Is Unknown Force In Universe Acting On Dark Matter? (https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091022154644.htm)
Is Unknown Force In Universe Acting On Dark Matter?
ScienceDaily (Oct. 23, 2009) — An international team of astronomers have found an unexpected link between mysterious 'dark matter' and the visible stars and gas in galaxies that could revolutionise our current understanding of gravity.
One of the astronomers, Dr Hongsheng Zhao of the SUPA Centre of Gravity, University of St. Andrews, suggests that an unknown force is acting on dark matter. The findings are published this week in the scientific journal Nature.
Only 4% of the universe is made of known material. Stars and gas in galaxies move so fast that astronomers have speculated that the gravity from a hypothetical invisible halo of dark matter is needed to keep galaxies together. However, a solid understanding of dark matter as well as direct evidence of its existence has remained elusive.
Now the team believes that the interactions between dark and ordinary matter could be more important and more complex than previously thought, and even speculate that dark matter might not exist and that the anomalous motions of stars in galaxies are due to a modification of gravity on extragalactic scales.
Dr. Benoit Famaey (Universities of Bonn and Strasbourg) explains: "The dark matter seems to 'know' how the visible matter is distributed. They seem to conspire with each other such that the gravity of the visible matter at the characteristic radius of the dark halo is always the same. This is extremely surprising since one would rather expect the balance between visible and dark matter to strongly depend on the individual history of each galaxy."
Dr. Zhao at the SUPA Centre of Gravity notes, "The pattern that the data reveal is extremely odd. It's like finding a zoo of animals of all ages and sizes miraculously having identical, say, weight in their backbones or something. It is possible that a non-gravitational fifth force is ruling the dark matter with an invisible hand, leaving the same fingerprints on all galaxies, irrespective of their ages, shapes and sizes."
Such a force might solve an even bigger mystery, known as 'dark energy', which is ruling the accelerated expansion of the Universe. A more radical solution is a revision of the laws of gravity first developed by Isaac Newton in 1687 and refined by Albert Einstein's theory of General Relativity in 1916. Einstein never fully decided whether his equation should add an omnipresent constant source, now called dark energy.
Dr Famaey added, "If we account for our observations with a modified law of gravity, it makes perfect sense to replace the effective action of hypothetical dark matter with a force closely related to the distribution of visible matter."
The implications of the new research could change some of the most widely held scientific theories about the history and expansion of the universe.
Lead researcher Dr. Gianfranco Gentile at the University of Ghent concludes, "Understanding this puzzling conspiracy is probably the key to unlock the formation of galaxies and their structures."
Journal reference:
Gianfranco Gentile, Benoit Famaey, HongSheng Zhao, Paolo Salucci. Universality of galactic surface densities within one dark halo scale-length. Nature, 2009; 461 (7264): 627 DOI: 10.1038/nature08437
Adapted from materials provided by University of St. Andrews.
University of St. Andrews (2009, October 23). Is Unknown Force In Universe Acting On Dark Matter?. ScienceDaily. Retrieved October 23, 2009, from Science Daily: News & Articles in Science, Health, Environment & Technology (https://www.sciencedaily.com) /releases/2009/10/091022154644.htm
Tars
10-24-2009, 09:02 AM
Only 4% of the universe is made of known material. Stars and gas in galaxies move so fast that astronomers have speculated that the gravity from a hypothetical invisible halo of dark matter is needed to keep galaxies together. However, a solid understanding of dark matter as well as direct evidence of its existence has remained elusive.
In a hundred years, or maybe even much sooner, the existence of "Dark matter" may well be considered just a quaint hypothesis of this time period. Our current version of, "the Sun rotates around the Earth".
I enjoy watching the Science Channel programs which speculate about its existence and even the explanations of why there's speculation. One can insert "presently unknown effect" every time the term "Dark matter" is used. It's a good example which illustrates that, though human knowledge is expanding exponentially, we are far FAR away from understanding the universe(s) we live in.
Does God exist? Perhaps. Are there forces/effects/conditions in the universe that are way beyond our knowledge? Certainly.
Just as a snake sheds its skin, we must shed our past over and over again.
The Electric Cosmos (https://www.electric-cosmos.org/indexOLD.htm)
here is the link, if not in the text
..............................................................
The Electric Sky
Donald E. Scott, Ph.D. (Electrical Engineering)
Author of the book - The Electric Sky
The M1 Pulsar - X-ray Image by Chandra
There is a revolution just beginning in astronomy/cosmology that will rival the one set off by Copernicus and Galileo. This revolution is based on the growing realization that the cosmos is highly electrical in nature. It is becoming clear that 99% of the universe is made up not of "invisible matter", but rather, of matter in the plasma state. Electrodynamic forces in electric plasmas are much stronger than the gravitational force.
Mainstream astrophysicists are continually “surprised” by new data sent back by space probes and orbiting telescopes. That ought to be a clue that something is wrong. New information always sends theoretical astrophysicists "back to the drawing board". In light of this, it is curious that they have such "cock-sure" attitudes about the infallibility of their present models. Those models seem to require major "patching up" every time a new space probe sends back data.
Astrophysicists and astronomers do not study experimental plasma dynamics in graduate school. They rarely take any courses in electrodynamic field theory, and thus they try to explain every new discovery via gravity, magnetism, and fluid dynamics which is all they understand. It is no wonder they cannot understand that 99% of all cosmic phenomena are due to plasma dynamics and not to gravity alone.
When confronted by observations that cast doubt on the validity of their theories, astrophysicists have circled their wagons and conjured up pseudo-scientific invisible entities such as neutron stars, weakly interacting massive particles, strange energy, and black holes. When confronted by solid evidence such as Halton Arp's photographs that contradict the Big Bang Theory, their response is to refuse him access to any major telescope in the U.S.
Instead of wasting time in a futile battle trying to convince entrenched mainstream astronomers to seriously investigate the Electric/Plasma Universe ideas, a growing band of plasma scientists and engineers are simply bypassing them. A new electric plasma-based paradigm that does not find new discoveries to be “enigmatic and puzzling”, but rather to be predictable and consistent with an electrical point of view, is slowly but surely replacing the old paradigm wherein all electrical mechanisms are ignored.
This web site is dedicated to explaining the basis of this ongoing scientific shift. It also presents links to other sites where you can investigate the details of what is happening.
These pages are designed to be read through in order, starting with the Introduction. If you do this, the background information needed for understanding any given page will have been presented in an earlier page. However, each of the topics below is discussed in a reasonably self-contained way for anyone who just wants to pick and choose. Enter the site by clicking on the link to the Introduction below.
Introduction
A Model of Interstellar Space
Plasma - The Fundamental State of Matter
Missing Matter
Our Sun
Solar Neutrino Problem
Stars
Galaxies
Solar System
Red Shift
Summary
Links
Electromagnetic Fields in Space (Published, Peer Reviewed, IEEE paper)
Solar Surface Transistor Action
Bayes Theorem
Reply to Tim Thompson
Reply to Tom Bridgman
Clancy
10-25-2009, 10:25 AM
Most scientists don't seem "cocksure" about anything to me, since they're in the business of revising and even overturning present understanding. Being surprised at new data does not mean anything is wrong, it means the scientific process is working and new information about the way the universe works is being revealed.
If this guy's theory has any validity, it will make predictions about the universe and do it better than Einstein's theories. He won't have to denigrate his colleagues, his theory will be overwhelmingly useful and it will speak for itself because it will reveal more than current theory does.
Oh and by the way, most of the luminous matter in the universe is in the plasma state too.
The Electric Cosmos (https://www.electric-cosmos.org/indexOLD.htm)
here is the link, if not in the text
..............................................................
The Electric Sky
Donald E. Scott, Ph.D. (Electrical Engineering)
Author of the book - The Electric Sky
The M1 Pulsar - X-ray Image by Chandra
There is a revolution just beginning in astronomy/cosmology that will rival the one set off by Copernicus and Galileo. This revolution is based on the growing realization that the cosmos is highly electrical in nature. It is becoming clear that 99% of the universe is made up not of "invisible matter", but rather, of matter in the plasma state. Electrodynamic forces in electric plasmas are much stronger than the gravitational force.
Mainstream astrophysicists are continually “surprised” by new data sent back by space probes and orbiting telescopes. That ought to be a clue that something is wrong. New information always sends theoretical astrophysicists "back to the drawing board". In light of this, it is curious that they have such "cock-sure" attitudes about the infallibility of their present models. Those models seem to require major "patching up" every time a new space probe sends back data.
Astrophysicists and astronomers do not study experimental plasma dynamics in graduate school. They rarely take any courses in electrodynamic field theory, and thus they try to explain every new discovery via gravity, magnetism, and fluid dynamics which is all they understand. It is no wonder they cannot understand that 99% of all cosmic phenomena are due to plasma dynamics and not to gravity alone.
When confronted by observations that cast doubt on the validity of their theories, astrophysicists have circled their wagons and conjured up pseudo-scientific invisible entities such as neutron stars, weakly interacting massive particles, strange energy, and black holes. When confronted by solid evidence such as Halton Arp's photographs that contradict the Big Bang Theory, their response is to refuse him access to any major telescope in the U.S.
Instead of wasting time in a futile battle trying to convince entrenched mainstream astronomers to seriously investigate the Electric/Plasma Universe ideas, a growing band of plasma scientists and engineers are simply bypassing them. A new electric plasma-based paradigm that does not find new discoveries to be “enigmatic and puzzling”, but rather to be predictable and consistent with an electrical point of view, is slowly but surely replacing the old paradigm wherein all electrical mechanisms are ignored.
This web site is dedicated to explaining the basis of this ongoing scientific shift. It also presents links to other sites where you can investigate the details of what is happening.
These pages are designed to be read through in order, starting with the Introduction. If you do this, the background information needed for understanding any given page will have been presented in an earlier page. However, each of the topics below is discussed in a reasonably self-contained way for anyone who just wants to pick and choose. Enter the site by clicking on the link to the Introduction below.
Introduction
A Model of Interstellar Space
Plasma - The Fundamental State of Matter
Missing Matter
Our Sun
Solar Neutrino Problem
Stars
Galaxies
Solar System
Red Shift
Summary
Links
Electromagnetic Fields in Space (Published, Peer Reviewed, IEEE paper)
Solar Surface Transistor Action
Bayes Theorem
Reply to Tim Thompson
Reply to Tom Bridgman
Dram
10-25-2009, 01:08 PM
I found this extremely helpful and important to get a feel for this universe we live in, The closest I ever got in scope was trying to imagine being god to a dust mote being our solar system and that didn't even get me to the next star...So without some kind of feel for scope its just a vague unimaginable subject, I remember in elementary school how voided it made me feel trying to get this concept of infinity...It was very depressing.
<center> A Conceptual Model
of Interstellar Space
</center> Modern astronomers claim that the only forces capable of forming and driving the galaxies that make up the universe are gravitational and magnetic fields. In order to judge whether this or any alternative explanations are reasonable, we have to be able to visualize the relative sizes of stars and the distances between them. In order to do this, we need a scale model that humans can relate to. It is very difficult, if not impossible, for us to relate conceptually to how far something is from us when we are told its distance is, say 14 light years. We know that is a long way - but HOW long?
Burnham's Model
In his "Celestial Handbook", Robert Burnham, Jr. presents a model that offers us a way to get an intuitive feel for some of these tremendous distances. The distance from the Sun to Earth is called an Astronomical Unit (AU); it is approximately 93 million miles. The model is based on the coincidental fact that the number of inches in a statute mile is approximately equal to the number of astronomical units in one light year. So, in our model, we sketch the orbit of the Earth around the Sun as a circle, two inches in diameter. That sets the scale of the model. One light year is one mile in the model.
The Sun is approximately 880,000 miles in diameter. In the model that scales to 880,000 / 93,000,000 = 0.009 inches; (Approximately 1/100 of an inch in diameter). A very fine pencil point is needed to place it at the center of the (one inch radius) circle that represents the Earth's orbit.
In this model, Pluto is an invisibly small speck approximately three and a half feet from the Sun. All the other planets follow almost circular paths inside of this 3.5 foot orbit. If a person is quite tall, he or she may just be able to spread their hands far enough apart to encompass the orbit of this outer planet. That is the size of our model of our solar system. We can just about hold it in our extended arms.
The nearest star to us is over four light-years away.
In our model, a light year is scaled down to one mile. So the nearest star to us is four and a half MILES away in our model. So when we model our Sun and the nearest star to us, we have two specks of dust, each 1/100 inch in diameter, four and a half miles apart from one another. And this is in a moderately densely packed arm of our galaxy!
To quote Burnham, "All the stars are, on the average, as far from each other as the nearest ones are from us. Imagine, then, several hundred billion stars scattered throughout space, each one another Sun, each one separated by a distance of several light years (several miles in our model) from its nearest neighbor. Comprehend, if you can, the almost terrifying isolation of any one star in space" because each star is the size of a speck of dust, about 1/100 inch in diameter - and is miles from its nearest neighbor.
When viewing a photographic image of a galaxy or globular star cluster, we must remember that the stars that make up those objects are not as close together as they appear. A bright star will "bloom" on a photographic plate or CCD chip. Remember the two specks of dust, miles apart.
Even in our model, the collection of stars that makes up our Milky Way galaxy is about one hundred thousand miles in diameter. This is surrounded by many hundreds of thousand of miles of empty space, before we get to the next galaxy. And on a larger scale, we find that galaxies seem to be found in groups - galaxy clusters. On this gigantic scale even our model fails to give us an intuitive feeling for the vastness of those distances.
Because the stars are so small relative to their separation, they have only an extremely small gravitational pull on each other. However, it is now well known that the entire volume of our galaxy is permeated by plasma - huge diffuse clouds of ionized particles. These electrically charged particles are not relatively far from each other. And they respond to the extremely strong Maxwell / Lorentz electromagnetic forces (36 powers of 10 stronger than gravity). It is becoming clear that galaxies are not held together by gravity, but, rather, by dynamic electromagnetic forces.
Gravitational Lensing
As an application of the insight afforded by Burnham's model let us consider the oft proclaimed phenomenon known as gravitational lensing. If a far distant object lines up precisely with Earth and an intermediate object that has enough mass, Einstein's theory of relativity suggests that the light from the farther object will be bent - producing multiple images of that distant object when it is observed from Earth. Gravitational lensing is now a standard explanation used by mainstream astronomy to discredit any observations of quasar pairs situated very near their parent galaxies. We are told that any images of this sort are "mirages" due to gravitational lensing. Once this explanation is accepted by a gullible public, the way is cleared for its continued use, no matter how improbable its repeated occurrence is.
An image of the The "Einstein Cross" is shown below. NASA claims that the four small quasar objects flanking the central bright core of the galaxy represent only a single quasar located in the far distance directly behind the center of the galaxy - they tell us that we are not seeing four separate quasars - this is only a "mirage". The reason for their conclusion that the four small quasar images are in the deep background is that they have a vastly greater redshift value than does the central galaxy.
<center>https://www.electric-cosmos.org/EinsteinCross.gif</center>
Clancy
10-25-2009, 01:23 PM
I've never understood why the realization that the universe is incomprehensibly big depresses some people. Another way to look at it is this...
We are literally made of star stuff, the leftover remains of exploded stars from billions of years ago. The reality is that we are not observers separate from the universe, we are a part of the universe observing itself. The universe has evolved eyes to see and minds to wonder... I find that to be amazing and awe inspiring.
I found this extremely helpful and important to get a feel for this universe we live in, The closest I ever got in scope was trying to imagine being god to a dust mote being our solar system and that didn't even get me to the next star...So without some kind of feel for scope its just a vague unimaginable subject, I remember in elementary school how voided it made me feel trying to get this concept of infinity...It was very depressing...
"Dr. Zhao at the SUPA Centre of Gravity notes, 'The pattern that the data reveal is extremely odd. It's like finding a zoo of animals of all ages and sizes miraculously having identical, say, weight in their backbones or something. It is possible that a non-gravitational fifth force is ruling the dark matter with an invisible hand, leaving the same fingerprints on all galaxies, irrespective of their ages, shapes and sizes.'"
...really hit it home for me; seems the most logical to me, personally.
I just LOVE stuff like this...oh, the universe! I'm sure you all watch The Universe on the History Channel, yes? The Universe's "Strangest Things," which will cover alcohol clouds in space; pulsar planets; a possible planet in our solar system beyond Neptune; & DARK MATTER, will air Tue., 11/03 @ 1-2pm. Coming this Tuesday on The Universe: "Pulsars & Quasars," if anyone's interested. Times & dates may vary w/ HD channels. But, yes, one of my very favorite shows.
Thanks for the 'dark matter' info Geomancer! Much gratitude!!! :thumbsup:
~Ginger (Astronomy & Space Sciences Lover)
podfish
10-26-2009, 10:10 AM
<snip> ... Modern astronomers claim that the only forces capable of forming and driving the galaxies that make up the universe are gravitational and magnetic fields. <...>
This whole phrasing is a red-light to me. I had a discussion over the weekend that was on an unrelated topic, but was riddled with comments like the one above.
"Modern astronomers" (implying either all, or at least all the "mainstream" rigid-thinking ones), claim that "the ONLY" ...
So many people seem to want to believe that there's a consensus among some group that prevents that group from recognizing new truths. Usually the group is defined as the 'experts' and the point is that their expertise isn't of real value. The experts aren't willing to acknowledge other points of view, or new data, for a variety of insufficient reasons.
This is a really destructive pattern and if you find yourself falling into it, I suggest rebuilding your argument. Defining those who might hold opposing opinions as irrelevant seems to make it easier to make your point, but it really just makes your argument incomplete. In my experience, it's actually rather difficult to find such doctrinaire opponents. They're usually pretty good at avoiding prefacing their claims with "always" or "only", and the reason they may be considered experts is that they actually know a lot about their field, including challenges to the currently-accepted "truth".</snip>
Dram
10-26-2009, 09:15 PM
I offer you this for an enjoyable rebutal. There will always be an in crowd and those who say things contrary to their perspective.
Here is a PBS miniseries from Nova, "Darwins Darkest Hour"
Darwin's Darkest Hour | NOVA | PBS Video (https://video.pbs.org/video/1286437550)
This whole phrasing is a red-light to me. I had a discussion over the weekend that was on an unrelated topic, but was riddled with comments like the one above.
"Modern astronomers" (implying either all, or at least all the "mainstream" rigid-thinking ones), claim that "the ONLY" ...
So many people seem to want to believe that there's a consensus among some group that prevents that group from recognizing new truths. Usually the group is defined as the 'experts' and the point is that their expertise isn't of real value. The experts aren't willing to acknowledge other points of view, or new data, for a variety of insufficient reasons.
This is a really destructive pattern and if you find yourself falling into it, I suggest rebuilding your argument. Defining those who might hold opposing opinions as irrelevant seems to make it easier to make your point, but it really just makes your argument incomplete. In my experience, it's actually rather difficult to find such doctrinaire opponents. They're usually pretty good at avoiding prefacing their claims with "always" or "only", and the reason they may be considered experts is that they actually know a lot about their field, including challenges to the currently-accepted "truth".
Dram
10-26-2009, 11:58 PM
When I look at the sun and see where it is and there it is, it looks just like the sun and there it is right there, but its not, that is not where the sun is when you see it. Its eight minutes past that..I've known this for awhile the subject brought the thought up but its one of those wonders of the world to me our own sun is playing hide and seek with us and can make its self appear to be somewhere it isn't now whats up with that? Ive heard it said " Don't believe anything you hear and only half of what you see" but what does that do when the sun is not where it seems to be.
The Electric Cosmos (https://www.electric-cosmos.org/indexOLD.htm)
here is the link, if not in the text
..............................................................
The Electric Sky
Donald E. Scott, Ph.D. (Electrical Engineering)
Author of the book - The Electric Sky
The M1 Pulsar - X-ray Image by Chandra
There is a revolution just beginning in astronomy/cosmology that will rival the one set off by Copernicus and Galileo. This revolution is based on the growing realization that the cosmos is highly electrical in nature. It is becoming clear that 99% of the universe is made up not of "invisible matter", but rather, of matter in the plasma state. Electrodynamic forces in electric plasmas are much stronger than the gravitational force.
Mainstream astrophysicists are continually “surprised” by new data sent back by space probes and orbiting telescopes. That ought to be a clue that something is wrong. New information always sends theoretical astrophysicists "back to the drawing board". In light of this, it is curious that they have such "cock-sure" attitudes about the infallibility of their present models. Those models seem to require major "patching up" every time a new space probe sends back data.
Astrophysicists and astronomers do not study experimental plasma dynamics in graduate school. They rarely take any courses in electrodynamic field theory, and thus they try to explain every new discovery via gravity, magnetism, and fluid dynamics which is all they understand. It is no wonder they cannot understand that 99% of all cosmic phenomena are due to plasma dynamics and not to gravity alone.
When confronted by observations that cast doubt on the validity of their theories, astrophysicists have circled their wagons and conjured up pseudo-scientific invisible entities such as neutron stars, weakly interacting massive particles, strange energy, and black holes. When confronted by solid evidence such as Halton Arp's photographs that contradict the Big Bang Theory, their response is to refuse him access to any major telescope in the U.S.
Instead of wasting time in a futile battle trying to convince entrenched mainstream astronomers to seriously investigate the Electric/Plasma Universe ideas, a growing band of plasma scientists and engineers are simply bypassing them. A new electric plasma-based paradigm that does not find new discoveries to be “enigmatic and puzzling”, but rather to be predictable and consistent with an electrical point of view, is slowly but surely replacing the old paradigm wherein all electrical mechanisms are ignored.
This web site is dedicated to explaining the basis of this ongoing scientific shift. It also presents links to other sites where you can investigate the details of what is happening.
These pages are designed to be read through in order, starting with the Introduction. If you do this, the background information needed for understanding any given page will have been presented in an earlier page. However, each of the topics below is discussed in a reasonably self-contained way for anyone who just wants to pick and choose. Enter the site by clicking on the link to the Introduction below.
Introduction
A Model of Interstellar Space
Plasma - The Fundamental State of Matter
Missing Matter
Our Sun
Solar Neutrino Problem
Stars
Galaxies
Solar System
Red Shift
Summary
Links
Electromagnetic Fields in Space (Published, Peer Reviewed, IEEE paper)
Solar Surface Transistor Action
Bayes Theorem
Reply to Tim Thompson
Reply to Tom Bridgman
podfish
10-27-2009, 08:33 AM
I offer you this for an enjoyable rebutal....
don't think I'm trying to propose that the conventional wisdom is necessarily correct, or that experts are always right! I didn't follow the link you posted, but I do know that Darwin (among probably all other notable thinkers) has on occasion been loudly and publicly wrong.
I just don't find the quotes from "Donald E. Scott, Ph.D. (Electrical Engineering)" reassuring. He may indeed have good ideas to offer, but his introduction makes him sound like a bit of a quack.
Dram
11-07-2009, 08:23 PM
There is a story of a child of a King and a Queen who's childhood was spent growing in the beauty of an enchanted and protected garden until the time a beggar made his way in. The shock that the world was not so wonderful as he assumed was so great upon this child who had had the benefit of having grown strong in this garden, he had the strength to ponder this larger thing.
The thought the world was not like his world threw him into shock and then the pondering that led to him becoming the Buddha.
To see the world with that benefit of having been grown strong by protecting ways
instead of the assault upon the senses the cacophony of reality is to so many
To be Introduced to infinity by the " gentle " touches of the Catholic Church which led to the discovery of a threat of Eternity as though some would spend all of that time in Great Grief
was the rape of a child....
I've never understood why the realization that the universe is incomprehensibly big depresses some people. Another way to look at it is this...
We are literally made of star stuff, the leftover remains of exploded stars from billions of years ago. The reality is that we are not observers separate from the universe, we are a part of the universe observing itself. The universe has evolved eyes to see and minds to wonder... I find that to be amazing and awe inspiring.
Clancy
11-07-2009, 09:33 PM
I know the story of Siddhārtha. I also know the story of people born into the worst imaginable circumstances, who, somehow, keep their heart and soul alive in the midst of the cacophony. It's never too late to wonder at this amazing universe, and to find comfort in knowing that we belong here, we are as old as the stars.
There is a story of a child of a King and a Queen who's childhood was spent growing in the beauty of an enchanted and protected garden until the time a beggar made his way in. The shock that the world was not so wonderful as he assumed was so great upon this child who had had the benefit of having grown strong in this garden, he had the strength to ponder this larger thing.
The thought the world was not like his world threw him into shock and then the pondering that led to him becoming the Buddha.
To see the world with that benefit of having been grown strong by protecting ways
instead of the assault upon the senses the cacophony of reality is to so many
To be Introduced to infinity by the " gentle " touches of the Catholic Church which led to the discovery of a threat of Eternity as though some would spend all of that time in Great Grief