Naked Science Forum
Non Life Sciences => Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology => Topic started by: Eric A. Taylor on 30/07/2010 08:36:19
-
We know of 4 fundamental forces, discovered in reverse order of their strength. Gravity, Electromagnetic and the weak and strong nuclear forces. Could dark energy be another fundamental force, billions of times weaker than gravity? Gravity is already so weak that it's hard or impossible to measure until you have a huge number of atoms gathered together. But gravity drops off fairly quickly as you move away. If there was another repulsive force billions of times weaker than even gravity but which didn't drop off with distance (or drop off as quickly as gravity does) then it's effect would not be seen until you got to extra galactic scales. It would also not effect the expansion of the universe until it reached a critical density. If dark energy were a fundamental force of nature could it be distinguished from something other than normal energy?
-
Eric
I think that there is a long range electrostatic force that has yet to be discovered that pushes stars apart [as well as assisting gravity in attracting planets to their star.] If you look up alternative magnoflux universe part 1 you will see this force alluded to there.
CliveS
-
The 31st July issue of "The New scientist " discusses this topic suggesting that a force that has a range that depends on the density of matter locally that it calls the chameleon force could explain things but I find the arguments very unconvincing.
-
I think it's probably an Occam's razor argument against introducing a fifth force--it's seems a lot simpler to assume that dark energy works within the context of general relativity (or that general relativity isn't 100% correct at large scales) than it is to introduce a new force just to account for those effects.
-
it is possible and logical to think that dark energy is the fifth force, a very weak antigravitational force. Dark matter doesn't exists, the missing mass is located in massive black holes possibly mostly located at the horizon of the universe. If it is true that a black hole is a region of space with maximum entropy and that the universe end with maximum entropy, the end (and the beginning) of the universe is the entire universe crushing in to a black hole. At that moment, the fifth force could become stronger than gravity (analog to gravity vs nuclear force at the end of a star life). The fifth force is a repulsive one, so creating another big bang. If the dark matter is in fact matter hidden in massive black holes, that explains why we cannot measure the fifth force easily and send theoretical physicists on the wrong track...
The fifth force could be the missing link to a unify theory of gravitation and nuclear force...
Now, i am thinking about that theoretically, in a photon point of view, there is no time, so it means that photons do not exist in our space time. How could it be? The truth is, when you do experiments to detect photons, you don't detect photons at all, you detect a variation of energy in space time but the photons may have never really showed up... :) That is a strong point to a holographic universe and that could be the key to the non locality phenomenon. if photons do not exist in space time then,there is nothing wrong to think that they can possibly exist in another dimension not following relativity's principles...
Maybe photons are simply quantum of information that makes reality as we perceive it... Black holes absorb matter and light. The matter is transform in to light before vanishing in a black hole. So everything in a black hole is light... suspended light in another dimension(s) or simply pure information. The quantity of information contained in a black hole is proportional to its surface (the event horizon).
-
Theoretically dark energy could be pancakes, the problem is regardless of what theory we use to describe it, we still don't have all the pieces to pin it down concretely. Untill we find a theory that suggests a way of confirming all the effects and affects accurately (and I suspect when we understand other phenomena such as dark matter this will be easier) then its all guesswork.
-
There are 4 forces inside matter, strong 10^38 gluon short range force that holds protons to protons and neutrons to neutrons, there is the electroweak insider 10^25 boson short range force that attracts negative charge to positive charges, there is the QED insider magnetic enclosure 10^36 force that binds molecular volumes together and finally there is gravity force=1 that allows everything to attract each other. However, to magnetize interstellar space we need a fifth force which could be a electrostatic long range boson force maybe I guess about 10^-5 of gravity.
CliveS
-
When you are hurt somewhere on your body, there is a signal going from your nerves where you feel the pain to your brain, telling you where to feel the pain. This is truly a virtual feeling, this is a fact not fiction, so why other things should not be virtual.... [?] [:D]
-
I think it's probably an Occam's razor argument against introducing a fifth force--it's seems a lot simpler to assume that dark energy works within the context of general relativity (or that general relativity isn't 100% correct at large scales) than it is to introduce a new force just to account for those effects.
