Thread: The search for dark matter

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0414104213.htm

"Ordinary matter, which makes up the stars, planets, gas and dust in our galaxy, emits or reflects light that can be observed using telescopes on Earth or in space. However, the effect of dark matter, according to several theories, can be observed only indirectly by the gravitational force exerted on the more visible portions of the galaxy around us, Cline said"


can see it, but the effects are what they look for. Is it possible the effects are from the energy (light) exchanging between the surrounding mass?

The entanglement?

ie..... see casimir

See van der waals..............

the energy IS causing the effect!

Here's a hypothesis...it's all mine of course so it will be easily debunked. Say that the Big Bang (in some form) was an accurate theory. The universe is expanding or exploding outwards. (question) outwards into what exactly? What lies beyond the edge of the universe, that apparently was there prior to the Big Bang? That empty 'nothingness' that the universe is displacing as it expands. Could it be made up of 'dark matter? dark energy? Could it be the causation of gravity?

Originally Posted by ronmatt

Here's a hypothesis...it's all mine of course so it will be easily debunked. Say that the Big Bang (in some form) was an accurate theory. The universe is expanding or exploding outwards. (question) outwards into what exactly? What lies beyond the edge of the universe, that apparently was there prior to the Big Bang? That empty 'nothingness' that the universe is displacing as it expands. Could it be made up of 'dark matter? dark energy? Could it be the causation of gravity?

what is dark energy/matter?

what is gravity?


start there before trying the unknown speculation.

That is what i did; start with what is, before trying to speculate 'then' (in the beginning; BB). We can observe the now. we are in 'the process'.

It is easier to understand based on reality versus the before and after time constraints. The problem with physicist is at this level, each are trying to describe what can NEVER be known as none of us are 'there'. Kind of like, there is no 'nothing' between any points of mass so 'we' will never see the edge of the universe, anytime.


I often claim to anyone who is really looking for answers, begin with comprehending the life of mass (the process) before going nuts on speculations.

learn what you are first!

Originally Posted by Bishadi

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0414104213.htm

"Ordinary matter, which makes up the stars, planets, gas and dust in our galaxy, emits or reflects light that can be observed using telescopes on Earth or in space. However, the effect of dark matter, according to several theories, can be observed only indirectly by the gravitational force exerted on the more visible portions of the galaxy around us, Cline said"


can see it, but the effects are what they look for. Is it possible the effects are from the energy (light) exchanging between the surrounding mass?

The entanglement?

ie..... see casimir

See van der waals..............

the energy IS causing the effect!

Why do you consider such a narrow band of the electromagnetic spectrum so important?

Originally Posted by Someone

Why do you consider such a narrow band of the electromagnetic spectrum so important?

radio to gamma ; all light

you just cant see it!


ie...... no place in the whole of the universe without light (electromagnetic energy; light), except to the narrow minded someone

Originally Posted by Bishadi

radio to gamma ; all light

you just cant see it!

Typically speaking, electromagnetic signals outside the near visual spectrum are not called "light". It might explain why so many people have trouble understanding what you're talking about, and people might be able to have more meaningful conversations with you if you would use the customary terminology.

ie...... no place in the whole of the universe without light (electromagnetic energy; light), except to the narrow minded someone

While theory predicts this is true, that has yet to be confirmed. For example, what lies outside of the visual edge of the universe? We have no idea. The very nature of how we observe the universe (by observing electromagnetic signals) would bias us towards a belief that things which do not interact with the electromagnetic spectrum do not exist. If dark matter exists as theory describes, it would definitely suggest that electromagnetic forces were not, in fact, "everywhere"--or even particularly meaningful to the majority of the universe.

Originally Posted by ronmatt

Here's a hypothesis...it's all mine of course so it will be easily debunked. Say that the Big Bang (in some form) was an accurate theory. The universe is expanding or exploding outwards. (question) outwards into what exactly? What lies beyond the edge of the universe, that apparently was there prior to the Big Bang? That empty 'nothingness' that the universe is displacing as it expands. Could it be made up of 'dark matter? dark energy? Could it be the causation of gravity?

No, because scientists have already found some dark matter and it's found inside of our universe.

Originally Posted by Panzerkampfwagen

No, because scientists have already found some dark matter and it's found inside of our universe.

Really? What journal was this paper published in?

Originally Posted by Jack Ridley

Really? What journal was this paper published in?

They're called nutrinos. Feel free to look it up.

Originally Posted by Someone

Typically speaking, electromagnetic signals outside the near visual spectrum are not called "light". It might explain why so many people have trouble understanding what you're talking about, and people might be able to have more meaningful conversations with you if you would use the customary terminology.

i am using the customary terminology, you are perhaps just not up to date and why the terms are throwing you off.

ie.... see the threads i opened, they are the currrent while your education maybe a bit obsolete.

While theory predicts this is true, that has yet to be confirmed.

quite the opposite; nature proves it true and not as of yet never anywhere ever has a PERFECT vacuum been confirmed without em (light; all wavelength of the spectrum)

A perfect vacuum has never been identified. Again, perhaps you are at the recyling stage.

For example, what lies outside of the visual edge of the universe?

no one on the earth has ever seen or been there. The old timers like to speculate but not one iota of data (as oooosual)

We have no idea.

i know

The very nature of how we observe the universe (by observing electromagnetic signals) would bias us towards a belief that things which do not interact with the electromagnetic spectrum do not exist.

that is 2 sentences that are good quality line items (attaboy)

If dark matter exists as theory describes, it would definitely suggest that electromagnetic forces were not, in fact, "everywhere"--or even particularly meaningful to the majority of the universe.

no place anywhere within the universe between any 2 points of mass without em (light) (ie... the suns magnetosphere is hugenormous so no where on this planet is there a void without em)

Dark matter in the original speculation is about mass within the universe that is not observable but the monkeys that believe DM/DE is what is causing the 'mass curve' of the galaxy rotations (per hubble) to be inconsistant with newtonian physics are idiots that DO NOT comprehend what energy entangling mass is. (em; all cases) ie.... them stars in close proximity are associating just the like moon and earth and just like the energy that combines the mass of nebula.

Perhaps when you read what is occuring RIGHT NOW within the scientific community, you could catch up beyond carl sagan's TV series.