The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Does dark matter have mass?  (Read 9889 times)

Offline annie123

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 252
    • View Profile
Does dark matter have mass?
« on: 12/07/2008 02:23:39 »
If the 'dark matter' out there is really 'matter' won't it have mass? And if it has mass why doesn't it conduct sound waves and so let us hear 'the music of the spheres"(probably loud explosions/mostly percussion etc.)
« Last Edit: 12/07/2008 11:55:56 by chris »


 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Re: Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #1 on: 12/07/2008 08:41:29 »
Hi Annie & welcome to TNS.

Dark matter is a strange beastie. It does indeed have mass but it only interacts via gravity and, thus, could not be affected by sound. If it can't be affected by sound, it can't "pass it on".

As for hearing loud explosions & mostly percussion, I'd call that Schoenberg's Piano Concerto, op. 42  :D
 

blakestyger

  • Guest
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #2 on: 12/07/2008 12:05:06 »
Yes, DM is quite enigmatic, like many theoretical astronomical ideas it was postulated because it needed to be there to explain the way spiral galaxies held together - then people started to look for it.

The favourite candidate at the moment is the neutralino, a Weakly Interacting Massive Particle (WIMP) with a predicted mass of 20 to 100 times that of the proton (yes, that precise).
If they exist then some should remain over from the Big Bang. It's predicted that they will only interact with other particles through weak interaction and gravity. This theoretical particle should be massive enough to exert gravity and emit no radiation, neither would it collapse with a galaxy's disc as it is weakly interacting which is exactly what is needed for a DM halo.
Hopes are being pinned on the CERN Large Hadron Collider that is to be kick-started this year, I believe - though an astronomer I know has said to to hold my breath. :-\

There aren't loads of astronomy jokes but here's one:

A spiral galaxy goes into a pub. The barman says "I'm not serving you - you're barred". ;D
 

Offline annie123

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 252
    • View Profile
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #3 on: 14/07/2008 07:28:11 »
Thanks for replies. I still find the use of the word 'matter' confusing in terms of its usual connotations. Is there any other form of matter that does not conduct/reflect/pass on or otherwise be affected by sound waves?
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #4 on: 14/07/2008 08:10:13 »
Sound is propagated by particles bumping into each other; like tipping dominoes. Sound must cause another object to vibrate in order for it to be heard. Dark matter interacts only via gravity so could not cause another object to vibrate; neither could another object cause dark matter to vibrate. Therefore sound propagation is impossible.

Is there any other form of matter that does not conduct/reflect/pass on or otherwise be affected by sound waves?

There are plenty of materials that absord sound rather than passing it on. That is the basis of soundproofing.
« Last Edit: 14/07/2008 08:13:33 by DoctorBeaver »
 

Offline Alan McDougall

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1285
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #5 on: 14/07/2008 11:50:05 »
Assuming dark matter has mass why is the universe still expanding at the rate it is Huge ammounts of exotic matter

must have a huge effect on the universe
 

Offline Soul Surfer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3345
  • keep banging the rocks together
    • View Profile
    • ian kimber's web workspace
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #6 on: 15/07/2008 08:55:44 »
It does have a huge effect on the way galaxies and clusters of galaxies move and the whole detail of structures on this large scale.  As to the universe expanding it could quite well be that the properties of this material effectively drive the expansion so understanding it could well be a solution not a problem.
 

Offline Bishadi

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 75
    • View Profile
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #7 on: 15/07/2008 15:43:35 »
If the 'dark matter' out there is really 'matter' won't it have mass? And if it has mass why doesn't it conduct sound waves and so let us hear 'the music of the spheres"(probably loud explosions/mostly percussion etc.)

Dark matter/energy;  was a created entity.   It does not exist.

Virial theorem makes a big oooops with combining energy as that energy has a property of entanglement that is not addressed.


To see, how the current model is observed http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0710/0710.4384.pdf

this pub from india, shares a few insights

the idea to remember is that Virial predicted how the rotations should work, but then to look into space and watch what is actually occurring; well the data does not match the math.

