phenomena
I was reading an article that brought up something I found to be interesting...in that it was a new-ish idea and not yet disproven. The 2nd law of infodynamics I believe it was called. It was posited that the universe contains a ton of information, what if information has a weight (even if infinestimal) and that's what constitutes dark matter. Again, I found it to be interesting. Could information have a weight?
Great video. But I get a bit concerned when I hear scientist say we know all there is to know about what makes up the universe when we are still discovering stuff even in the last 20 years. Need to be a bit more humble and then we might actually move the unexplained area forward. One of the areas that I dont understand is that if the universe itself is expanding, why is is natural to try to associate that with a regular force in the same way as a force that occurs in regular matter. There is fabric and then is the content. different things..
I probably sound like an idiot, but I can't stop wondering if not only mass, but also energy has gravity. If e=mc^2 and F= G(m1*m2/r^2) then by combining these two equations, can't we conclude that not only mass, but also energy should have gravity? As such, the speed of the rotation of galaxies which need more gravity to explain is in itself energy and if we can conclude that energy also has gravity, then we may find our solution to where the gravity is coming from is the energy from the motion which we are trying to explain, as well as the temperature of the galaxy, etc. I'm not very well educated in this field, so be kind :)
Yes, energy can affect gravity. Get enough massless photons in a small enough volume, and you can make a black hole. However, the kinetic energy of start moving around in a galaxy is nowhere near enough to account for what is observed. As a general rule, if you come up with a new idea, it is more than likely that the people who do this every day for a living have already thought of it.
I've got a general question for ya. Dark matter is blamed on the extra motion occurring to our solar system as it orbits around the supermassive black hole Sgr A*. We're traveling at a velocity of around 536,000 mi/h. But according to general relativity and the laws of motion because we're located some 26,000 light years from the barycenter, we're supposed to be traveling at about 90,000 mi/h. There is a discrepancy of around 450,000 mi/h between what was measured and what was predicted. The extra motion is pinned on dark matter. My question, if dark matter was causing the sun to be traveling so fast, 450,000 mi/h then why doesn't it affect the motion of the Earth, planets and other small bodies as they orbit the sun? According to the laws of motion matter falls at the same rate, regardless of weight or density. A bowling ball and a feather fall at the same rate in a vacuum. This was proven many times before. So if the sun is being affected by dark matter, and the gravity produced by this missing mass is the only force acting upon visible matter, then why is the Earth, planets and other small bodies not affected? They should be affected just like the sun and all other stars and satellite galaxies orbiting the central black hole. But dark matter doesn't affect the motion and orbits of planets and moons. Why is that? If the mass of dark matter particles were acting upon the sun causing it to move 450,000 mi/h too fast, then why doesn't it affect the motion of the planets and moons too? Planets and moons would be much closer to the dark matter halo than the sun. They should be affected too as they orbit around the sun, more so than the sun.
@@schmetterling4477 No. Density is not the answer. A bowling ball and feather fall at the same rate in a vacuum. Regardless of density or weight all matter falls at the same rate in a vacuum. The reason why the sun is affected but the planets and other small bodies are not has nothing to do with weight or density.
@@schmetterling4477 Dark matter is the action blamed for stars and satellite galaxies to be orbiting so fast along the outskirts of host galaxies. If the density of a galaxy were causing this motion then how would it be possible? The stars close to the center where the galaxy contains the most mass, is the most dense according to the laws of motion and general relativity should be moving much fast than the bodies furthest from the center. But the satellite galaxies and stars furthest from the center are orbiting too fast, more than 1,000,000 mi/h. That's why dark matter was proposed. It's as if their velocity increases exponentially with the distance they are from the center of the galaxy. This currently cannot be explained by the theories and laws of motion. Also note that this mysterious force doesn't seem to affect the motion and orbits of planets and other small bodies in solar systems. Weird, because if gravity and mass were the actions causing this extra unexplained motion then surely it would effect the planets, moons and other small bodies in solar systems too because according to the laws of motion all mass falls at the same rate, regardless of their weight, mass or density. What plays the role in the motion of gravity is the inverse square distance to the concentration of the mass. The further away from the concentration of mass the slower the bodies orbit. Example, Pluto because it is so far away from the sun where the most mass is concentrated. While Mercury because it's so close to the sun zips around the sun taking less than 87 Earth days. Dark matter was proposed as a solution. Yet not even dark matter can explain why stars and satellite galaxies haven't been flung out of their host galaxy. The galaxy's gravitational influence should be extremely weak some 60,000 light years from the center. So the stars and other bodies should have reached an escape velocity a long time ago. Yet they continue to orbit the galaxy as if dark matter is not affecting them. This is why it's such a mystery. I believe I came up with a solution that explains everything. Dark matter only affects the motion of old stars and old galaxies and satellite galaxies. It doesn't affect the motion of planets, moons, young stars and young diffuse galaxies. So there lies the solution. This motion only occurs to old bodies radiating a constant solar wind full of charged particles. Planets, moons and other small bodies do not produce this extra motion because they don't spew a constant solar wind. Stars then slowly propel themselves over time. The older they are the faster they travel. I set out to prove this hypothesis wrong. If age and ion propulsion happens to stars then it would be the same for all of the bodies radiating a solar wind. So the acceleration rate should be the same ratio between the unexplained motion and their age. Our solar system is roughly 4,500,000,000 years old and is orbiting the barycenter of all the mass 26,000 light years away at about 536,000 mi/h. When we take into account the distance and mass of our solar system and plug them into the equations of gravity and motion it should be orbiting the galaxy at about 86,000 mi/h. so there is a discrepancy of about 450,000 mi/h in it's motion. 546,000 - 83,000 = 450,000. So the ratio between it's age and this unexplained motion is 10,000 to 1. This ratio between age and velocity should be the same for all bodies radiating a solar wind if ion propulsion is causing it. So I measured the ratio between the age of the Milky Way galaxy and it's motion to see if it had the same 10,000 to 1 ratio between it's age and velocity. Our galaxy is 13,700,000,000 years old. According to measurements it's traveling about 1,370,000 mi/h towards what's called the great attractor. You can look this up. 13,700,000,000 / 1,370,000 = 10,000. Thus the Milky Way galaxy has the same 10,000 to 1 ratio between it's age and velocity too. Okay, maybe it's a coincidence I thought? So I began measuring the ratio between the age and velocity of satellite galaxies orbiting the Milky Way and got the same 10,000 to 1 ratio between their age and velocity too. Every star system, satellite galaxy and host galaxy I studied had the same 10,000 to 1 ratio between their age and this unexplained velocity. The data indicated it is not dark matter causing this motion. It appears to be caused by the bodies that radiate a constant solar wind over time. I then wanted to see how rapid this acceleration was so I took 1 mile per hour and broke it down to seconds and got an acceleration of 0.0000002007 in/s. Wow, that's about twice the width of a proton every second. Way too slow to measure directly seeing how the sun is the closest star and is 93 million miles away. A slow acceleration of 0.0000002007 in/s would go unnoticed even with the most sensitive instruments made today. The sun is made of hot dense plasma that ripples in waves more than a mile high. There would be no way to measure such a slow acceleration of 0.0000002007 in/s. It would take 10,000 years for our solar system to accelerate another 1 mile per hour in it's velocity. Even after 100 generations we wouldn't be able to measure this acceleration. I call this theory the AP theory for short, or Accelerated Propulsion Theory.