The problem with using Occam's razor here is that no one knows what it is. The term "dark" here refers to a lack of knowledge rather than a lack of light, as in the "Dark Ages."
Perhaps "Doyle's Razor" would be of more use here. "Once all other possibilities have been eliminated, the one left, no matter how unlikely, must be the truth." I'm not sure if this statement is a real guide used in science, but it's as true today as it was in the 19th Century.
-
Physicists don't know what dark matter is, but they have taken huge chunks out of the mystery by eliminating things that it is not. It is not black holes. Black holes generate huge amounts of gravity in local areas. Dark matter is too spread out to be black holes. It's not baryonic matter, made of quarks and electrons. There is so much of it that if it were baryonic matter it would have been heated and would be visible in the IR or radio spectrum. It is believed to be concentrated (at least some of it) around the borders of galaxies. It it were baryonic it would compress, heat and form new stars when dark matter halos from colliding galaxies interacted, no such phenomena has ever been seen. It is seen in the gas clouds INSIDE galaxies. Dark matter only interacts with light and baryons through gravity. It doesn't even seem to interact with itself except with gravity.
-
The four-forces viewpoint is out of date anyway isn't it?
Quantum-field theory is a mathematical culmination describing all the fundamental forces except gravity.
If you're saying that DE could be explained as an extrapolation of QFT, then I think this is already viewed as a possibility.
If you're talking about adding completely separate mechanism to describe our universe then this would seem counter to the reductionist principles of fundamental physics.
-
Thanks Peppercorn,
It is not a matter of adding anything, just a matter of having a clearer perception or recognition of what has already been identified.
As an organisational psychologist, heping people to cope with the uncertainty of change is a critical part of my work. Uncertainty is elusive in that it is often felt rather than seen.
What I'm looking for is a recognition that uncertainty is an inherent part of Nature and a vital one at that. From what I have read, uncertainty is ubiquitous. It is apparent at the microscopic level, the macroscopic level and the cosmic level. It is measureable. Possibility is the basic measure, as previously discussed, and it is a simple measure that anyone can understand, and this is important.
If uncertainty were acknowledged as the fifth dimension, it may help people to come to grips with it better.
Until recently, religion provided a mechanism for people to cope with uncertainty. With the secularisation of society, a coping void has emerged. Developing a psychology of uncertainty that is not just based on anxiety reduction has great potential. Indeed, what is often seen as a personality trait may simply be a response to uncertainty of which I have identified seven major ones ~ rigity, avoidance, control, spontaneity, anticipation, initiative and serenity. The good news is that a person may LEARN to expand the response repertoire and become more adaptive.
A major theory of human motivation could well emerge from having a deeper understanding of uncertainty. Separating environmental uncertainty from psychological uncertainty was a major breakthrough in this regard.
If there has been a paradigm shift, it would help to make it more explicit.
Regards, Clem.
-
Thanks Peppercorn,
It is not a matter of adding anything, just a matter of having a clearer perception or recognition of what has already been identified.
As an organisational psychologist, heping people to cope with the uncertainty of change is a critical part of my work. Uncertainty is elusive in that it is often felt rather than seen.
What I'm looking for is a recognition that uncertainty is an inherent part of Nature and a vital one at that. From what I have read, uncertainty is ubiquitous. It is apparent at the microscopic level, the macroscopic level and the cosmic level. It is measureable. Possibility is the basic measure, as previously discussed, and it is a simple measure that anyone can understand, and this is important.
If uncertainty were acknowledged as the fifth dimension, it may help people to come to grips with it better.
Until recently, religion provided a mechanism for people to cope with uncertainty. With the secularisation of society, a coping void has emerged. Developing a psychology of uncertainty that is not just based on anxiety reduction has great potential. Indeed, what is often seen as a personality trait may simply be a response to uncertainty of which I have identified seven major ones ~ rigity, avoidance, control, spontaneity, anticipation, initiative and serenity. The good news is that a person may LEARN to expand the response repertoire and become more adaptive.
A major theory of human motivation could well emerge from having a deeper understanding of uncertainty. Separating environmental uncertainty from psychological uncertainty was a major breakthrough in this regard.