Hence they created a patch;  Dark matter/energy.....

when in reality what they are observing is the effect of entangled energy between the stars.....

 

Offline Soul Surfer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3345
  • keep banging the rocks together
    • View Profile
    • ian kimber's web workspace
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #8 on: 16/07/2008 08:36:06 »
Thankyou for that reference it is useful I was wondering what effects the expansion of the universe (dark energy) might have on galaxies.

As to your own contraversial statement in the last line of your comment it adds up to nothing unless you explain clearly what you mean and show how it fits into the general scheme of observations.
 

Offline Bishadi

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 75
    • View Profile
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #9 on: 16/07/2008 16:54:31 »
Thankyou for that reference it is useful I was wondering what effects the expansion of the universe (dark energy) might have on galaxies.
   Expansion?   How does accretion work in expansion?

i.e....  not an entropy kind of guy;  planck was wrong!

Quote
As to your own contraversial statement in the last line of your comment it adds up to nothing unless you explain clearly what you mean and show how it fits into the general scheme of observations.
  general?   That phenomenon conversed about all over the world as to 'what is gravity?'     Is simple:   entangled energy between mass

i.e....  note the binary asteroid 
Quote
Jul 11, 2008Binary Asteroids

What causes asteroids to split apart?

Scientists have been studying small planetoids called Near Earth Objects (NEO) for the past thirty years. Some concerns have arisen about whether large space rocks could strike our planet since current theories suggest that one of them caused the extinction of the dinosaurs. The Earth has supposedly been struck many times by asteroids and comets, so astronomers have been tracking as many objects as they can find to see if any of them cross the plane of Earth's orbit.

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/00current.htm 


it is suggested that the energy captured from the sun is what is causing the rotation


if the binary asteroid shares that within or in between the 2 rotating; if the highest state of the so called gravitational attraction is focused in the center of their combination and not on the mass of either asteroid...

then you are seeing the exact same thing that is called a 'black hole'....

not that they exist but that is is the combining of energy focused to the center is that phenomena wrongfully called a black hole, when it is really the shared energy between the stuctures is greater than any of the singles, added separately.....

this phenomenon is from entangled energy...
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #10 on: 16/07/2008 19:00:52 »
Eh?  ???

In what way was Planck wrong? As for the rest of what you said, I haven't a clue what you mean.
« Last Edit: 16/07/2008 19:02:39 by DoctorBeaver »
 

Offline Soul Surfer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3345
  • keep banging the rocks together
    • View Profile
    • ian kimber's web workspace
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #11 on: 16/07/2008 22:59:40 »
Bishadi is a Troll spouting rubbish with the intention of creating arguments.  By some lucky chance he hit on a reference that I found very interesting.
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #12 on: 16/07/2008 23:01:38 »
Bishadi is a Troll spouting rubbish...

Is he related to Bill Bailey?  :D
 

Offline Bishadi

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 75
    • View Profile
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #13 on: 17/07/2008 16:46:03 »
Eh?  ??? 
  then ask a question but why the ad homimen attacks?

Quote
In what way was Planck wrong?
because the environment cannot be observed within the confines of the single direction of entropy.  Angular momentum cannot reflect the 'l' nor the potential increase when 2 systems shares the same 'f' and within a supporting environment reflect the increased potential that is greater than the 2 systems, when added separately.

i.e.....  2 people can lift a greater weight, then the addition of the 2 maximums added separately.

Are you even aware of why Quantu, mechanics was developed?

Look up why Gibbs is used and how the resonance conveys between 2 systems without a loss.....

 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #14 on: 17/07/2008 19:24:41 »
Eh?  ??? 
  then ask a question

I did ask a question. I asked how Planck was wrong.

Yes, I am aware of why QM was developed. I am aware of why String Theory was developed. I am aware of why Quantum Loop Gravity was developed.

Quote
because the environment cannot be observed within the confines of the single direction of entropy.

If that means what I think it means, then it is totally wrong. Entropy following the "Arrow Of Time" is exactly how the environment is. We observe it around us all the time.