Just a thought and I really am not trying to be a wise guy but what "dark matter"is really isn't hard to figure out. What is everything else in the universe made of? Different kinds of stuff like rocks, ices, gasses and the like, right? All of the stuff we can see or detect is lit up by stars and other bright objects. The stuff we can't see we call "dark matter" so wouldn't "dark matter" be rocks, ice, gas, chemicals and other stuff that is in shadows or too far from bright things like stars to be illuminated? Is my thinking just showing how much I don't know or do I have something worth thinking about? If I'm wrong, forgive me. If I'm right, let me know when the Nobel Prize money is going to get to me and I'll let everyone know when and where the party is. Everybody is invited, provide your own transportation and byob.
the question is: what is dark physics? It seem to be devolving into mathematicians scrawling reams of formulas that very few understand. Many tap out ti infinities that are “renormalized”.
The long and short of this lecture, like every other talk about Dark Matter, seems to be we are still in the dark about the matter.
It's mind over matter. You don't mind, I don't matter.
Science is hard
{crash, thunk, splatt}
We can hear the noises.
It's a good thing we can't smell all the rotten vegetables your audience are throwing at you!
🐕💚🍕 dogs like pizza 🐕💚🍕
Thank you for putting a light on this issue.
I have long found, I get as much understanding out of reading many of the comments, as I do from the lecture itself. The questions raised are answered by other watchers, or the presenter, and they typically are questions beyond and outside of the direct aspects of the lecture. This is certainly true regarding this lecture. Thanks!
Were you at the talk? The questions don't seem to appear on the video!
The missing mass is dilated mass. We have all heard the phrase "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light" this phenomenon is illustrated in a common relativity graph with velocity (from stationary to the speed of light) on the horizontal line and dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) on the vertical line. Mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside/stationary/Earthbound observer.
Wherever you have an astronomical quantity of mass, dilation will occur because high mass means high momentum. There is no place in the universe where mass is more concentrated than at the center of a galaxy.
In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" Einstein wrote about dilation occurring in regions that would have less mass than that which would exist at the center of common spiral galaxies. Therefore it is safe to say that according to Einstein's math the mass at the center of our own galaxy must be dilated, in other words that mass is all around us.
It was recently discovered that low mass galaxies (like NGC 1052-DF2) have normal star rotation rates. This is what relativity would predict because there is an insufficient quantity of mass at the center to achieve relativistic velocities.
A simple way to confirm this would be to calculate the star rotation rates of a large number of galaxies. This would show that all the high mass galaxies would have star rotation rates that seem to defy the known laws of physics and all the low mass galaxies would have predictable star rotation rates.
This video was worth spending an hour. Very informative indeed.
Yes the trumpet shaped Universe, the big band theory.
by Jack Black
right?
😂😂😂😂
Dark matter and energy are placeholders for "that yet to be discovered'.
Dark matter was first discovered in the 1940s.
"We know dark matter exists by the way the universe is shaped." ...Which we don't actually KNOW at all, but have calculated mathematically and also built a whole mathematical framework to support, and if that's wrong, well, we know nothing. We made our equations agree with each other and input variables we can't explain to make them come out right. Proof! Great science there.
I think it's more likely that there's not this invisible magic stuff but it's just a lack of understanding of how things work over long distances.
All observations over long distances indicate that gravity works according to general relativity. There is plenty of "invisible magic stuff" in the universe. We call it neutrinos. Please learn some physics, kid. ;-)
if the expansion of the galaxy is counteracted by gravity, so we're not getting bigger, what would happen if you were just floating between galaxies? would you expand?
This picture seems to suggest that matter is reducing over time (into black holes) and the vacuum energy or the space between matter and things is expanding - the less matter of both kinds, the bigger the vacuum thus increasing that vacuum energy and the expansion
Gravity Defined:
Gravity can be defined as the Electromagnetic force that matter excerpts on the
Universe, on Dark energy, that causes a "Dark Energy Field Effect" or "Gravity"
Matter does not remove (which is what "excerpts" means fyi) electromagnetic force.
Once two galaxies' Halo's have significantly begun to merge what is the probability that the two galaxies' will fully merge?
Is the bullet cluster going to regroup into the dark matter or will a significant portion of each galaxy continue on and escape the dark matter in the middle?
"Information is information, not matter or energy.
No materialism, which does not admit this, can
survive at the present day" by Norbert Wiener, the Father of Cybernetics.
If physics wish to survive, than have to recognize the same ontological status of Information, Matter and Energy. That is a key for paving the way to new physics. Because of the fact that physics treats the information as just an artifact of interaction of matter and energy, even at quantum level - no way to detect Dark Matter. Physics should embrace the idea that information can play also a cause role, not only as an effect's one.
Thanks for nice and instrumental talk - very interesting.
Humanity needs a major breakthrough in particle / Quantum physics. I know it is a marathon, not entirely under control...but without a major breakthrough, the knowledge and this branch of science are becoming stagnant. To be clear, I am not undermining the objectives of countless physicists, and scientists working in the field. I hope we find a major breakthrough soon.
several breakthrough happened years ago....thats not the issue ....the issue is governments label them disruptive technologies and quash them ...dont be so naive
Whilst true that most of this is already available in many other lectures with the only addition being some unique speculation by the speaker we should see it as a good thing! Keeping it in the mouths of the scientific community keeps the research alive!