If there has been a paradigm shift, it would help to make it more explicit.
Regards, Clem.
Not sure how we got of on the psychology of uncertainty here (which has nothing at all to do with quantum uncertainty.) We are discussing dark energy. From what we understand of gravity, it drops off at a rate of the square of the distance, but it never ever falls to zero. With all the matter in the universe gravitationally attracting itself the expansion of the universe should be slowing down but it is in fact speeding up. It's like tossing a ball up. You fully expect it to come right back. What would you think if you tossed the ball up, watched it slow down as it reaches the highest point, then instead of stopping and falling back into your hand it takes off like a rocket. That would be really weird!
-
...Separating environmental uncertainty from psychological uncertainty was a major breakthrough in this regard....paradigm shift....
Not sure how we got of on the psychology of uncertainty here (which has nothing at all to do with quantum uncertainty.)
Eric, I see you've not come across the joys of Sandstone's postings!
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=33328.0
Don't really know why I'm putting a link to it - you really won't to go there - It being "Is uncertainty the fifth dimension?" [???]
It would seem that after refusing to answer the perfectly valid questions asked about his 'theory' and hence causing everyone to get pee'd-off and leave - he has decided to try to hijack your post instead - I'm assuming cause it's got some of the same words in the title [:(!]
-
From what we understand of gravity, it drops off at a rate of the square of the distance, but it never ever falls to zero. With all the matter in the universe gravitationally attracting itself the expansion of the universe should be slowing down but it is in fact speeding up. It's like tossing a ball up. You fully expect it to come right back. What would you think if you tossed the ball up, watched it slow down as it reaches the highest point, then instead of stopping and falling back into your hand it takes off like a rocket. That would be really weird!
Eric, I agree that our 'new look' expansionist universe is most unsettling.
Especially since there also seems to be evidence for a big unexplained gravity 'surplus' which would drag everything back together even faster without the 'vacuum energy' constant (or whatever it is!).
There was a time, probably around the mid-70's, when it would seem that QFT only had to be combined with a workable quantum gravity model to tie up the major loose ends in Cosmology.
I think the clues for whether dark-energy (I agree - terrible name) is a force like particle or a key constituent of the dimensional-nature of space - will depend on whether we observe local variations in expansion rates (one bit of space being more expantion-ary(?) than another - suiting a scalar-field model).
-
I agree that dark energy should be renamed dark force. If we have lost 75% of the observable universe then that means we need a repulsive force of minus four gravities to balance the equation. Probably the dark force of =-4G will turn out to be massless electromagnetism.
CliveS
-
... will turn out to be massless electromagnetism.
Is there any other type?
-
there have been attempt to explain both dark matter and dark energy as modification of gravity (so, not a fifth force, just a modification of what is there; in this sense gravity means the force due to whatever you are considering having mass). So far all such modifications have contradicted other experimental observations. Right now the dark energy and matter assumptions are the best bet, but it's far from decided....
-
Link:
Void that is truly empty solves dark energy puzzle (http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20727764.100-void-that-is-truly-empty-solves-dark-energy-puzzle.html?DCMP=OTC-rss&nsref=online-news)
-
No Peppercorn. There is no electromagnetism I know of except the massless type.The link quotes "In our picture, quarks and gluons can't flutter in and out of existence unless they're inside hadrons " which I believe is correct and means that physicists should not look for parts of particles; just accept that the dark magnoflux force is equal to 4G's.
It does mean though that all the stars in a galaxy have there north poles facing in the same direction thus they repel each other. Interestingly this will result in an induced south pole magnet at the very centre of the galaxy which could appear as a black hole!!
CliveS
-
The way i see it is that if there is a fifth force, it should be the main force because it would be the first to appear at the Big Bang. It would be the cause of the Big Bang (in fact we need this fifth force to explain the Big Bang... Maybe it is proportional to 1/r or r or even r^2... To what type of matter it is related is the real question. We must not forget when we look at the Universe, we look in the past... So what is happening to those quasars right now is unfortunately totally unknown. I am just happy to live here and not there... [:o)]