"Dark Matter Might Not Exist" (Weekend Feature)
Follow the Daily Galaxy
Add Daily Galaxy to igoogle page AddThis Feed Button Join The Daily Galaxy Group on Facebook Follow The Daily Galaxy Group on twitter
 

« "The Universe May be Different on Scales Larger than Those We Can Directly Observe" --Planck Satellite Team | Main | Image of the Day --Clues Found that Liquid Water May Exist on Mars Today »

February 08, 2014

"Dark Matter Might Not Exist" (Weekend Feature)

 

Dark Energy and Gravity - Yin and Yang of the Universe

 

This past 4th of July 2013, a European team of astronomers led by Hongsheng Zhao of the SUPA Centre of Gravity at the University of St Andrews presented a radical new theory at the RAS National Astronomy Meeting in St Andrews. Their theory suggested that the Milky Way and Anromeda galaxies collided some 10 billion years ago and that our understanding of gravity is fundamentally wrong. Remarkably, this would neatly explain the observed structure of the two galaxies and their satellites.

In 2009, Zhao led An international team of astronomers that found an unexpected link between 'dark matter' and the visible stars and gas in galaxies that could revolutionize our current understanding of gravity. Zhao suggested that an unknown force is acting on dark matter.

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.

"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," said Dr. Benoit Famaey (Universities of Bonn and Strasbourg). "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.

"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. Astrophyisicts Neil Degrasse Tyson has stated that dark energy soould in fact be renamed dark gravity.

In the image above above dark energy is represented by the purple grid above, and gravity by the green grid below. Gravity emanates from all matter in the universe, but its effects are localized and drop off quickly over large distances. 

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 concluded, "Understanding this puzzling conspiracy is probably the key to unlock the formation of galaxies and their structures."

In January 2010, Erik Verlinde, professor ofTheoretical Physics and world-renowned string theorist, caused a worldwide stir with the publication of On the Origin of Gravity and the Laws of Newton, in which he challenged commonly held perceptions on gravity, going so far as to state ‘for me gravity doesn’t exist’. If he is proved correct, the consequences for our understanding of the universe and its origins in a Big Bang will be far-reaching.

"Everyone who is working on theoretical physics is trying to improve on Einstein," says Robbert Dijkgraaf, UvA University Professor and current director of the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton (where scientists including Turing, Oppenheimer and Einstein have worked) In my opinion, Erik Verlinde has found an important key for the next step forward."

Verlinde, who received the Spinoza prize (the Dutch Nobel Prize) from the Netherlands Organisation for Science, is famous for developing this new theory, or idea, on gravity in which he says that gravity is an illusion. "Gravity is not an illusion in the sense that we know that things fall," says Verline." Most people, certainly in physics, think we can describe gravity perfectly adequately using Einstein’s General Relativity. But it now seems that we can also start from a microscopic formulation where there is no gravity to begin with, but you can derive it. This is called ‘emergence’."

"We have other phenomena in Physics like this," Verlinde continued. "Take a concept like ‘temperature’, for instance. We experience it every day. We can feel temperature. But, if you really think about the microscopic molecules, there’s no notion of temperature there. It’s something that has to do with the property of all molecules together; it’s like the average energy per molecule."

To Verlinde, gravity is similar. It’s something that only appears when you put many things together at a microscopic scale and then you suddenly see that certain equations arise. "As scientists," he observes, "we first want to understand nature and our universe. In doing so, we have observed things that are deeply puzzling, such as phenomena related to dark matter. We see things happening that we don’t understand. There must be more matter out there that we don’t see. There’s also something called ‘dark energy’. And then there’s the whole puzzle of the beginning of the universe. We now have what is called the ‘Big Bang’ theory.

Verline belives his ideas will shed new light on the concept of ‘dark matter’ and ‘dark energy’ and why they’re important in relation to gravity.