Smashing atoms is materializing dark matter... literally! ''dark''...'''matter'''
Dark matter is a hypothesis which allows a mathematical description of "local" anomalies in the fabric of space-time. Dark energy allows a description of the observed anomaly of accelerating cosmic expansion. Both hypotheses require a total of 20 times more stuff than the observable universe to fudge a correspondence between observation and theory. New physics is needed, but I don't know what it would look like.
Imagine radiation never ever expiring. That light, whether you think it's a particle or not just goes on forever even if the source is kaput. Pretty hard to believe. But radiation finally expiring isn't so hard to believe. Then believing dark matter is expired radiation is easy to believe.
Over-Unity of energy is the only solution to every observation, from the beginning of time till now with distant galaxies receding away from us faster than light in every direction. I came up with a slow acceleration that occurs only to stars and galaxies over time because they radiate million mi/h solar winds full of hot, charged particles at a constant while spinning like a top. It's a slow 1 mi/h (1.609 km/h increase in velocity every 10,000 years.
@@sclogse1
expired "light" would simply be the Aether
since "light" is the aether moving in a way we can perceive and measure but at least for now we can never measure the "super fluid" aether...we only perceive it once it hits certain vibrational frequencies
seems dark matter/energy is just another way for main stream science to further itself about from aether
The real story starts at 30:20 .
thank you
Thank you!
56:46 Best part of the video.
Just throwing out an idea here: we're told that large bodies create gravity by 'bending' space-time, like a bowling ball on rubber sheet, to use a common analogy. Maybe the reason the galaxies spin the way they do is because, instead of bending, the fabric of space-time itself is spinning like an enormous disc, carrying the stars and galaxy with it. That's why they all move at the same speed. I fully expect any half-way competent astrophysicist to explain why I'm wrong. I'd appreciate the lesson.
Your idea fits with all the other ideas that are theory and not reality. Is space a fabric? My senses tell me we are barking up the wrong tree.
Love it! But I Interpret it to mean just as a bucket of water spining makes the edges rise, so might the rotation of a gravity well do likewise!
Could anyone enlighten me, “ghost” particles are emitted from all stars, and the shear numbers emitted are beyond comprehension, where do these particles end up in the fabric of space, one assume’s that these tiny neutrinos have mass so given their numbers over time will cause gravitational effects, since the birth of the very first stars the number of neutrino’s must be colossal plus I wonder if neutrino’s are recycled in any way or do they simply exist as massive ash heaps (so to speak) between the stars and the galaxies.
This is utterly in watchable. This guy is just maddening to listen to… I made it to about halfway before giving up
Same here. After giving it two chances, I gave up after about 1/3 of it total.
I found it brilliant. Not packaged in typical soundbites, rather he took time. I guess it required patience and concentration@@wmden1
I ain't a scientist and was looking for something more on black matter but came across this. I found it interesting and thanks for the video. Merry Christmas from Canada
Last years Nobel prize in physics was won by three physicists who proved that quantum entanglement effects are instant or faster than light across vast distances meaning it’s possible that aliens are communicating with quantum entanglement which possibly has the added advantage/disadvantage that not only will the receiver know the question before he’s received the question but the transmitter will know the answer before he’s sent the question.
False sending information through an entangled pair of particles is not possible as this would break causality. As we have no way to know if our particle will be the spin-up or spin-down , and we have no control over the collapse, it is not possible to send information through the collapse of the function. Once the function has collapsed, the quantum entangled state will be gone. What they proved was that our Universe is not locally real, which has to do with entanglement, but this is still not a way to brake causality.
General relativity is wrong, special relativity is correct. General relativity says it takes time for light to travel, hence a light year is the distance it takes ight to travel in one year.
But that is not completely true under certain conditions. Like according to James Maxwell's equations on EM fields, when the observer or telescope is contained inside the EM field they are measuring, light information takes zero time to travel any distance. It brought on quantum entanglement's spooky action at a distance idea and the Einstein Rosen-bridge postulate about wormholes. General relativity says light takes time to travel.
Quantum mechanics was right, general relativity was shown to be wrong. But like I said, only under certain conditions, like when the observer or telescope is contained inside the EM field they are measuring. Light information then happens instantly at any distance. According to Maxwell when the observer is contained inside the EM field being measured light has an infinite velocity. It's what sparked the EPR thought experiment into being called the EPR Paradox. It also sparked the Copenhagen Interpretation in quantum mechanics.
That's honestly super interesting
Coming at this as a layperson, I find it fascinating that the fact dark matter forms a halo suggests it acts like a field; perhaps even the "donut," if you will, to the "donuthole" of the galactic matter that the former flattens or locks together gravitationally. I often wonder if the supermassive and other black holes might create this halo by some quantum or other effect. Questions I have include: How are we sure dark matter is even present WITHIN our galaxy? Do we see absolutely NO hesitation before galaxies collide that might reveal dark matter? If not for dark matter, would stars near the edge of galaxies simply fly away moving at 220km/s? And would the universe then be more uniform (chaotic) with rogue stars and planets? What part of a spiral galaxy still remain in that case? About a half? A third? 3/4?
We always see the graphics of mass warping a space time grid. What if when extremely massive objects (galaxies, black holes, etc) warp space time, it doesn’t just pop back to “neutral” when they move on? If it left a trail, something like a ditch on the space time grid graphic, wouldn’t gravitational effects still be observed? I don’t even know if this makes sense mathematically, I just like to brainstorm.
It would be exremley interesting if it is a text in english languagae to the video. I am swedish and understand much better written english than a lot of strange dialects!
Fascinating thankyou
"we know dark matter exists because all our suppositions and theories about how the universe works can't possibly be wrong."
Exactly my sentiment. So cavalier about saying ‘we know’.
Precisely. It follows a long line of fabrications to protect current dogma that has been ongoing since "black holes"...
Once it became a business, all those scientists take the billions of funding. Besides, you must not by the book he presents, I can give you the answer to the title right now: we don’t know. The ideas and formulas developed by Nassim Haramein make far more sense without violating ART and QED but don’t need abstract constructs like dark matter or dark energy.
