Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: McQueen on 28/03/2024 04:06:47
-
One issue that I certainly take exception to is the present trend to dismiss the concept of an aether by saying, that Michelson & Morley proved definitively that the aether does not exist and that there was no point in discussing it any further. Michelson & Morley did not prove that the aether did not exist, they merely proved that it could not be detected! It should be noted that the aether as discussed in this post has nothing to do with the concept of a luminiferous aether and more to do with the original concept of the aether as a medium for the propagation of light. In fact, even Einstein, who could be considered the leading edge in the argument against the aether, did not deny the existence of the aether, he merely stated that there was no further use for the aether concept since a viable substitute had been found in the concept of electric and magnetic fields. But what if the whole concept of fields is wrong? Before anyone gets into a twist about this statement, kindly remember that this is a science discussion forum and as such preconceived ideas, even if considered to be proven, should never be the criteria in any argument.
For instance consider Dark Matter, it occupies 85% - 90% of all the mass in the Universe according to the latest findings. Proof that that this mass is present is indisputable. Astrophysicists have been fairly successful in determining the factor of increase in gravity that would be necessary for the rotation curve of Galaxies to match observations. Extensive information on the methods used by astronomers in studies such as this can be found in Strobel?s Astronomy Notes Page: https://www.astronomynotes.com/ismnotes/s7.htm (https://www.astronomynotes.com/ismnotes/s7.htm). The study estimates that 90% -95% of the mass in the Universe to be in the form of undetectable Dark Matter. This study seems to indicate that 95% of the mass in the Universe is missing or undetectable. There was also a study done by Kafle, P.R., Sharma, S., Lewis, G.F., & Bland-Hawthorn, J. in 2014 entitled ? On the Shoulders of Giants: Properties of the Stellar Halo and the Milky Way Mass Distribution.? Published in The Astrophysical Journal, 794(1), 17.
Ignoring for the moment the attempt that will almost certainly made by critics in this forum that the only property that Dark matter exhibits is its property to induce gravity OR that the study quoted ignored Dark Energy, I am merely quoting up to date theories supported by citations. Consider the fact that IF as is stated Dark Matter occupies 85% - 95% of all matter in the Universe, there is a definite possibility (the odds are very much in favour of such a possibility) that our small part of the Universe consisting of the solar system, must fall within the 85% - 95% of the Universe occupied by Dark Matter. This in turn raises the distinct possibility that what we thought of as being the aether was in fact Dark Matter!
When one studies the properties of Dark Matter it is found that they bear a striking resemblance to the properties that the aether was once thought to possess. Dark Matter is for instance, completely permeable to all forms of matter. Matter can pass through Dark Matter without experiencing the slightest interaction and vice-versa. This was a property that was attributed to the aether and was one of the reasons that the aether could not be detected. Even with all the fantastic advances that have been made in technology, it is still not possible to detect Dark Matter. A truly amazing property of Dark Matter ( and one that the aether also demonstrated) is its ability to allow the free passage of all types of electromagnetic radiation, without offering the slightest interference or opposition. For a substance that theoretically is calculated to occupy anything from 85% to 95% of the Universe, it is something truly amazing that it allows the passage of all types of electromagnetic radiation, without offering any opposition.
One reason that Dark Matter might allow for the free passage of all types of electromagnetic radiation is if itself was made up of electromagnetic radiation. Consider if Dark Matter was made up of very low energy electric dipoles of about 10^-40 J energy. Such a substance would be absolutely permeable to all matter, since atoms are notoriously choosy or picky about the energy of the photons they interact with. No known atom could ever conceivably under any circumstances whatsoever, interact with photons of an energy of 10^-40 J. Further and possibly just as important, Dark Matter made up of such low energy electric dipoles would allow the free passage of all types of electromagnetic radiation. including x-rays and gamma rays.
This raises the incredible possibility that just like molecules convey the energy of waves in water, the low energy photons constituting Dark Matter, might convey light, or photons.
-
Doesn't sound like a good fit to me. Dark matter isn't distributed evenly throughout the Universe whereas an aether presumably would be (or at least a lot more so than dark matter).
-
Doesn't sound like a good fit to me. Dark matter isn't distributed evenly throughout the Universe whereas an aether presumably would be (or at least a lot more so than dark matter).
