[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
I thought dark matter just existed to explain the stuff physicists could not explain. Should there be surprise when the stuff that physicists could not explain might be something different than the assumptions and characteristic assigned to the stuff that they could not explain in the first place? What I got from this is there is reason to continue doing research.
It is funny, those outside of science often think science has all the answers, everything is named and explained. While those in science see more questions than answers - except, of course, when applying for funding or publishing articles.[/quote]
No, this is actually an observable phenomenon. In the form of what they call ‘Null Theory’ which basically states that within a space, where no matter is present, something does in fact remain or is present, in the absence of physical matter. There super mega tiny little particles of varying polarity that “pop in and out” of existence. The dark energy is the result of the actions of these particles…
It is observable that if you devoid a given space of all matter, this is what’s left. It is therefore assumed that the same phenomenon exists where ever there is nothing, or more accurately, a lack of matter.
The problem with this experiment is it’s just one measure. The one thing that everyone is certain about quantum mechanics is that nobody really understands it. So it’s possible that measurement shows the “dark energy” is not prevalent, and yet it still be prevalent. [/quote]
I also thought the same as Tex Ag, but not in the sense that scientists were just making shit up. From what I understand of this stuff, and I certainly love this stuff, gravity has been shown to be a very weak force and gravity alone cannot explain everything that goes on in the universe. Dark matter/dark energy was used to fill in the gaps in Newtonian physics.
And then there’s string theory…
[/quote]
It’s not made up to fill in gaps. It has validity and has been ‘observed’ to some degree. The idea of mass with out matter is certainly intriguing. The bottom line is that there is more mass in the known universe than can be observed and there has to be a reason for it.
Here’s an interesting thought, though. General Relativity breaks down mathematically in black holes to 1/0, or infinity. This is generally thought of as an error and that’s why everybody was scrambling around trying to figure out what’s really happening. After all how can something have infinite mass and infinite gravity? But what if there is no dark energy and this break down is actually what is happening?
Of course, it would then stand to reason that galaxies when there mass is measured, should always be increasing, but at what rate? Would we notice just simply taking two measurements over a span of time should yield different results, the second indicating more mass. Now, here’s a problem, black holes are beyond time, at least within. So you may not be able to measure a discernible difference over a span of earth time.
That’s some thing to get wasted and think about…