"We think we understand gravity in most situations," he says "but when we look at galaxies and, on much larger scales, at galaxy clusters, we see things happening that we don’t understand using our familiar equations, like Newton’s equation of gravity or even Einstein’s gravity. So we have to assume there’s this mysterious form of matter, which we call dark matter, which we cannot see. Now dark energy is even weirder, in the sense that we don’t even know what it consists of. It’s something we can put in our equations to make things work, but there’s really a big puzzle to be solved in terms of why it’s there and what it’s made of. At present, we have not really found the right equations to describe it. There’s clearly progress to be made in terms of finding a bettertheory of gravity, and understanding what’s happening in our universe."

For example, the Big Bang theory is the idea that at a particular moment things suddenly started exploding and growing, and that our universe got bigger, which Verlinde finds illogical to think it came from this one moment.

"It’s illogical to think there was nothing and then it exploded. We use concepts like time and space," he adds, "but we don’t really understand what this means microscopically. That might change. The Big Bang has to do with our understanding of what time should be, and I think we will have a much better understanding of this in the future. I think we will figure out that what we thought was the Big Bang was actually a different kind of event. Or maybe that we should not think that the universe really began at a particular moment and that there’s another way to describe that."

Verlinde believes that the information we have today and the equations we now use only describe a very small part of what is actually going on. "If you think that something grows, like our universe, than something else must become smaller," he observes."I think there’s something we haven’t found yet and this will help us discover the origins of our universe. In short, the universe originated from something, not from nothing. There was something there and we have to find the equations. It has something to do with dark energy and how that is related to dark matter. If we understand the equations for those components of our universe, I think we’ll also have a better understanding of how the universe began. I think it’s all about the interplay between these different forms of energy and matter.

The Big Bang theory works well in the sense that it gives us some understanding of how particular elements in our universe came about and there are other things that we can observe, like the radiation that came from the Big Bang. But the whole idea of an expanding universe that started with a big explosion will change. "You need to think about the equations in a bigger setting," Verlinde observes. "You need to describe more than just the matter particles. You need to know more about what space/time is. All these things have to come together in order to be able to explain the Big Bang."

Quantum mechanics took approximately 26 years to develop, Verlinde concludes. "We’ve had string theory for 40 years and nothing yet has come out of that which can be directly tested with observations or experiments. I think my idea has a greater chance of being tested with observations, which is an exciting thing. I think it will take no more than 10 or 15 years."

The end result be belives will lead to a paradigm shift in how people think that the universe was created.

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

The Daily Galaxy via University of St. Andrews, University of Amsterdam and Erik Verlinde

Image credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech.

Comments

bingo!

Good stuff! I think we're getting closer! Of course it’s all much deeper than we’ve yet to imagine... Light is the truest connection with cosmic symmetry…

I can respond to most of the point in above topic

1. "This past 4th of July 2013, a European team of astronomers led by Hongsheng Zhao of the SUPA Centre of Gravity at the University of St Andrews presented a radical new theory at the RAS National Astronomy Meeting in St Andrews.

my comment in http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2013/07/is-an-unknown-force-of-the-universe-acting-on-dark-matter.html

2. "our understanding of gravity is fundamentally wrong"

3. "It is possible that a non-gravitational fifth force is ruling the dark matter with an invisible hand"

4. "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. Astrophyisicts Neil Degrasse Tyson has stated that dark energy soould in fact be renamed dark gravity."

5. "Verline belives his ideas will shed new light on the concept of ‘dark matter’ and ‘dark energy’ and why they’re important in relation to gravity."

my comment in
http://swarajgroups.blogspot.in/2013/10/gravity-pushing-force-arising-due-to.html

http://swarajgroups.blogspot.in/2013/06/out-of-box-thinking-is-essential-in.html

6. "The team believes that the interactions between dark and ordinary matter could be more important and more complex than previously thought"

my comment in
http://www.quantumdiaries.org/2013/07/01/getting-our-hands-on-dark-matter/#comment-168173

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/blogs/physics/2014/01/journey-into-the-dark-realm/

http://swarajgroups.blogspot.in/2014/02/new-space-telescope-to-map-dark-matter.html

7. ""We’ve had string theory for 40 years and nothing yet has come out of that which can be directly tested with observations or experiments. I think my idea has a greater chance of being tested with observations, which is an exciting thing. I think it will take no more than 10 or 15 years."

My work is important because I am thinking out of box, I am looking the Universe from another window (of Dark Matter & Dark Energy) while our scientific window is different but on many topic we are drawing the same picture of universe.

swarajgroups.blogspot.in

You are so right...how can mankind remotely understand things when we have not the faintest clue as to what is space, time, gravity and electrical charge? Think about it...we can measure these four things alright and experiment with them and document them just fine but we haven't the slightest idea of really WHAT they are. Period.

An interesting observance...matter seems to be approaching the speed of light itself at the horizon of the universe..it is expanding at an ever increasing rate at that. This high speed matter at the horizon of the universe...does it keep going faster and breaks the speed limit as it does at the event horizon of a black hole..then turns into pure energy at the horizon (of the universe) just as it does in a black hole's horizon? I can't disagree with this hypothesis. So the universe's matter eventually will ALL speed up since space/time is expanding with the expansion of the universe's horizon and cross over to energyville. If you think about it, it's true. So on the "other side" of the universe's event horizon is like the horizon in reverse of a black hole. Are we then existing in a massive black hole outside the universe and we are a bubble of matter inside it? Seems so. If this is the case, you betcha, we've got to rethink everything.

That leads me to say that the universe could have been created by this huge energy well which is now outside the universe's horizon. Something perturbed it and energy was converted into the building blocks of matter JUST AS current theory suggests a short time after the so called Big Bang. When the bang occurred there was only space/time and energy. As things expanded, the energy formed packages which formed what we can call "pre matter" then the building blocks themselves (quarks etc) then sub atomic particles then atoms. As to how this formation of the universe from energy happened or how this horizon we now call our universe came to be, I don't know. But I have a strong feeling this form of thought leads us to some clues. Imagine, we live I a tiny itsey bitsey bubble of matter called a universe, which is inside an immenser pure energy mega environment.


To clarify (and not to spam the board here) imagine a bubble of matter inside an event horizon, the reverse of a black hole. The universe is that bubble. The matter in the outside shell is going at almost velocity C from the center. Then it increases to C and is converted to pure energy...at this point I the "horizon of the universe"...reverse of a black hole where matter turns into energy and you have a singularity point.

Then are black holes punch throughs? Punched through to the outside of the universe's horizon itself or are they pockets of horizon inside our universe? I also think out of the box, always have...but with reason and logic de jour.

We see the universe, as Einstein said, as a giant illusion and this illusion is created inside our objects mentality...we see things as images instead of what they really are.

And let's clarify dark matter for those who are lost here. Dark matter is matter we can't detect (yet). This includes sub atomic particles floating around galactic and intergalactic space, atoms/ions/plasma, molecules and any and all forms of non reflective non photon emitting matter of all sorts. I read once that black holes were considered dark matter and I disagree, we can see/perceive where they are (we can't see a black hole, just where it's many effects start being detectable).

I'm looking forward to a better explanation of how the universe came into being. I find it hard to see how a point of nothing can explode into a bunch of Gas and radiation. The part about how matter came about is easy to understand.

This theory seem to be very "down to earth". That's why I like it. No 11th dimensions or matter that appears out of nothing.

All things are really simple in the universe, when their properties are boiled down to the essentials. I think that gravity, the beginning of our universe, dark matter etc. will prove to be very obvious once their true nature is discovered.

String and quantum theories are nice tries, but they seem too complex and full of uncertainty, chaos and randomness. Structure and hierarchy is something that prevails from the very smallest particles to the grandest scales of galactic clusters. I think following that same path will lead to new answers. "All stuff is made of something."

This thread hits an interesting point. If we go back to the "Big Bang," then what caused that?
We could go on ad-infinitum this way, or get around the problem by assuming that The Universe has always been here ....., Infinite!
I don't think this is simplistic because Occam's Razor states "When all else fails, the simple solution is usually the best!

Very interesting!
Dark matter should also be renamed "imaginary matter"!

i don`t believe that changing the name of Black Hole to "gravity abnormality" solves anything .Can anyone explain what`s with all those photos of lensing effect of very far galaxies ? Could they be castaway black holes (from ex-twin blackhole systems) that just bend the light (acting like lenses) and have nothing left around them to be "seen" ?

Dumb question - or two;
Why does the universe appear to be the same 13.5 billion years old in any direction we look? Is the universe anthropogenic?
If an object emitted light 13.5 billion years ago and we're just now seeing it, then that object was 13.5 billion light years away at the time the light was emitted?

The theory of the origins of (this)universe starts with the "Big Bang"; since we can see the residue of the explosion that occurred at its birth. The theory of the Big Bang comes in conflict with what exactly made the explosion, and what was life prior to the birth of this universe. If there was a Big Bang what was it that created the Big Bang and how long did it exist? If we went back in time some 200 trillion years what would we see? The common notion of time is that time was "created" at the time of the Big Bang. What if time has no beginning and has no end? Amen(Amen Ra). How does gravity respond on the scale of universes? I am not talking about multi-verses, but the concept of universe both large, small and dwarf that are clustered and rogue in the infinite expanse of space and time; say for example of a small quadrant of space of one hundred quintrillion light years.

An article full of "darkness", dark assumptions, dark conclusions and nothing clearly told about what correlations the authors have actually found in their study which I believe is really interesting.

Time in absolute sense is non-existent. It is just an experiential reality that is assumed by an experiencer. If there is no experiencer, there is nothing like time. The brain tends to link up two points of actions (motions or processes) with its memory function. This associative memory experience is called time. The universe is perpetuity of motions or processes, chemical or otherwise.

Or else: imagine the beginning or end of so-called time billions and trillions of years before or after, but still the question remains: what was before or will be after that?
Saying that time started with big bang and ends with the end of the universe, is partial explanation. Big bang was rather a beginning of a series of processes/motions that would stop one day.
Time is an illusion, but a persistent one for any life form as such having conscious memory.
Rajnish Roy
http://rewiringthebrain.net/

"Time is an illusion..." Opinion only.

My favourite prediction is that the Higgs is a composite boson, with the two spin 1 parts cancelling to spin 0, and with a little energy difference combining in a different energy state to a spin 2 graviton. The LHC may eventually show this as two close peaks where the Higgs has been "found". using Boltzmann energy level occupation (black body statistics), the actual energy density would control the relative Higgs to graviton ratio, and "modulate" the relative inertial to gravitational mass. Therefore G is not constant. As said I predict this, and submit it to LHC while awaiting them producing more results of significance as more Higgs mass level events are produced. Does higher than expected photon coupling sound familiar?

-The dark
substance.
-In the world of
the dark
substance,
-from there
looked at our
world's clear
substance
the dark
substance.
-Let us return to
the
space time
physics.
-So not flat the
waving
of the space.
-This means that
the
space is different
between
his coordinates
time -
hijacking they
arise.
-So the real space
not
time
homogeneous.
-So the space of
our Earth
may not be time
simultaneously
homogeneous.
-What causes the
storms
of the space
waving?
-Because the
smaller
bigger space
storm may
break out in any
of the
dots of the space.
-The material
masses of
the worlds which
cannot
be seen can cause
the
largest storm ,
( the dark
substances ).
-The space storm
the time
pressure,you are
gravitational
disturbance
with an other
word.
-This a meteorite
to an
impact
measurable,but
some other way
to be
contemplated it
dared for
this passage his
result no
collision,
but this a
gravitation and
time distortion.
-According to the
space
time physics,
the unknown
worlds'
single part moves
in each
other.
-Because of that
because
the masses on the
identical
wavelength exist
only physically for
each
other.
-So his
passage
happening
on each other
does not
cause the
different
worlds' celestial
bodies a
problem in the
space time
physics.
-These substance
masses
may pass through
each
other in the space
time
physics.
-This dark
substance.
-The dark
substance.
-This the
substances of
the real substance
masses
in the dark
worlds.

My theory of stuff, still working on, , ,

If it was found by normal thinking it would be found easy. The grand unification theory would (should) explain everything. Where would the energy of the beginning of our universe come from? Energy from anything in our universe could not supply large enough energy to start our universe. So, the energy must have come from someplace other then in our universe. I think from outside of our 3d space & 1d time (3D), um, ok, I got it. 4D (4d space & 1d time). Ok take a small piece of 4D matter changed to a large amount of 3D matter (or 4D energy to 3D energy).

How could 4d change to 3d? What in our universe change dimension(s), um, oh, yeah, what about very large star going to a black hole? 3d to 0 dimension (singularity), can the black hole take 1d reduction at a time? What I believe is the event horizon becomes a new universe that is (in our universe) reduced one dimension to a true 2d universe. So we can imagine one added dimension at our beginning (some call it big bang).

Now I have enough energy for a very large big bang. Let us take a megaton nuclear explosion with a camera recording the event, but forgot to start the recorder. The nuclear explosion happens up high in the sky, and we turn on the recorder late and get the nuclear explosion large in the sky. What we see is a sphere growing at a very large rate.

If we look at the recording and run it backwards, we see the explosion get smaller and smaller. We might assume it would continue to and make or come from a single point. Some believe this is how our universe began. Why, because when looking back to the far past this universe continues to get smaller farther in the past. What we see where we can no longer look any farther back is the 4D mass changed to 4D energy, then the 4D energy changed to 3D energy (light), then the 3D energy (this is where we start to see clear space) changed to 3D mass. The 3D energy is expanding into the 3D space and drags the fabric of this universe out at much higher speed then the speed of light. When the 3D energy slows to our speed of light, 3D mass can form, and then must slow even more. The first matter that changes is the very small particles. With particles moving so close to light speed we have no interaction to these particles to slow them down.

It looks to me the Image of the cosmic microwave background (echoes of the Big Bang) from NASA's WMAP satellite I see the star from where we came from. It is only in our 3D universe from the 4D universe.

Mass (force of gravity) holds the 4th dimension (quantum physics) from expands into our 3D space. All the unstable particles found in quantum physics are mega stable in the full 4D universe. Out in deep space where no mass (not even any virtual particles).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mass keeps the 4th dimension in the quantum level. When there is no mass the 4th dimension expands larger then quantum level. What is thought of dark energy is a pocket of 4d larger then quantum levels. The light in volume is traveling along a 3d route of a ripple in 4d space. It seems to be expanding in distance in the 3d route, because the 4th dimension is expanding like an increasing amplitude and shorter frequency sine wave into our 3rd dimension.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is my thought of a unification theory. We need to understand (what I think) black hole. It simply reduces dimensions. Takes 3d space & 1d time matter into the surface of the event horizon. Matter becomes energy by E=mc^2. Then the energy can overlap at the event horizon, and makes a 2d space & 1d time (surface of the event horizon). This would be a big bang for a new 2d universe.

Now, increase the star dimensions to 4d space & 1d time. When it goes supernova (change 4d space & 1d time to 3d space & 1d time) and reduce dimension at the event horizon is our universe. The energy needed for our big bang is the remnants of a 4d star reduced to 3d. The 4th dimension thickness in our 3d universe must be reduced to quantum length or smaller. This is why gravitational force unit is not as large as the other force units. Also explains what quantum physics really is 4d space & 1d time. The size seems to be between 2 x radius of an election (size a) and 2 x radius of a proton (size b). The electron jumps easily from one energy state to another though the 4th dimension. This jumping (I think of a worm hole) does not take much energy for such a small object and short 3d distances.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is the pull of every piece of matter has on every piece of matter. In deep space where there is no matter within a sphere with a very large radius (many light years), is a place that does the reverse of stated above. It is the push not pull of every piece of matter has on every piece of matter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
****The galaxy, NGC 1277, formed all its stars in a quick burst roughly 10 billion years ago — less than 4 billion years after the Big Bang. Then it appears to have abruptly switched off.****

Yes, the object that fell into the hyper-black hole (4 space 1 way time dimension “4d matter”) from the 4th dimension (5th including time) into our 3d universe (the 4d hyper-black hole has a 3d hyper-event horizon that is our 3d universe). When a 4d object enters the spinning hyper-black hole it is converted into 3d objects with the 4th dimension thickness reduced to quantum dimensions as the hyper-black hole spins. As a meat slicer cuts slices off meat, this 4d object gets sliced into 3d and takes time. In such high gravitational field time is different.

The time it has taken for the object to fall into our 3d universe must have been 4 billion years after the Big Bang, but in the 4th dimensional universe it was a flash of time.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, seems to be different 4th dimensional layers of our universe at different time dimensional locations. Each layer is another rotation around on the 4d event horizon of the 4d black hole. This universe is stretching like a role of bathroom tissue paper. Each next layer speeds up from the layer before it. This could be why this 3d universe is accelerating apart. The thickness of the 4th dimension is too small to detect, smaller than the plank’s length constant.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Space, time, mass, energy = speed of light

LET ME TAKE YOU ON A STRANGE JOURNEY (The Rocky, , , Show)

As it takes space, time, mass, and energy to leave earth at a speed called "exit velocity", so to there is a speed to leave the 3rd dimension and enter the 4th. As mass moves into the 4th dimension it increases in size (larger value). To move into the 4th (4 length 1 time) dimension mass moves closer to speed of light. As the speed increases so does the 3d mass. When the 3d mass is doubled the mass has moved into 4th dimension (if only a small amount). As a 2d a square moves into 3d as a cube, so does 3d a cube into 4th as a hypercube.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OK, GOOD, HOW DO I DO THAT? What equations do I use?

E = mC^2 from 4 length and one time dimensions to 3 length and one time dimensions gives a very large amount of energy for a, "Big Bang theory" to start. The energy density must be maximum for a 4th dimensional black hole. Problem is what are the fundamental forces in the 4d universe and the 4d universe fundamental particles?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Somehow space, time, mass, energy is formed into speed of light limit.

LET ME TAKE YOU ON A STRANGE JOURNEY (The Rocky, horror, picture, Show)

As it takes space, time, mass, and energy to leave earth at a speed called "exit velocity", so to there is a speed to leave the 3rd dimension and enter the 4th. As mass moves into the 4th dimension it increases in size (larger value). To move into the 4th (4 length 1 time) dimension mass moves closer to speed of light. As the speed increases so does the 3d mass. When the 3d mass is doubled the mass has moved into 4th dimension (if only a small amount). As a 2d a square moves into 3d as a cube, so does 3d a cube into 4th as a hypercube.

OK. 4d (space or length dimension) no time dimension. By what and the way you use 4d it would be 5d space time. In our universe we have black holes (3 dimensions of space and one way in time.) with the event horizon where the speed of light and the pull of gravity balance. What is the thickness of this event horizon? How large is the light travelling in the 2d space one way time event horizon (or 2d surface of the event horizon)? NOW let us think of the two dimensional universe of the black hole event horizon. How thick is this universe in the third dimension? I would think it would be within quantum distances. Any thicker would cause the light particle to fall into or exit into the third dimension away from the black hole. So if the thickness (or the third component) of the event horizon is in the range of quantum distance, then it seems to be as true a 2d universe as I can think of being. So, this is increased by one space dimension. In this 4d space (1d in time) universe there was a 4d star (hyper-star). This star is so large; it goes to a 4d black hole with our 3d universe as the 4d event horizon.

Now so as we continue, we look at what we can see at the event horizon. Light can not travel perpetual to the event. Light travels in 2 dimensions on or in the event horizon. If the light has higher speed it leaves the event horizon out into our 3d universe (exit velocity). In other words, travel faster than light is leaving 2d into 3d. Add one space dimension and we have our 3d universe on the hyper-surface of the event horizon of the 4d black hole.

This is why the force magnitude of gravity is so very small compared to the other force. Mass warps and compresses the 4th dimension to quantum distances where mass particles exist and when no mass is around (in deep spaces between the galleries).

Oh, this could be why the galleries are moving apart. The lack of mass in deep spaces between the galleries, allows the 4th dimension to expand (like a growing amplitude and smaller frequency sine wave in the middle). Then at some point in the past the expansion was slower (4d sine wave was small amplitude and very long ‘almost flat’ frequency). The expansion had to have a point where it was a linear expansion and change to an acceleration of the expansion. In the midpoint between the galleries where the lowest amount of mass began the smallest point of ripples where the 4th dimension was able to push the 3d space into rolling up (or folding up) like a sine wave that is higher in the middle and the peeks are closer together. As we approaching any mass from the center this sine wave (ripple in the 4th dimension) flattens closer we get to mass. Just like a sine wave following a bell curve, the mid section is the highest point and levels off at the edges, so does the ripples in the 4th dimension. Another example we take a road that is 2 dimensions with many hills in the 3rd dimension. If we also take another road right next to the first without any hills and set up a start line and set the finish line, the road with the ripples in the 3rd dimension will travel farther and faster to keep up with someone on the shorter road.

This could be true because the expansion is where the lack of the gravitational pull is not able to keep the 4th dimension to quantum distances. As the galleries (source of mass or gravitational force) increase in distances between them the larger the 4th dimension expands into our universe.

Yes but how does the, "spooky action at a distance" work or happens? The way I see it, it is a quantum element that involves the 4th dimension. The quantum event happens when we entangle the players in this dance. The dancers share quantum attributes. When these players are moved a distance (great distances sometimes) in 3 dimension, but they stay connected in the 4th dimension. And this is how the electron moves from one energy level(s) to others.

There is 4th dimension at quantum levels. Let us think about a long hallway ten feet high and five feet wide, and we move a pole of 12 feet long and can only orientate the length in one of the x, y, or z coordinates. X is aligned to the length of the hall. Y is height, and Z is width. We move the pole down the hall orientated to the X coordinate. If we cut the pole in half to 6 feet we have one more degree of freedom that is we move the 6 foot pole down hall in X or Y coordinates and another cut in half to 3 feet we move the pole in X, Y, and Z coordinates. We see that moving to small size can increase the number of degrees of freedom. So when we get to quantum levels we have the 4th dimension as another degree of freedom.

I can go on to see every aspect or mystery in science be explained. This is still a work in progress, so far I am still missing adequate words to fully explain in detail the way I see the (gig saw puzzle) pieces fall together. It seems to show a different way of thinking than I have ever seen or listen to in the past.

I have been tinkering with this idea all together for almost 20 years. If anyone can help, and see places that are unclear, and can please point them out. Last date updated is 7 Feb. 2014.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"how the universe was created"?

Surely you do not believe that someone "created" this?

John Moffat has advocated MOG for years.

Quite natural questions Gaugain. As well as the 'edge' of space appearing equidistant in every direction from us, the tiniest things we perceive are the same level of magnitude from us as the largest things we perceive. How can this be? We are magically in the middle of everything. So it is in a dream: you are always in the middle of your dream. 'We' are in the middle, because 'we' are looking, and the universe is apparitional, as John Dobson was saying decades ago, and hard scientists have been troubled that they cannot refute, but quickly go back to their more familiar and comforting constructs. There have always been sages walking around, who have awakened from identity with a separate observer, who tell us that in fact space/time is in us (a conceptual construct only), rather than the reverse. The theoretical problems will continue as long as the false presumption of the primacy of the separate observer goes unexamined. 'Who is that one now?', ask the sages, 'You presume to know, but you do not'. 'The entire universe is a tiny bubble in my hand', said one. Sages are using their whole brains, while scientists have had a spasm of self-recoil into a fear-based adaption of identifying with self/world concepts generated out left-brain maladaption and chosen to forget this 'fall' into space/time and must generate a conceptual world in order to perpetually avoid that original fear they have vowed to never feel. The sages roll on the ground laughing at this dream-play, at least for awhile.

Since the space appearance is expanding, the galaxy needn't have been 13.5 light years away 13.5 billion years ago, as what is presently taken to be the universe, did not exist then.


Post a comment

« "The Universe May be Different on Scales Larger than Those We Can Directly Observe" --Planck Satellite Team | Main | Image of the Day --Clues Found that Liquid Water May Exist on Mars Today »




1


2


3


4


5


6


7


8





9


11


12


13


14


15

Our Partners

technology partners

A


19


B

About Us/Privacy Policy

For more information on The Daily Galaxy and to contact us please visit this page.



E