Fascinating New Study Suggests Dark Matter Older Than the Universe

[zaangalewa]

Nothing has been around 10 billion years. Everything would eventually wear down due to entropy. For example, our Earth's magnetic field could be gone in 500 years by one projection. That would be the end of all of us -- The Weakening of Earth’s Magnetic Field Has Greatly Accelerated, Could Have Apocalyptic Implications for All of Us - Global Research.

The iron atoms are 10 billion light years away ... how old does that make them? ...

I don't know your problem now - but the universe is 13.8 billion years old and has a radius of 46.6 billion lightyears. So I would say a distance of 10 billion lightyears is equivalent to a time of 10/46.6*13.8 billion years in a cosmic context. Relativelly young, I would say.

 

[james bond]

There is ... the entire universe is permeated with the stuff ... from classical mechanics Shell theorem - Wikipedia:

"If the body is a spherically symmetric shell (i.e., a hollow ball), no net gravitational force is exerted by the shell on any object inside, regardless of the object's location within the shell."

Dark Matter's gravitational effects are all around us pulling us in all directions ... or in total, not at all ... remember, we only need Dark Matter to explain galactic sized objects ... or galaxy group sized objects ... little baby pin-pricks like our solar system are too small to measure any of these effects ...

One has to demonstrate how dark matter is pulling us in "all directions ... or in total, not at all ..." We can see that a black hole affects us with its gravity as the event horizon. I'm not sure what you mean by galactic sized objects or more as our galaxy is plenty big.

 

[zaangalewa]

I don’t know what dark matter is or even if it exists.

Haha, scientists would, basically, agree.

if I ran into dark matter would I feel it?

Nope.

Is it dark only in relation to light or is it ephemeral except for gravity.

The second one, basically.

why does it only exist everywhere but here?

Not so. The Milky Way has a dark matter halo, too.

What would happen if you did run into dark matter

What happens when you sit down in a car, bus, aeroplane or ship? This is much more mass than you are and it happens nothing. You do not feel any force in such a case. You start to feel the "resistance" of the reference system when you try to accelerate together with the mass of this reference systems. Biking is more easy.

 

[james bond]

Why do you think there is, and why are you the only person who sees it?

Do you hear voices too?

It's not good to ask feces any questions because any part of it will be exactly that. On the outside or the inside. The best thing to do is kick it to the curb if it gets in the way. You really don't want to step in it. This isn't what he said a year ago, but he said feces a year ago, too. It never changes.

 

[ReinyDays]

One has to demonstrate how dark matter is pulling us in "all directions ... or in total, not at all ..." We can see that a black hole affects us with its gravity as the event horizon. I'm not sure what you mean by galactic sized objects or more as our galaxy is plenty big.

You maybe missed the statement of out problem:

The basic problem is GR gravity doesn't explain why galaxies hold together ... they should be flying apart with just the matter we can see, so called light matter ... therefore there must be another kind of matter that we can't see, dark matter ...

That's the best I can do simplifying the problem ... it's a calculus thing ...

 

[james bond]

One has to demonstrate how dark matter is pulling us in "all directions ... or in total, not at all ..." We can see that a black hole affects us with its gravity as the event horizon. I'm not sure what you mean by galactic sized objects or more as our galaxy is plenty big.

You maybe missed the statement of out problem:

The basic problem is GR gravity doesn't explain why galaxies hold together ... they should be flying apart with just the matter we can see, so called light matter ... therefore there must be another kind of matter that we can't see, dark matter ...

That's the best I can do simplifying the problem ... it's a calculus thing ...

Last point first. It's a calculus thing should still produce something even if it's off. Some of the methods of figuring it out can lead to something.

Anyway, the basic problem with me is not to believe in dark matter and dark energy despite the evidence we thing we have. The 10 billion light years across isn't measuring time as we know it. If we put a clock in a ship that can go up to the speed of light, then it will move very, very, very slow like it's not working. I mean if we go from SF to New York, then no time has elapsed. So someone on Earth, standing still with the same clock, measuring how long it took light to reach them is way off. I think the only way we can use this clock to measure time of light from space is limited. We can only measure that we can reach with our maps of locations that we can travel to at light speed. Perhaps that is only 100 light years away.

What this sounds like is the weakness of big bang and cosmic inflation. And explosion can only go in one direction. Thus, many people (many scientists) aren't going to believe in it but give lip service. Even the center of the universe becomes where the observer is. You know that's not true.

The dark matter and dark energy stuff is like global warming. People are going to believe what they want to believe.

 

[zaangalewa]

... The dark matter and dark energy stuff is like global warming. People are going to believe what they want to believe.

I don't have any idea where such totally weird and absurde ideas come from.