With all due regard to the view stated above, a clear logical estimation of the statement does not appear to hold water. How exactly is an assessment of the distribution of dark matter carried out? Dark Matter is not easily quantifiable, in fact it is not only not easy to quantify Dark Matter, it has not been quantifiable at all, with the exception of the gravitational effects that it exerts. These gravitational effects seem to be fairly isotropic in nature, hence the shape of the milky way galaxy, which in itself is thousands of light years across.
For instance, if one tried to collect dark matter and put it on a weighing machine to weigh it, it would be impossible to do so. Firstly, Dark Matter would sink right through any vessel that it was put in (Dark Matter is perfectly permeable to matter) and if by some chance it were possible to put Dark Matter on a weighing machine, it would sink right through the weighing machine and possibly right through the earth supporting the weighing machine. Again, if one tries to measure Dark Matter through using radio waves, it would prove to be impossible. Dark Matter allows the free passage of all types of electromagnetic radiation, hence one would not be able to calculate the distribution of Dark Matter using this method. There is literally nothing there to measure. It has not been possible to detect Dark Matter by any means whatsoever. Therefore, any discussion of the distribution of Dark Matter is purely hypothetical and has no basis in empirical science.
This statement deserves a qualification. The claim made for the distribution of Dark Matter through the Universe is based on the distribution of matter as indicated by the CMBR, (cosmic background Microwave Radiation) but this is not a very realistic way of describing Dark Matter distribution. The shape of a Galaxy does not really help in identifying which galaxies are shaped due to the presence of Dark Matter and which are not. Here is a quote from a Nasa web-site: ″Irregular galaxies have no identifiable shape or structure to them. They are often chaotic in appearance, without a bulge or any trace of spiral arms. The different shapes and orientation of galaxies are a result of their history, which may have included interactions with other galaxies.″
On the other hand, if as I had suggested, Dark Matter was in itself made up of infinitesimal electric dipoles of very low energy of about (10^-40 J) it would explain not only why Dark Matter has such low interaction with matter : no atom could possibly under any known circumstances, react with such low energies as 10^-40 J , it would also explain how and why Electromagnetic Radiation of all wave-lengths passes unobstructed through Dark Matter. This would also raise the possibility that had been under consideration by scientists like Lorentz, Poincare and Einstein that gravity had an electromagnetic origin.
-
How exactly is an assessment of the distribution of dark matter carried out?
Like this: https://www.livescience.com/space/einstein-was-right-about-invisible-dark-matter-massive-new-map-of-the-universe-suggests
it has not been quantifiable at all, with the exception of the gravitational effects that it exerts.
It is those very gravitational effects that allows it to be quantified.
These gravitational effects seem to be fairly isotropic in nature
No, it isn't. If dark matter was isotropic throughout the universe, then it couldn't cause the anomalous galaxy rotation curves. Any star would experience an equal pull from dark matter in all directions, and thus their orbital speeds wouldn't be changed.
This statement deserves a qualification. The claim made for the distribution of Dark Matter through the Universe is based on the distribution of matter as indicated by the CMBR, (cosmic background Microwave Radiation) but this is not a very realistic way of describing Dark Matter distribution. The shape of a Galaxy does not really help in identifying which galaxies are shaped due to the presence of Dark Matter and which are not.
The total mass is what causes the changes, and some portion of that is dark matter. Given that the visible matter is visible, that can be subtracted out to reveal what amount of change is being caused by the dark matter.
On the other hand, if as I had suggested, Dark Matter was in itself made up of infinitesimal electric dipoles of very low energy of about (10^-40 J) it would explain not only why Dark Matter has such low interaction with matter : no atom could possibly under any known circumstances, react with such low energies as 10^-40 J , it would also explain how and why Electromagnetic Radiation of all wave-lengths passes unobstructed through Dark Matter.
If your dark matter dipoles don't interact with electromagnetic radiation, then how is it at all relevant as a medium for the propagation of light?
-
If your dark matter dipoles don't interact with electromagnetic radiation, then how is it at all relevant as a medium for the propagation of light?
It is light itself. This makes sense. Light travels through light, without any resistance or opposition. This is somehow analogous, but not exactly analogous to how waves travel in water, the energy of the wave is conveyed by the molecules of water, although the molecules themselves do not actually travel, they oscillate up an down in one place. Still even though the wave is made up of molecules of water (i.e., particles), it still manifests as a wave.
If you are interested you can read this paper: https://www.academia.edu/116411419/Redefining_Electrons (https://www.academia.edu/116411419/Redefining_Electrons)