@@rolandrick It's pretty ironic you're criticizing this guy on a subject you obviously know nothing about by saying he's doing it to get rich...and then advocate for a snake oil salesman who started his own vanity project "foundation" to take money from rubes by telling them that he's the only honest one and everyone ELSE is just trying to take their money for vanity projects. Yeah, it's the peer-reviewed science that we should be more suspicious of, rather than the one guy and lady who can't get anyone with a shred of respectability to vouch for their work.
@@pcarter1989Well said. Additionally the op was insinuating something that was not claimed. Research still continues.
Penrose says there's no Dark Matter, so that's good enough for me.
The understanding of the presence of Dark Energy and Dark Matter can be found in: "Atomic Gravity" International Journal of Physics.
Thank you Dr. fisher!
Dark Energy and Dark Matter May Be Anti Gravity.
This drawing makes a case for anti gravity, not gravity, as the force that comes from acceleration.
You don't know dark matter exists because of the way things are shaped in our universe, you know there is an extra gravitational effect, you then make a rational presupposition (the bane of Science), & conclude it's because of some type of extra matter, I've come up with five hypotheses that don't require it, relative mass caused by dark energy, probability mass of the quantum wave-functions, nested gravity wells or contextual gravity, ambient mass of the photonic & phononic energy coming into our Galaxy from outside of it & curvature differentials between the negatively curved galactic space-time & the positively curved intergalactic space-time, it's tufted space-time.
At 3:16 Dr.Fisher refers to the expansion of the universe as acceleration, several times,which took me a while to tease out what he was actually saying. Kind of cast a pall over the rest of the lecture
Speed of light being fixed is an assumption that holds in the near space around us. Assumptions are not always valid.
thank you for the lecture
So is It a invisible solid..like would it move a human like wind?loll😭🙌🏼🌉💫
not really understanding this "expanding image" shouldn't be going 720 degrees in every direction?
I do not understand the thought that "we know dark matter exists". We know that there are some gravitational anomalies around and within normal matter bodies in space. Whether this is matter or not doesn´t seem to be proved as far as I know. Please explain.
21:30 "this is a great screensaver"
This is a great screen destroyer, do you not remeber why we had screen savers?
I still don't understand what is dark matter after attending this lecture.
neither do they
Seems no surprise that the past is getting further away faster in order to prevent time travel and all the complex paradoxes that would create. It's a natural barrier to stop us screwing with the past.
Was the heavy neutrino experiment Mr. Fisher talked about the same as the hypothetical sterile neutrinos?
Great talk!
Thank you!
Perhaps because we cannot still quantify dark matter with the standard model, we may have to find another field of matter in the space/time metric from which we can propose a dark matter particle related to but not included in the standard model. Just a thought.
Dark matter is a theory to explain another theory they’re having trouble to explain.
so at first you said there are no working Models for Dark Matter with Quantum physics. okay.... later on you explained how dark matter and quantum Mechanics made the Temperature difference in the CMB. How can you guys know if there are no Working Theories?? it always gets me I'm alone?
The structure of the CMB is a classical effect. The only way to get it down to the quantum level is with inflation, which has absolutely nothing to do with dark matter. If anything, that would be a dark energy related dynamic.
@@schmetterling4477 listen to 15:50 till 16:07. I don't know if you even watched his video. He literally said "its because of the Quantum Mechanical uncertainty of Dark Matter." get some education first before you are trying to say something Intelligent. The Early Universe was Dark Matter dominated. Dark Energy dominance began way after. it was literally his first slide dude.
@@koilerREC I don't need to watch these videos, kid. I am a physics PhD who used to work in high energy physics. Dude, you simply don't know what you are talking about and that's that. ;-)
@@schmetterling4477 what an absolute disrespectful guy. Calling somebody something without having any background really shows your Physics degree buddy. just another troll yikes...
@@koilerREC I don't owe you respect, buddy. I owed you the taxpayer dollars that paid for your K-12. That you didn't use them wisely is none of my problem. Are we cool now or do you need another dressing down? ;-)
how do we rule out a modification of the gravity equations
Thank you sir.
I think you should please explain and discuss the findings of Subid Sarkar's team.
Thank you very much!
Given there is no wiki page about him, I don't think his findings are very significant. All I can find about him is awards and that he has among other things an interest in dark matter.
It seems at times as though "dark energy" is simply code for the mystery of how space itself expands. Space grows and is warped by mass. Space is rather more "thing like" than one would ever have guessed.
Let's put it another way. Dark Energy is EQUAL to Regular Energy PLUS time being, for our purposes here, "heavy time."
Mira, look, we're looking at any form of energy "vibrate, rotate," whatever you want to call it. We see this electron revolve 1000 times a minute. We set that as our base or 0 reading. But in this pocket of dark energy we get readings a billion times a minute. Or after you convert it back to our time it becomes readings of energy where there shouldn't be. That's because in that same minute that atom aged a million times faster and therefore has given off readings of a billion instead of 1000. Or energy from somewhere that should not be giving off any readings. It's TIME that brings it all together or in this case tears us apart. Maybe. Numbers used for reference only. TI-I-I-IME IS ON MY SIDE! YES, IT IS!
it would also track that dark matter, as it attracts, then being in pockets of "Light Time."
Mira, look, if heavy time is "full" then light time is "starving." In this case "starving" is the same as creating a vacuum for time. Since everything outside this pocket of dark matter is in a "heavier time," it makes it appear dark matter is attracting when really it's just a vacuum trying to equalize. Making it stand to reason, by very simplified reasoning, that Dark Matter is EQUAL to Regular Matter PLUS "Light Time." Maybe.
Working on the fundamental question how universe is created and is working since its creation is a tribute man pays for immense favours showered on him by the creator. I salute you and the people like you who selflessly spend their days and nights hunting for truth. Thank you very much sir.
I would like to have a final answer.
Imagine you've been investigating this your whole life, and you've always been wrong.
I wouldn't thank him for that.
A fascinating talk - thank you. As dark matter is proving so elusive, is the notion of Modified Newtonian Dynamics - MOND- becoming a viable option?
And as an aside, is the model ship behind you the Titanic? Lets hope the standard model proves more unsinkable !
Of course modified theories of gravity are always an option. Why wouldn't they be? The problem is that in terms of fitting the available data they aren't very good, either.
Perhaps gravity isn’t as much of a monopole after all.
gravity and acceleration are indistinguishable........its all retaliative to the point of measurement
non mutual mass acceleration
Existential Physics: Do all galaxies eventually collapse in upon themselves?
Modern science claims that 'gravity' is matter bending the fabric of spacetime. There is a lot of matter in a galaxy which would make a huge dent in spacetime. How could galaxies not eventually collapse in upon themselves if spacetime were bent to make it so? (Or is modern science wrong about 'gravity', 'space', and/or 'time'?)
We know a huge amount about what dark matter does and where it is, and a great deal about what it isn't, but its microscopic properties are a complete mystery! If you're a physicist these days, then this is reason to be both frustrated (because of the lack of positive data) and creative (since there is a great deal of freedom to theorize). It's an interesting time
A huge amount of what it does? Do we know anything more than that it interacts gravitationally?
I saw something about interesting effects of dark matter shown by galactic collisions.
It behaves differently from the known matter which passed through .. so it's interesting
@@Reptex_cs We know it does not interact electromagnetically or (probably) via the weak force. We know it is stable. We know it is cold, therefore likely to be massive. We know it can't be any of the particles we know about.
@@Reptex_cs I meant "does" as in how dark matter impacts things like the CMB, galaxy formation and evolution, etc.
We know nothing Mr Numbers.
Based on our limited knowledge of this subject, is it possible that the "Stuff we know about" and dark matter is 50/50 with dark energy? Entangled pairs could be split into matter and energy.
To clarify, if there are entangled pairs, can the pairs be anti-matter and/or matter, or do the entangled pairs have to both be matter or anti-matter?
Missing mass? Something that should be there but can not be uncovered? What changes if the speed of light is not a constant? Can you really age the universe by Doppler shift of light? Of course there are things we can not see, consistent in our reality; The air we breathe, the forces of gravity, magnetism, electricity, and more. Physics is the study of properties of matter. Can we uncover dark properties of our universe?
Dark matter is a Newtonian effect. You need to learn to listen better. ;-)
Three scientific lines without dark substances -
1. "First test of Verlinde's theory of Emergent Gravity using Weak Gravitational Lensing measurements"
"Understanding galaxy rotation curves with Verlinde's emergent gravity"
2. "Testing the Strong Equivalence Principle: Detection of the External Field Effect in Rotationally Supported Galaxies"
3. "Galactic rotation curve and dark matter according to gravitomagnetism"
you wish.... we cant even define gravity unless we embrace the religion of scientism ...have fun in that cult
Thank you for the presentation. Question: By when will we be able to use dark matter and especially dark energy for our daily needs?
when they realise that they have got the calculations for gravity wrong , quantum standard model does not contain a parameter for gravity , so if what is more likely , a mysterious substance we cannot see touch detect or reflect light , or something we know is there but is not on the standard model , IE GRAVITY
@@Demonic-X Tuesday would work for me.
when tottenham win a trophy
The particle mass seems to be a mathematical solution for something like Andromeda data, but they never give the math of the first 500M years and galaxy formation from maybe a sphere 100 time the galaxies eventual size with very very weak initial gravitational attraction. You turn on a switch and the dark matter makes a quick trip 100 times the size of the galaxy in 500M years, then the switch is turned off and parks in position to make the Andromeda calculations work for the next 5, 10, 100 billion years with maybe a massive black hole pulling on it at a much closer distance than that original 300M years. It doesn't make sense that it would move so fast to a very weak gravitational force and sit in some theoretical perfect position thereafter.
I like his point on the time between Newton and Einstein .... Don't expect any new events here on this subject till another real genius is on the scene.
Occam's razor I think we are just wrong about the masslessness of photons and we are trying to find the mass of a spec of dust on a home bathroom scale we need too a better tool before we can find is tiny tiny tiny mass. Super ironic name for it if true
Just forgot to mention Neutrinos. They according to our ability to measure, have infinite speed, no mass no charge. Could it be, that we are not yet in the higher orbit of clear thinking. Would Tesla double coil help, by slowing neutrinos down and give them charge, so Power is in abundance. Am I talking to much?
I think dark matter is Like ordinary matter but its existing in the dimensions WE dont see...IT can interact with matter in our 3d world though. U see, so easy IT is 😊
300 millionths of 1 degree above the average of 3 degrees? Did I misunderstand? How could we possibly be so exact, especially billions of years ago
E=MC2? The energy, includes? Do you acknowledge the electric universe and plasma? If not you might get your pie graph.
If dark matter can polarize light through gravity, then could our sun's light that reaches earth be effected by having different polarization, would the earth heat up or cool down? I know someone did a study on solar panels about using polarized light .
"If ifs and ands were pots and pans there'd be no need for tinkers hands." ____Anon
I greatly enjoyed your descriptions of your work. This dark matter and energy stuff - well - I think we need to remain skeptical.
Last year I read an article by an E. European scientist who claims dark matter clearly doesn't exist. For dark matter, he argues, to "work" - to explain galactic rotation - it has to be a sort of donut structure outside our galaxy. But, this scientist maintains, almost everyone in physics ignores the obvious problem, that small galaxies or clusters orbit galaxies where this donut of dark matter is supposed to be. And these small galaxies or clusters are NOT impacted by this supposed dark matter. So dark matter can't exist.
Well, that's one argument. MOND is looking better and better. There is a great chance that Dark Matter isn't real - doesn't exist.
Dark Energy may also not exist. The universe may not be expanding in an accelerated sense. The so-called acceleration we seem to detect may be related to the idea that "uniformity" or "sameness" - that our assumptions about how this works in space were wrong. That you need a much, much bigger region of space before uniformity is real. We have detected structures that definitely throw off our old data, which was used to guesstimate uniformity of space. If space is not uniform at the vast region we thought it was, then some of the galactic redshif/blueshift we detect may be caused by something much simpler than "dark energy". Dark energy - and acceleration of expansion - may very well be myths/errors. There is a prominent physicist at Oxford, iirc, advocating what I'm saying.""
Super symmetry has suffered a number of serious disappointments in the past 10 or so years.
I don't want to sound disrespectful, but Dark Energy and Dark Matter are under serious attack in academia. There are strong reasons to believe these are flawed theories.
On my astronomy exam was a multiple choice question, What is dark matter. I picked invisible particles with heavy gravitational mass [or some such] and got marked wrong. Correct answer was, We have no idea. I like that.
@@annprehn yes!
@@annprehn Dark matter is nothing more than an Accelerated Propulsion that only occurs to stars and galaxies, at a rate of 0.0000002007 in/s (0.000000509778 cm/s). This acceleration is way too small to be measured directly. It can only be measured over a span of around 1 million years. In 1 million years the star or galaxy would have gained an extra 100 mi/h or 160.9 km/h in it's velocity. The older the star or galaxy is, the more motion they will have gained. This acceleration is the same for all stars and galaxies, regardless of their mass or missing mass. There is no missing mass or missing energy in the universe. Have you ever measured the ratio between the age and velocity of stars and galaxies? It's the same for every star and galaxy in the universe. Dark matter and dark energy is not causing it. One single action is causing it all, gravity, dark matter, dark energy and even the high velocity dispersion of matter in galaxies. One action explains it all.
The problem of modern physics is they're trying to explain everything with particle physics and the physics is being cornered more and more to the dead end. To escape the dead end, they invent or design another imaginary particle in vain instead of trying to revise their way to approach to the problem.
I agree to that idea that the interaction between mass and space must be explained with quantum mechanics.
But that doesn't mean gravity is the QM phenomena.
That's because gravity is not a force.
Gravity is just a joint effect of the expansion of the Universe and the curvature of spacetime.
Details are given below.
Alternative Explanation of Dark Matter and Dark Energy - Newly proposed model of Universe can explain both of Dark Matter and Dark Energy
Einstein’s theory of General Relativity states that spacetime is curved by the presence of mass.
This curvature influences the motion other objects with mass and gives rise to gravitation.
Thus, gravity is a result of geometric features in spacetime.
However, we also observe gravitational effects - curvature of spacetime - in areas without any detectable mass.
This has given rise to the concept of dark matter, which is matter that does not interact in any detectable way with normal matter, except through gravity.
So, there is some large quantity of dark matter scattered throughout the universe, which curves spacetime and causes gravitational effects just like normal matter, but we cannot see or detect it with any known method.
An alternative theory to the identity of dark matter is proposed - it is not matter at all, but rather an intrinsic curvature of spacetime.
In other words, spacetime is not naturally flat. Even in the absence of matter, we observe some inherent curvature of spacetime.
So, the question is now - why is spacetime naturally curved? Why is it not flat in the absence of mass?
The universe is 4-dimensional, with 3 spatial dimensions and one dimension in time.
Rather than consider time as a linear dimension, we can consider it as a radial one.
Therefore, rather than describing the universe with a Cartesian coordinate system, we describe it with a 4-dimensional spherical coordinate system - 3 angular coordinates, φ1, φ2, φ3, and one radial coordinate in time, t.
We live on the 3-dimensional surface of a 4-dimensional bubble which is expanding radially in time.
Thus, the Big Bang represents t=0, the beginning of time.
The crucial point is that the expansion of the universe is not homogeneous in all directions.
The expansion rate at one point on the bubble’s surface may differ slightly from another point near it.
The universe is only roughly spherical in 4 dimensions, the same way that the Earth is only roughly spherical in 3 dimensions.
The same way we observe local mountains and valleys on the surface of Earth, we observe local “mountains” and “valleys” on the surface of the universe bubble.
The inhomogeneity of the expansion of the universe has given rise to natural curvature of spacetime. This natural curvature causes the phenomenon of “dark matter”. “Valleys” in spacetime pull matter in, similarly to the warping of spacetime of massive objects.
So “dark matter” is really “valleys” in spacetime that are expanding slower than the regions surrounding it.
These valleys tend to pull matter in and create planets, stars, and galaxies - regions of space with higher-than-average densities of mass.
Conversely, “mountains” in spacetime will repel matter away, an “anti-gravitational” effect, which gives rise to cosmic voids in space where we observe no matter.
Each point on the surface of the universe bubble traces out a time arrow in 4-dimensional space, perpendicular to the surface.
These time arrows are not parallel to each other since the universe is not flat.
This causes points to have nonzero relative velocity away from each other.
It is generally accepted that the universe is expanding faster than observable energy can explain, and this is expansion is believe to be still accelerating.
The “missing” energy required to explain these observations has given rise to the theory of dark energy.
The time dilation caused by non-parallel time arrows can be proposed as an explanation for dark energy.
Alternatively, dark energy is real energy coming from potential energy gradients caused by non-parallel time arrows.
As a sanity check, we can calculate the expansion rate of the universe based on the universe bubble model.
Since the radius of the universe bubble is expanding at the speed of light in the time direction, it increases at 1 light second per second.
Therefore, the “circumference” of the 3-dimensional surface increases by 2π light seconds per second, or about 1.88*10^6 km/s.
This expansion is distributed equally across the 3-dimensional surface, so the actual observed expansion rate is proportional to the distance from the observer.
At present, the age of the universe is estimated to be 13.8 billion years, so the radius of the universe bubble is 13.8 billion light years, or about 4233 megaparsecs (3.26 million light years to 1 Mpc).
Thus, we can calculate the expansion rate of the universe, per megaparsec from the observer, as:
Expansion rate = ((d(circumference))/dt)/radiusofuniverse=(1.88*〖10〗^6 km⁄s)/(2π*4233Mpc)=(1.88*〖10〗^6 km⁄s)/26598Mpc=70.82(km⁄s)/Mpc
The popularly accepted empirical expansion rate is 73.5 + 2.5 km/s/Mpc, so our calculated value is close.
There may be some additional source of expansion (or observed red shift) to make up for the discrepancy. For example, if two adjacent points have some gravitational gradient due to non-parallel time arrows, then light passing through these points will be red-shifted.
- Cited from www.academia.edu/82481487/Title_Alternative_Explanation_of_Dark_Matter_and_Dark_Energy
I have heard that there are at least a couple of galaxies that appear to have no dark matter. If this is the case, then it seems to me that perhaps ironically these galaxies seemed to disprove theories such as MOND because surely gravitational laws should be consistent across all galaxies?
(Bullet Cluster, I believe) Exactly. Interesting, isn't it?