Are you referring to the Gibbs artifact? That can be easily explained and reduced by using smoothing filters. I fail to grasp what it has to do with entropy.

Also, look up "The Gegenbauer reconstruction method".
« Last Edit: 17/07/2008 19:41:28 by DoctorBeaver »
 

Offline Bishadi

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 75
    • View Profile
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #15 on: 19/07/2008 17:21:26 »
Eh?  ??? 
  then ask a question

I did ask a question. I asked how Planck was wrong. 

The you are aware of what angular momentum is?

Do you know the math?  Or are you reading wiki or something?

Meaning if we have a system defined,  can we (current physics) address 2 like systems associating and match up predictions with the math?

If you say yes, then obviously you are not a math guy.

ie....  look up Virial theorem http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/virial.html
http://universe-review.ca/R04-03-VirialTheorem.htm


Quote
  http://www.astro.uu.se/~mizuno/DynProc/2003_virial.pdf



Thoughts on the Virial Theorem
What did we leave out?
How about different masses?
Collisions? Close encounters?
Timescales
food for thought  (an eye opener)

Quote
Yes, I am aware of why QM was developed.
to bridge newtonian with the other sciences; ie.. chemistry..

and they don't work....... 

Quote


I am aware of why String Theory was developed. I am aware of why Quantum Loop Gravity was developed.
they are patches

Quote
then i shared this truth...


because the environment cannot be observed within the confines of the single direction of entropy.


and you respond with this


If that means what I think it means, then it is totally wrong. Entropy following the "Arrow Of Time" is exactly how the environment is. We observe it around us all the time.

with simple eyes.....

look up entanglement......   maybe you forgot the missing link

Quote
Are you referring to the Gibbs artifact?
  Gibbs 'free energy' .... in which the energy upon a structure is the resonance, rather than a chemical potential.... in which the environment is addressed to offer a method of 'how to' define an exchange of energy without measurable loss (an entropy buster)
Quote

That can be easily explained and reduced by using smoothing filters. I fail to grasp what it has to do with entropy. 

because you not up to speed with what is occuring in the sciences......

a paradigm shift is on the horizon....

the missing link is what shares what that non-local affect is;  entanglement; shared energy between structures does have an effect no where addressed in the current physics of the universal equations.

remember the question:    WHAT DID WE LEAVE OUT?

it is based on the error in plancks constant;  the representation of angular momentum removes the ability of measuring the potential increases from the environment.

 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #16 on: 19/07/2008 17:27:57 »
You still haven't told me how Planck was wrong.
 

Offline Bishadi

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 75
    • View Profile
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #17 on: 19/07/2008 17:44:48 »
You still haven't told me how Planck was wrong.

i did, it is above, as well with material in current form (Virial) to share, that observed data does not match the math...

problem is, you talk rather than do....

in that even if I put a frame of math on the board, all you would do is ask someone else to confirm it.

please remove the dr, from your handle as it ruins an credibility to the field of professionals.

if you think I am here to debate with an unarmed person, you have me figured all wrong....

i like to offer questions to thinking minds, our future generations; that can offer basis to drive their professors nuts.

as to question the curren paradigm is what allows progress to continue;

you just can't see that

as for to question has the works been done?   You bet, but I have no intention of publishing as i did once before in 82' and the 'community' was too much like you, complacent to comprehend that material.

So for these last 25 years, research unbiasd has been completed and this time, we will go directly to the kids; the future with the truth....

it is all based from changing the comprehension of how energy is observed (plancks constant).......

just as 'f' is relevant to the energy, 'l' is also just as important, which brings in 't' and removes 'c'......

if you understand that than you will find the em spectrum is simple a list of line items of energy, as each is simply a unit of 'light'... in which then the properties of energy (i.e. resonance and entanglement) ground the non-local affect

basically addressing what the Big E was trying to do; represent gravity within the single form of mathematics

that missing link is the property of entanglement
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #18 on: 19/07/2008 17:49:51 »
I most certainly will not remove the Doctor from my name. I earned my doctorate at Cambridge and I'm very proud of that fact.

If you just want to trade insults rather than conduct a serious scientific discussion then you have very much picked on the wrong person.
 

Offline Bishadi

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 75
    • View Profile
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #19 on: 19/07/2008 18:11:08 »
I most certainly will not remove the Doctor from my name. I earned my doctorate at Cambridge and I'm very proud of that fact.

If you just want to trade insults rather than conduct a serious scientific discussion then you have very much picked on the wrong person.

you keep putting up irresponsible post, directly attacking; you drew the first blood, not me

you asked for the why's, i offered them but you discount any reading because you choose not to address issues and remain complacent.

very little respect for such from anything that considered itself a doctor and yet short on honesty

if you do not understand something consider it advanced education and ask real questions, but to think you can corner me, well you can't.....   I have sat with mathematicians and stumped them when they realize a whole new framework is required (paradigm shift) 


i play no games, so be fair and either address the material to offer increased understanding, or don't...

either you know what you are talking about and how to address it, or like most of the paper hangers; they got there education and forgot knowledge evolves   (and will be left behind)

for the children:    the old will be extinct; rest assured!

no time to suffer fools
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #20 on: 19/07/2008 19:37:56 »
I've looked back through the thread and my first post was...

Eh?  ???

In what way was Planck wrong? As for the rest of what you said, I haven't a clue what you mean.

What is irresponsible about that? How is that attacking you? To my mind it is a perfectly reasonable response to your claim. I asked you to explain how Planck was wrong. I haven't yet seen you address that.

The only proof I've seen you offer so far is that your impudence is matched only by your arrogance.
« Last Edit: 19/07/2008 19:42:46 by DoctorBeaver »
 

Offline Bishadi

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 75
    • View Profile
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #21 on: 19/07/2008 23:14:45 »
I asked you to explain how Planck was wrong. I haven't yet seen you address that.

what does this mean

"because the environment cannot be observed within the confines of the single direction of entropy.  Angular momentum cannot reflect the 'l' nor the potential increase when 2 systems shares the same 'f' and within a supporting environment reflect the increased potential that is greater than the 2 systems, when added separately.

i.e.....  2 people can lift a greater weight, then the addition of the 2 maximums added separately."

Is there a question?

 

Offline Bishadi

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 75
    • View Profile
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #22 on: 19/07/2008 23:19:23 »
In what way was Planck wrong?

before we go further

please read a little on the original paper, as i am not concerned with people opinions that have not at least read the paper

Quote
1. Entropy depends on disorder and this disorder, according to the electromagnetic theory of radiation for the monochromatic vibrations of a resonator when situated in a permanent stationary radiation field, depends on the irregularity with which it constantly changes its amplitude and phase, provided one considers time intervals large compared to the time of one vibration but small compared to the duration of a measurement. If amplitude and phase both remained absolutely constant, which means completely homogeneous vibrations, no entropy could exist and the vibrational energy would have to be completely free to be converted into work. The constant energy U of a single stationary vibrating resonator accordingly is to be taken as time average, or what is the same thing, as a simultaneous average of the energies of a large number N of identical resonators, situated in the same stationary radiation field, and which are sufficiently separated so as not to influence each other directly. It is in this sense that we shall refer to the average energy U of a single resonator. Then to the total energy 


http://dbhs.wvusd.k12.ca.us/webdocs/Chem-History/Planck-1901/Planck-1901.html

Quote


As for the rest of what you said, I haven't a clue what you mean.
i can see that

Quote

The only proof I've seen you offer so far is that your impudence is matched only by your arrogance.

not real patient with them who profess to know, and really have no clue

it is probably why i prefer working alone
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #23 on: 19/07/2008 23:52:57 »

it is probably why i prefer working alone

I bet other people can't wait to work with you.
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #24 on: 19/07/2008 23:54:27 »
Precisely; what does this mean?

"because the environment cannot be observed within the confines of the single direction of entropy"

Are you suggesting that entropy must be bi- or multi-directional for the environment to be observed?
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Does dark matter have mass?
« Reply #24 on: 19/07/2008 23:54:27 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums