1
New Theories / Re: What if dark matter is space time fabric?
« on: 09/08/2017 17:39:10 »
I previously posted this in the Physics, Astronomy and Cosmology forum without realizing that it was more appropriate to submit to this forum. I apologize for that oversight.
I have considered this myself for quite some time, but I also consider myself a simple man of simple mind and this solution that dark matter can be considered as a physical fabric or super-fluid, if one takes the time to afford it due consideration, is quite elegant in its simplicity.
I would argue that if the fabric of space-time is a physical substance (which I believe it to be), then as a galaxy placed within that fabric rotates, the fabric would be drawn in upon itself similar to objects placed on/in any other spinning fabric. Spin a washcloth in a bath tub and watch what happens. It's pulled in on itself. The rotating fabric drawing those objects inward could then account for the perceived gravitational effects of "dark matter" while the curving of the fabric caused by the objects in the galaxies account for their local orbital behavior. Light would still follow the path of the curve in the fabric of space-time caused by the gravitational mass of the object in the field.
This also makes sense if we choose to abandon the idea that "dark energy" exists to make up the other 70+% of the universe, accept a previously proposed "tired light" theory and reconsider the existence of the ether which was "proven wrong" by the Michelson-Morely experiment. The problem I have with this experiment is they were looking for differences in the speed at which light propagates through a vacuum due to the Earth's motion relative to the ether prior to the revolutionary discovery by Einstein that the speed of light measures the same value regardless of the motion of the source or observer. They were essentially looking for a result which Physics only later revealed could not have occurred. However, I have worked out a mathematical result that indicates a linear relationship between the amount of red shift which would occur for light with a wavelength of 400 nm to near infrared based on the distance of the light source which agrees with observed data and that amount of shift occurs at a distance of 13.7 BLY from the Earth. "Dark energy" is simply the loss of energy of a light source over astronomical distances because light must continue to travel the speed of light and now "dark matter" can make up 100% of the universe with a varied distribution not because it does exist some places but not others but rather because the amount of curvature space-time experiences varies with the presence of mass. You'll observe more dark matter near galaxies because the have greater mass.
Obviously this goes against the currently most accepted paradigms of science. I deliberately say "most accepted" rather than "correct" because we have seen on many occasions where brilliant minds were often wrong. Unfortunately, I don't believe this model of the universe will ever be a provable theory because, as was stated in an earlier post, dark matter appears to be measurable where as the fabric of space-time cannot be. It would be like asking a fish to measure that it's wet and the only way to do so is take the fish out of the water. Because we cannot (presently) "get out of" the fabric of space time, we will never be able to take an external measurement of it. It is not some abstract mathematical construct which allows us to explain the behavior of the universe. It is a physical fabric which affects the observed behavior of physical objects.
I have considered this myself for quite some time, but I also consider myself a simple man of simple mind and this solution that dark matter can be considered as a physical fabric or super-fluid, if one takes the time to afford it due consideration, is quite elegant in its simplicity.
I would argue that if the fabric of space-time is a physical substance (which I believe it to be), then as a galaxy placed within that fabric rotates, the fabric would be drawn in upon itself similar to objects placed on/in any other spinning fabric. Spin a washcloth in a bath tub and watch what happens. It's pulled in on itself. The rotating fabric drawing those objects inward could then account for the perceived gravitational effects of "dark matter" while the curving of the fabric caused by the objects in the galaxies account for their local orbital behavior. Light would still follow the path of the curve in the fabric of space-time caused by the gravitational mass of the object in the field.
This also makes sense if we choose to abandon the idea that "dark energy" exists to make up the other 70+% of the universe, accept a previously proposed "tired light" theory and reconsider the existence of the ether which was "proven wrong" by the Michelson-Morely experiment. The problem I have with this experiment is they were looking for differences in the speed at which light propagates through a vacuum due to the Earth's motion relative to the ether prior to the revolutionary discovery by Einstein that the speed of light measures the same value regardless of the motion of the source or observer. They were essentially looking for a result which Physics only later revealed could not have occurred. However, I have worked out a mathematical result that indicates a linear relationship between the amount of red shift which would occur for light with a wavelength of 400 nm to near infrared based on the distance of the light source which agrees with observed data and that amount of shift occurs at a distance of 13.7 BLY from the Earth. "Dark energy" is simply the loss of energy of a light source over astronomical distances because light must continue to travel the speed of light and now "dark matter" can make up 100% of the universe with a varied distribution not because it does exist some places but not others but rather because the amount of curvature space-time experiences varies with the presence of mass. You'll observe more dark matter near galaxies because the have greater mass.
Obviously this goes against the currently most accepted paradigms of science. I deliberately say "most accepted" rather than "correct" because we have seen on many occasions where brilliant minds were often wrong. Unfortunately, I don't believe this model of the universe will ever be a provable theory because, as was stated in an earlier post, dark matter appears to be measurable where as the fabric of space-time cannot be. It would be like asking a fish to measure that it's wet and the only way to do so is take the fish out of the water. Because we cannot (presently) "get out of" the fabric of space time, we will never be able to take an external measurement of it. It is not some abstract mathematical construct which allows us to explain the behavior of the universe. It is a physical fabric which affects the observed behavior of physical objects.
The following users thanked this post: GoC