Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Dark matter theory resolved or just a new theory?

  1. #1 Dark matter theory resolved or just a new theory? 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Hello everybody,I'm new here, I’m not a scientist or something like that, but recently I have become very interested in dark matter, so I did a lot of information digging about the problem and I think I’ve solved the problem. I will try to explain my train of thought the best I can.

    To solve the problem I didn’t use any theories, just facts and particles we already know. So, we don’t need supersymmetry, string theory, new undiscovered particles nor do we need modified gravity. I just used knowledge we already know and pieced them together.

    We invented dark matter to solve two problems. Velocities in galaxies and clusters of galaxies, to be more exact the Bullet Cluster (it causes more problems).

    Dark matter has a few specifications: weakly interacting, heavy, very stable, “goes trough stuff”, couples together and on top of each other, cold, has a tendency to be where ordinary matter is… that’s about it, I may be forgetting something, but most of is here.

    The dark matter where looking for is in fact the weak force its self. I know this because my logic tells me to. To be more specific the W+, W-, Z bosons. These bad boys don’t meet some of the specifications but here me out. They are very heavy, weakly interacting (obviously) , it’s where ordinary matter is (we can’t have it any other way). It’s very unstable, and for the coupling part and going trough stuff, you will see that we don’t need that to make this work.

    The W+, W-, Z bosons have a life time of only 310^−25 seconds and exist in the short time when a neutron is changing in to a proton and vice versa. So they exist in β+ or β- decays and similar activities.

    It would be like poking something in space, there would still be some acceleration (extra gravity).

    At first this must seem insignificant, but the conversion rate goes up whit temperature, to be more exact in stars, or to be even more exact in centers of galaxies, where there is lots and lots and lots of stars and starry activity. In our own Sun 9.2 10^37 protons (hydrogen nuclei) are converted into helium nuclei every second (or is that number in half because we are only interest in the ones turning in to neutrons), so we can only imagine what the number in the centers of galaxies are because that’s where most stars and activity are placed.

    So here is my answer to the galaxies velocity problem, where there is proton-neutron activity there is more mass and gravity.

    As for the bullet cluster problem, it’s very simple. All of the activity is still happening in galaxies and not the gas in-between (although the gas is pretty hot, it contains pretty stable material)

    There it is, a simple solution to a simple problem, but I guess it’s a bit chaotic like quantum physics when you try to do the numbers.

    If I knew how, I would test this idea in a computer model or something but then again I’m not a scientist. I guess you could do something like m=m (known)*(period of existence)/(period of existence + period of nonexistence) and repeat that for every particle.

    It may not be the whole 5x missing part but maybe just a part of it.

    Hope it all made sense. Waiting for criticism and replies. What do you think?

    PS. Sorry if there are grammar issues.

    Last edited by tbraun; December 25th, 2013 at 10:16 PM.
    Reply With Quote  


  3. #2  
    Join Date
    May 2008
    The problem is that apparently the stars is our galaxy are moving so fast they should have escape velocity. So, could it be that our way of measuring is wrong or could there be some crazy stuff called DM which we have no evidence for and which seems to only obey the laws necessary for it?

    I plump for the former. I have a sea of gravity theory, that like photons, gravity does not vanish a fraction of a light year from a star, planet, moon but goes on and on. This would create a drag like a boat going through deep water in a real sea (away from currents) and the more gravitational sources, the more drag (so higher redshifts inside galaxies). Gravitational redshift is indistinguishable from recessional redshift so an object travelling at 80 mps may appear to be travelling at 160 mps when both readings are seen together as a redshift.

    As to the Bullet Cluster, imagine two nebulae running into each other. Huge distances between the few stars but lots of collisions between gas and dust. As they part there are two areas to each. The one where there is still collisions so red as in energetic and the area where the collisions have mostly ceased, so blue as in cold. There is a space between them as the nebulae have ripped apart where "nothing" is left. At over three billion light years away, there is not exactly a lot of detail in any photos. Just blobs.

    Reply With Quote  

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts