[pittsburghjoe (OP)]

It must be frustrating for you not to be able to prove this wrong. The strongest evidence I will have for this is Dark Energy existing before the big bang/spacetime. They don't know where Dark Energy came from, it makes sense for it to have been here all along.

[Bored chemist]

It must be frustrating for you not to be able to prove this wrong.

I can't prove that a ghost didn't do it.

That's not going to trouble me much, is it?

[Bored chemist]

They don't know where Dark Energy came from, it makes sense for it to have been here all along.

Nobody is pretending that it is new.

[pittsburghjoe (OP)]

A ghost did it, yeah, that's exactly what I've been saying ::roll eyes::
Okay, wait, everyone is already cool with something being here before the singularity?

..maybe "Dark Energy" is a better description than "Ghost"

[pittsburghjoe (OP)]

Holy Sh!t, is that what QM waves are? Dark Energy?

[Bored chemist]

Holy Sh!t, is that what QM waves are? Dark Energy?

No.

[pittsburghjoe (OP)]

A compelling argument as always.
Dark Energy = QM Energy Waves
Dark Matter = QM Matter Waves

[Bored chemist]

A compelling argument as always.
Dark Energy = QM Energy Waves
Dark Matter = QM Matter Waves

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong

[pittsburghjoe (OP)]

I showed you why I came to this conclusion. You people are impossible.

[pittsburghjoe (OP)]

Is Dark Matter showing us a limit to the power of observation? Pointing a telescope directly at it doesn't seem to collapse its waveform at all. Does that imply a distance or clarity (zoom) limitation to getting spacetime involved?

I would be worried if we find out earth is going to drift into a cloud of Dark Matter. What if our atmosphere is enough to decohere it? Would we suddenly have a metric ton worth of matter burning up in our atmosphere?

Does Dark Energy get stronger the longer it's unobserved?

[Colin2B]

......Pointing a telescope directly at it doesn't seem to collapse its waveform at all. Does that imply a distance or clarity (zoom) limitation to getting spacetime involved?

I don’t understand your reasoning. Is it associated with the use of ‘observed’ in the following?

Does Dark Energy get stronger the longer it's unobserved?

Are you misunderstanding the use of observed in QM? It doesn’t mean watched.

The only way we can ‘see’ dark matter is if it gives off radiation or absorbs radiation and it doesn’t seem to do either.
We can infer it’s pesence if it has an effect on nearby mass eg stars.

[pittsburghjoe (OP)]

If Dark Energy and Dark Matter are in a wave state, it means it is either special and will never change state or we just aren't close enough to measure it accurately ..trigger the swap from wave to physical.

[Colin2B]

If Dark Energy and Dark Matter are in a wave state, it means it is either special and will never change state or we just aren't close enough to measure it accurately ..trigger the swap from wave to physical.

We aren’t trying to, or doing anything, to make it change state.
As has been said before, waves are physical.

[pittsburghjoe (OP)]

Observing the path of a particle while in wave state would normally trigger it. Why do you think it's currently invisible to us? It makes sense for it be in wave format ..something we can't see. If waves are physical, then so is dark energy and dark matter.

[chiralSPO]

..maybe "Dark Energy" is a better description than "Ghost"

Holy Sh!t, is that what QM waves are? Dark Energy?

A compelling argument as always.
Dark Energy = QM Energy Waves
Dark Matter = QM Matter Waves

I showed you why I came to this conclusion. You people are impossible.

"I don't understand X.
Scientists don't understand Y.
OMG X must be the same as Y!"

Not compelling in the least. Especially since scientists understand X, and can prove (in many different ways) that X and Y are not the same.

[pittsburghjoe (OP)]

You are setting yourself up to look like a jerk if any of this ends up being true. What if this becomes the goto thread for discovering what "Dark" is?

No one has convinced me that QM waves are physical/visible. You just hate new ideas from lowly code writers.

[Colin2B]

No one has convinced me that QM waves are physical/visible.

Light is visible and is a QM wave.

[pittsburghjoe (OP)]

You don't see light until it hits something (wave collapse), you are not seeing it while it's a wave.

[Bored chemist]

I showed you why I came to this conclusion.

Where?

[Bored chemist]

What if this becomes the goto thread for discovering what "Dark" is?

It can't happen.

Especially since scientists understand X, and can prove (in many different ways) that X and Y are not the same.