(1) "Dark matter" and "dark energy" are not good expressions. "Dark" means just simple we don't know what it is. Without this unknown thing, which we call "dark matter", galaxies would not exist. And we are able to see effects in this context - for example gravity lenses. Dark matter is 23% of the energy of the universe.

(2)"Dark energy" is something, where we have even much less ideas about what it is. As far as I understood it has to do with the accelerating expansion of the universe, but no one has any idea what dark energy really is - it exists not any light idea about. It is able to be everything - ¿or nothing? The most intelligent men of all mankind have a problem to find out what's going on in this context. We don't know what it is and what binds 72% of the energy of the universe in this unkown structure.

(3)The global warming is a process, which human beings started with the industrialization. It has to do with a derailment of the global greenhouse effect because of industrialized human activities, which need a lot of energy. The problem is specially the production of much to much CO2. As far as I know the first warnings about this process started in the 1960ies. The USA fights in this context like crazy against all people, who like to help to bring this very serios problem under cohtrol - but no one in the world knows why the USA is so mad to do so.

 

[james bond]

I don't have any idea where such totally weird and absurde ideas come from.

Creation science. Real science.

The atheist scientists want dark matter and dark energy to explain big bang and cosmic inflation.

On a side note, I just realized while writing my last post the "dark" could refer to Satan. He certainly hides well. Hat tip.

 

[ReinyDays]

Last point first. It's a calculus thing should still produce something even if it's off. Some of the methods of figuring it out can lead to something.

Anyway, the basic problem with me is not to believe in dark matter and dark energy despite the evidence we thing we have. The 10 billion light years across isn't measuring time as we know it. If we put a clock in a ship that can go up to the speed of light, then it will move very, very, very slow like it's not working. I mean if we go from SF to New York, then no time has elapsed. So someone on Earth, standing still with the same clock, measuring how long it took light to reach them is way off. I think the only way we can use this clock to measure time of light from space is limited. We can only measure that we can reach with our maps of locations that we can travel to at light speed. Perhaps that is only 100 light years away.

What this sounds like is the weakness of big bang and cosmic inflation. And explosion can only go in one direction. Thus, many people (many scientists) aren't going to believe in it but give lip service. Even the center of the universe becomes where the observer is. You know that's not true.

The dark matter and dark energy stuff is like global warming. People are going to believe what they want to believe.

I do not understand your "last point first" comment ... please point out the specific step in the derivation of Shell Theory that you disagree with ...

If we put a clock in a ship that can go up to the speed of light, then it will move very, very, very slow like it's not working.

For the people on the ship watching the clock, it will be moving like normal ... for the people back here on Earth it will be moving very slowly ... this is the very core of the Einsteinian Revolution, that the passage of time is "relative" instead of absolute, and that's what's relative in Relativity ... let's magically shoot our clock around Alpha Centari and back, our clock here on Earth will say 8.6 years have pasted ... the clock we sent out will show a much much shorter period of time depending how close to c we get the fool thing to travel ...

It takes light a little more than 15 milliseconds to travel from SF to NY ... so time must elapse ... keep in mind we're in GR-land, I understand there's some inconsistencies with QM, but we're talking about galactic behaviors, not electrons ...

The Big Bang Theory is written in pencil ... so it's easier to erase the parts that are shown to be wrong ... we've recently discovered that inflation is continuing, so we erased the part the predicted the opposite and replaced it with something else ... again in pencil ... because who knows what we'll discover next ... theories are designed to change; it's a process, not a goal ...

 

[zaangalewa]

I don't have any idea where such totally weird and absurde ideas come from.

Creation science. Real science.

No idea what you like to say with this words. Sure is someone able to call "natural science" "creation science" - because nature is creation. Sure depends natural philosophy and/or natural science on experiments = reality. But this changes nothing in the known methods and known facts around natural philosophy. Special si in the Engolis epkaling world oinyl the totally stupid discusison "Christians vs Darwinists" which your world calls "Creation vs Evolution". No one in the Englosh sopeign world seems to have any longer a good idea what the Christian relgiosn says, what creatiom is, what evolution is (and what it is not) nor what darwinism (and Nazism, racism) is.

The atheist scientists want dark matter and dark energy to explain big bang and cosmic inflation.

You don't have any idea what you try to speak about, isn't it? It was by the way the physicist and priest George Lemaitre, who dicovered this, what we call today "big bang". He spoke from a kind of basic or first atom, which started to expand.

On a side note, I just realized while writing my last post the "dark" could refer to Satan. He certainly hides well. Hat tip.

Whatever I could say now: It will follow a totally stupid and absurde satanic discussion about the theme what is satanic and what is not satanic. Accept just simple that the words "dark matter" and "dark energy" are psychologically demotivating phrases - and are two completely different things. The physical "elements" or "realities" behind this words have not really something to do with this bad chosen words. Call it "dark matter" and "unknown energy" or seek for other words. In general: Man made words are not the reality beind this what this words describe. A stone exists independent - and whether you call it "stone" or "Stein" makes not any difference for example. Nothing in human words makes reality real. But we will always find a word. The creating word of god is very different from the words, which we use. Gods word of creation is for example a timeless word, how Augustinus found out long centuries ago.

 

[james bond]

No one in the Englosh sopeign world seems to have any longer a good idea what the Christian relgiosn says, what creatiom is, what evolution is (and what it is not) nor what darwinism (and Nazism, racism) is.

Let's see where you are coming from. Okay, if the big bang did exist let's say in the beginning around 6,000 years ago (or whatever the number of years ago), then we know the first thing it had was light. I think we agree God was the cause and he started space and time. On one hand, you have a singularity of infinite temperature and density in the space time created by God. It would mean we are about to experience a heat transfer which the world had never seen before. That said, what about the void? The void and singularity are two different things. Furthermore, the heat created would be intense in the early stages of this cosmic inflation. We should see this in the early universe and a cooling in the later universe. However, this isn't what we find throughout the universe. We find it is a constant 2.725 K for the CMB.

 

[zaangalewa]

No one in the Englosh sopeign world seems to have any longer a good idea what the Christian relgiosn says, what creatiom is, what evolution is (and what it is not) nor what darwinism (and Nazism, racism) is.

Let's see where you are coming from. Okay, if the big bang did exist let's say in the beginning around 6,000 years ago (or whatever the number of years ago), then we know the first thing it had was light. I think we agree God was the cause and he started space and time. [/Quotle]

I don't think we agree. I believe god created everything - for example not only space and time, but perhaps also universes without space and time. I loften tried to find out what time is. I have no answer. In case of space it's more easy to see a structure. Space is for example this what stays when everything else is taken away. We can compare this in physics with a vacuum. But in physics for example it is not clear how empty this emptyness is. For example exists in every vacuum fields. And this fields are able to make particles. In quantum mechanics exist so called virtual particles in the vacuum, what gives the vacuum a structure. In the vacuum exists in [¿superposition?] a particle and its anti-particles, which destroy each other and then appear again oitezhr öaprtcvoels adn and theri anti-partiovles. You can imagine this as if plus+numbers and negative-numbers exist which add each other contiously to 0. The Hawking radiation for example comes beause a black hole makes such virtual particles to normal particles. One flies into the universe - the other minimizes the gravity of the black hole - it "evaporates". Perhaps has this what happens everywhere in the vaccujm somnehgin to do with dark enerhy - perhaps not. I do not know.

Quote] On one hand, you have a singularity of infinite temperature and density in the space time created by God.

No. We have a calculation - a formula - which breaks down and gives no answers. And no one was able up to now to know the infinite elements in this theory. In reality something totally different could had happened. Statan for example could had been in a pre-universal toilet and we could be a result of his digestion. Who knows? But on the door of physics hangs the big note from ancient Greek philosophers: "No entrance without mathematics!". The spirituality of physics is mathematics.

It wouldmean we are about to experience a heat transfer which the world had never seen before.

Heat transfer? Nonsense. The infinite is not always the same infinite. When you compress a hot potatoe to a point (size 0, endless high temperture) and you decompress it, then you have a hot potatoe. Same you can do (only in experiments by thoughts) with everything. But when you don't know what was compressed then you are not able to decompress it. A single point with an endless high temperature tells not a lot of things - but it is able to be many different things.

That said, what about the void?

Void? What to say about the void? "Avoid the void!"?

The void and singularity are two different things.

Are they? A point is nothing. If for example all positive and negative energies of the universe are in total 0 then a universe in total would be without energy and not be able to cause anything "outside" of this universe. So perhaps you see in every point all around you an endless number of universes - but this is without any effect. Who cares?

Furthermore, the heat created would be intense in the early stages of this cosmic inflation.

Yea - was damned hot this Plank seconds. I got nearly a sunburn.

We should see this in the early universe and a cooling in the later universe. However, this isn't what we find throughout the universe. We find it is a constant 2.725 K for the CMB.

It cooled down and it cools down. In the moment the backgrund radiation is about 3°K (2,725 (± 0,002) Kelvin) and comes from a time when the universe was 380,000 years old and had a temperature of about 3000°K. By the way: The German physicist Erich Regener calculated in 1933 the temperature of a radiation from the intergalactic space - they called it "ultra-radiation" - with 2.8°K. Astonishing, isn't it? (see: http://www.wolff.ch/astro/All-Temperatur_Regener.pdf )