Another indication that an alternative explanation to dark matter is realistic.
If our galaxy was low in dark matter I think it'd need to be more spread out or spin more slowly.
@@Reptex_cs what do you mean by "alternative explanation"? Which one, exactly - there is no shortage of those.
@@bazoo513 the context of my comment doesn't require a specific one. An, as in any.
Maybe inflation happens faster as you get away from the blackhole. The rate of inflation keeps the star systems moving at a faster pace the further they get from the galaxy. This is how galaxy systems are kept stable inspite of the gravitational and inflationary forces. How exactly do black holes interfere with the process of inflation?
Han Solo talking about hyperspace.
Did i miss the answer ? I still don’t know what dark matter is, i know what it isn’t
Don't worry, he is just selling his book.
Then you know as much as the scientists trying to answer that question.
"Dark matter" is a way to explain away problems with the cosmology of the "experts."
is dark matter as defined by it's gravitational properties evident in the rotational velocities of stars very near the event horizon of a black hole?
Why dont black holes emitt photones ,why dont black holes become a sun due to fusion , could black holes be just an electo magnetic whirl wind
Dark matter = we have no idea wtf it is... Update today = we still have no idea wtf it is.. until next time. Brought to you by experts you have to trust.
You're right.
Everyone should quit trying to figure it out.
Maybe go out for a picnic instead.
That's the kind of scientists we really need.
Just think about the picnic industry!
Teach me more about how scientists should not discuss research.
Linier expansion early on, then polynomial :) Interesting
linier then polynomial?
@@PetraKann polyesmial
*linear
@@0ptimal I thought that it was more expornensial
@@ZeHoSmusician What is *linear and is this different from linier?
You have a lot of explaining to do Mr HoHoMachine
If dark matter has mass, it does interact with at least the Higgs, right?
You did not get any responses, so check this video out. It is in portugeuse for the first two minutes or so, and then it is english. It shows that yes, dark matter interacts with the higgs, and it shows how exactly it interacts.
Takes me back to a maths lecturer I had who couldn't make eye contact...
If you can't smell it the same as you can smell a duck, and if you can't hear it quack same as you can hear a duck, it's dark.
I may be a bit OCD, but as I'm trying to listen to your talk, that model behind you is bugging me. Smoke didn't come out of the fourth stack from the boilers (maybe a bit from the kitchen and smokers lounge, which wouldn't have been visible).
Could the amounts of matter between stars be, underestimated? Our star (and the planets) have cleared the local area of stray molecules, but could interstellar space have more than we have estimated in our calculations?
I don't get why scientists say the universe is speeding up in it's expansion. I don't believe in dark matter or dark energy.
The search for Dark Matter is likely to end up like the search for Phlogiston or the Luminiferous Aether.
Dark matter has been observed consistently since the 1940s. Those observations are not disappearing.
“We know that dark matter exists.” LOLno. We know that some observations don’t match what we expect from certain physical models. That doesn’t mean we should go drawing epicycles.
Exactly.
Shame that RI has gone down to videos of people looking at their notes.
we know dark matter exists because of the shape of things ,
OR we need to have a theory of Compound linked Gravity fields
Very interesting stuff. However all the math falls apart at the point of origin so the big bang is not proven. It's still a theory, not a law. And the fact we can only account for 4% of energy/matter/gravitational forces suggests that we know so very little still about all the laws, forces, and particles at work in the Universe. We simply have a lot to learn and discover still.
What if our universe is "just" another form of black hole, and both the expansion we observe, the background radiation, and the regions of more and less clustered areas that are attributed to dark matter are all just the effect of the internal fabric of our universe being twisted and crumpled under extreme forces that we don't observe because of our frame of reference? That there is no dark matter or actual expansion, only corruption of the laws of physics caused by us being inside a black hole like extreme event inside another universe? These are just shower thoughts, but it would make sense and be coherent with everything I know about astronomical phenomena
I was reading an article that brought up something I found to be interesting...in that it was a new-ish idea and not yet disproven. The 2nd law of infodynamics I believe it was called.
It was posited that the universe contains a ton of information, what if information has a weight (even if infinestimal) and that's what constitutes dark matter.
Again, I found it to be interesting. Could information have a weight?
We observe from a tiny point in an obscure part of our galaxy, and fill in blanks with magic.
Great video. But I get a bit concerned when I hear scientist say we know all there is to know about what makes up the universe when we are still discovering stuff even in the last 20 years. Need to be a bit more humble and then we might actually move the unexplained area forward. One of the areas that I dont understand is that if the universe itself is expanding, why is is natural to try to associate that with a regular force in the same way as a force that occurs in regular matter. There is fabric and then is the content. different things..
I probably sound like an idiot, but I can't stop wondering if not only mass, but also energy has gravity. If e=mc^2 and F= G(m1*m2/r^2) then by combining these two equations, can't we conclude that not only mass, but also energy should have gravity? As such, the speed of the rotation of galaxies which need more gravity to explain is in itself energy and if we can conclude that energy also has gravity, then we may find our solution to where the gravity is coming from is the energy from the motion which we are trying to explain, as well as the temperature of the galaxy, etc. I'm not very well educated in this field, so be kind :)
Yes, energy can affect gravity. Get enough massless photons in a small enough volume, and you can make a black hole. However, the kinetic energy of start moving around in a galaxy is nowhere near enough to account for what is observed.
As a general rule, if you come up with a new idea, it is more than likely that the people who do this every day for a living have already thought of it.
I've got a general question for ya.
Dark matter is blamed on the extra motion occurring to our solar system as it orbits around the supermassive black hole Sgr A*. We're traveling at a velocity of around 536,000 mi/h. But according to general relativity and the laws of motion because we're located some 26,000 light years from the barycenter, we're supposed to be traveling at about 90,000 mi/h. There is a discrepancy of around 450,000 mi/h between what was measured and what was predicted. The extra motion is pinned on dark matter.
My question, if dark matter was causing the sun to be traveling so fast, 450,000 mi/h then why doesn't it affect the motion of the Earth, planets and other small bodies as they orbit the sun?
According to the laws of motion matter falls at the same rate, regardless of weight or density. A bowling ball and a feather fall at the same rate in a vacuum. This was proven many times before. So if the sun is being affected by dark matter, and the gravity produced by this missing mass is the only force acting upon visible matter, then why is the Earth, planets and other small bodies not affected? They should be affected just like the sun and all other stars and satellite galaxies orbiting the central black hole.
But dark matter doesn't affect the motion and orbits of planets and moons. Why is that? If the mass of dark matter particles were acting upon the sun causing it to move 450,000 mi/h too fast, then why doesn't it affect the motion of the planets and moons too? Planets and moons would be much closer to the dark matter halo than the sun. They should be affected too as they orbit around the sun, more so than the sun.
Density. :-)
@@schmetterling4477 No. Density is not the answer. A bowling ball and feather fall at the same rate in a vacuum. Regardless of density or weight all matter falls at the same rate in a vacuum. The reason why the sun is affected but the planets and other small bodies are not has nothing to do with weight or density.
@@ronaldkemp3952 I didn't talk about the density of individual bodies. I meant the density of all matter in the galaxies. ;-)
@@schmetterling4477 Dark matter is the action blamed for stars and satellite galaxies to be orbiting so fast along the outskirts of host galaxies.
If the density of a galaxy were causing this motion then how would it be possible? The stars close to the center where the galaxy contains the most mass, is the most dense according to the laws of motion and general relativity should be moving much fast than the bodies furthest from the center. But the satellite galaxies and stars furthest from the center are orbiting too fast, more than 1,000,000 mi/h. That's why dark matter was proposed. It's as if their velocity increases exponentially with the distance they are from the center of the galaxy. This currently cannot be explained by the theories and laws of motion.
Also note that this mysterious force doesn't seem to affect the motion and orbits of planets and other small bodies in solar systems. Weird, because if gravity and mass were the actions causing this extra unexplained motion then surely it would effect the planets, moons and other small bodies in solar systems too because according to the laws of motion all mass falls at the same rate, regardless of their weight, mass or density. What plays the role in the motion of gravity is the inverse square distance to the concentration of the mass. The further away from the concentration of mass the slower the bodies orbit. Example, Pluto because it is so far away from the sun where the most mass is concentrated. While Mercury because it's so close to the sun zips around the sun taking less than 87 Earth days.
Dark matter was proposed as a solution. Yet not even dark matter can explain why stars and satellite galaxies haven't been flung out of their host galaxy. The galaxy's gravitational influence should be extremely weak some 60,000 light years from the center. So the stars and other bodies should have reached an escape velocity a long time ago. Yet they continue to orbit the galaxy as if dark matter is not affecting them. This is why it's such a mystery.
I believe I came up with a solution that explains everything. Dark matter only affects the motion of old stars and old galaxies and satellite galaxies. It doesn't affect the motion of planets, moons, young stars and young diffuse galaxies. So there lies the solution.
This motion only occurs to old bodies radiating a constant solar wind full of charged particles. Planets, moons and other small bodies do not produce this extra motion because they don't spew a constant solar wind. Stars then slowly propel themselves over time. The older they are the faster they travel.
I set out to prove this hypothesis wrong. If age and ion propulsion happens to stars then it would be the same for all of the bodies radiating a solar wind. So the acceleration rate should be the same ratio between the unexplained motion and their age.
Our solar system is roughly 4,500,000,000 years old and is orbiting the barycenter of all the mass 26,000 light years away at about 536,000 mi/h. When we take into account the distance and mass of our solar system and plug them into the equations of gravity and motion it should be orbiting the galaxy at about 86,000 mi/h. so there is a discrepancy of about 450,000 mi/h in it's motion. 546,000 - 83,000 = 450,000.
So the ratio between it's age and this unexplained motion is 10,000 to 1.
This ratio between age and velocity should be the same for all bodies radiating a solar wind if ion propulsion is causing it.
So I measured the ratio between the age of the Milky Way galaxy and it's motion to see if it had the same 10,000 to 1 ratio between it's age and velocity. Our galaxy is 13,700,000,000 years old. According to measurements it's traveling about 1,370,000 mi/h towards what's called the great attractor. You can look this up. 13,700,000,000 / 1,370,000 = 10,000. Thus the Milky Way galaxy has the same 10,000 to 1 ratio between it's age and velocity too. Okay, maybe it's a coincidence I thought?
So I began measuring the ratio between the age and velocity of satellite galaxies orbiting the Milky Way and got the same 10,000 to 1 ratio between their age and velocity too. Every star system, satellite galaxy and host galaxy I studied had the same 10,000 to 1 ratio between their age and this unexplained velocity.
The data indicated it is not dark matter causing this motion. It appears to be caused by the bodies that radiate a constant solar wind over time.
I then wanted to see how rapid this acceleration was so I took 1 mile per hour and broke it down to seconds and got an acceleration of 0.0000002007 in/s. Wow, that's about twice the width of a proton every second. Way too slow to measure directly seeing how the sun is the closest star and is 93 million miles away. A slow acceleration of 0.0000002007 in/s would go unnoticed even with the most sensitive instruments made today. The sun is made of hot dense plasma that ripples in waves more than a mile high. There would be no way to measure such a slow acceleration of 0.0000002007 in/s.
It would take 10,000 years for our solar system to accelerate another 1 mile per hour in it's velocity. Even after 100 generations we wouldn't be able to measure this acceleration.
I call this theory the AP theory for short, or Accelerated Propulsion Theory.
Just a thought and I really am not trying to be a wise guy but what "dark matter"is really isn't hard to figure out. What is everything else in the universe made of? Different kinds of stuff like rocks, ices, gasses and the like, right? All of the stuff we can see or detect is lit up by stars and other bright objects. The stuff we can't see we call "dark matter" so wouldn't "dark matter" be rocks, ice, gas, chemicals and other stuff that is in shadows or too far from bright things like stars to be illuminated? Is my thinking just showing how much I don't know or do I have something worth thinking about? If I'm wrong, forgive me. If I'm right, let me know when the Nobel Prize money is going to get to me and I'll let everyone know when and where the party is. Everybody is invited, provide your own transportation and byob.
There are other fields of force that need to be in place that interact with dark matter.
Astronomers finds evidence that black holes may be source of dark energy in which case it creates dark matter too.
the question is: what is dark physics? It seem to be devolving into mathematicians scrawling reams of formulas that very few understand. Many tap out ti infinities that are “renormalized”.