Notices
Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Mysterious Dark Matter

  1. #1 Mysterious Dark Matter 
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Detroit Metropolitan area
    Posts
    565
    MYSTERIOUS DARK MATTER

    Most everyone should know that Fritz Zwicky discovered the mysterious dark matter (MDM). This was the result of unexplained galaxy velocities that exceeded the estimated masses of these galaxies. So, what is the answer?
    The establishment astronomers have not provided one. I will offer an explanation for the reason why but first I will go to the spiral galaxy problem that is similar in nature.

    Vera Rubin and her partners researched spiral galaxies and found that the spiral structures in the spiral galaxies did not conform to the virial theorem where the velocities should fall off as the distances of the spiral structures increased from the central nucleus. This obviously is similar to the problem within the galaxy clusters. The conclusion, of course is that there is some mysterious dark matter that exists at the outer perimeter of these spirals.

    I believe that I have the solution to this problem and the solution is that the MDM does not exist! That is why it is unobservable. This is how I would explain this puzzle:

    Solar and star flares are common in all stars throughout the Universe. This flaring activity results when impacting bodies such as meteoroids, comets and on rare occasions, asteroids (I know this may start another debate on the cause of flares but I am sure I am right) create explosions. The oxides in these bodies break down and release their oxygen and in this hydrogen environment and high temperature, this results in an obvious explosion.
    These flares strip the electrons off of the elements involved (refer to the S&T article in the 1989 June issue on page 591) such as iron, sulfur and oxygen and leave only the two inner electrons. Some of these free electrons and positive ions are then blasted out into space where the slower positive ions are captured in the inner portions of the spirals while the much higher velocity electrons are captured in the outer hydrogen gas perimeter that surrounds the galaxies to create negative hydrogen ions (two electrons). There may not be many captured but enough to create an attraction between the negative ions and the inner positive ions to give a boost to the gravitational force and create the illusion that more mass is present. Therefore, the MDM does not exist. That is why there is no observation or detection of more mass.

    In the clusters, this ionic hydrogen gas collects in the central region of the clusters and acts as a glue (being attracted back from the surrounding galaxies) to attract the galaxies by this weak electric force that enhances the gravitational force and creates the same illusion of greater mass. Obviously then, this mass does not exist. There has been x-ray activity observed in the central regions of these clusters that is probably the result of the ionic electron activity of these charged ions.
    You may wonder how this electron cloud can exist because of their mutual repulsion but this central region is continually being fed these free electrons from all the surrounding galaxies and their star flaring activity. Electrons approaching each other from all sides will stop centrally because of their mutual repulsion. Electrons will be escaping this region but are being replenished continually.
    So this electron cloud is the MDM in the clusters while in the spirals, the added attraction is between negative HA’s and inner positive elemental nuclei.

    Mike NS


    Real science is objective, not subjective
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Isotope Zelos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,755
    that doesnt sound neither logical or plausible. string theory have a way to describe dark matter


    I am zelos. Destroyer of planets, exterminator of life, conquerer of worlds. I have come to rule this uiniverse. And there is nothing u pathetic biengs can do to stop me

    On the eighth day Zelos said: 'Let there be darkness,' and the light was never again seen.

    The king of posting
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Detroit Metropolitan area
    Posts
    565
    Zelos

    What proof can you cite for the ST that even gives it any credibility?

    NS
    Real science is objective, not subjective
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Professor Zwolver's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    1,667
    hmm, i bet it is possible.. but it does not explain why there is that much dark matter...

    explosions should always emit light, not absorb it...

    but the question is.... does dark matter have a color (black) or is it emptyness with a huge gravitational ability (like a black hole)?
    Growing up, i marveled at star-trek's science, and ignored the perfect society. Now, i try to ignore their science, and marvel at the society.

    Imagine, being able to create matter out of thin air, and not coming up with using drones for boarding hostile ships. Or using drones to defend your own ship. Heck, using drones to block energy attacks, counterattack or for surveillance. Unless, of course, they are nano-machines in your blood, which is a billion times more complex..
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Isotope Zelos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,755
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike NS
    Zelos

    What proof can you cite for the ST that even gives it any credibility?

    NS
    when did i say i had proof for it? never
    I am zelos. Destroyer of planets, exterminator of life, conquerer of worlds. I have come to rule this uiniverse. And there is nothing u pathetic biengs can do to stop me

    On the eighth day Zelos said: 'Let there be darkness,' and the light was never again seen.

    The king of posting
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    34
    What about Milgrom Mordahie's MOND theorie? I like that better than the dark matter theory. it is more proveable.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Isotope Zelos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,755
    what theory is that? tell it
    I am zelos. Destroyer of planets, exterminator of life, conquerer of worlds. I have come to rule this uiniverse. And there is nothing u pathetic biengs can do to stop me

    On the eighth day Zelos said: 'Let there be darkness,' and the light was never again seen.

    The king of posting
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Ph.D. william's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Wherever I go, there I am
    Posts
    935
    Someone asked about MOND...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOND

    A warning though, this is almost as controversial as NS's theories. So you may not want to go around saying that the issue has been solved by MOND just yet....

    william
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Isotope Zelos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,755
    NS?
    that theory fails on one gigantic thing
    F <> ma
    F ~ ma
    F = dP/dT
    I am zelos. Destroyer of planets, exterminator of life, conquerer of worlds. I have come to rule this uiniverse. And there is nothing u pathetic biengs can do to stop me

    On the eighth day Zelos said: 'Let there be darkness,' and the light was never again seen.

    The king of posting
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Ph.D. william's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Wherever I go, there I am
    Posts
    935
    Hi Mike,
    There are two dibilitating flaws that send this hypothesis to the graveyard.

    First:
    NS: Some of these free electrons and positive ions are then blasted out into space where the slower positive ions are captured in the inner portions of the spirals while the much higher velocity electrons are captured in the outer hydrogen gas perimeter that surrounds the galaxies to create negative hydrogen ions (two electrons).
    By your own words you describe an inner region of positive charge and an outer region of negative charge. This would have to be the case, otherwise, if the + and - ions/charges intermingled they'd become neutral and there goes your hypothesis.

    Okay, now here is the catch (and you can't get away from this one with fancy talk...). The galaxy you describe would NOT reproduce the rotation curves of Zwicky and Rubin that you referred to in your very first sentence!! (You were referring to the rotation curves whether you knew it or not by the way.) A galaxy with two distinct regions (the inner part positive and the outer negative) would behave much differently than what is observed.

    I'll give you a hint:
    it has something to do with Gauss' law.
    (Now you're going to have to look this one up for yourself.)

    As I said, there is NO escaping this one!


    This hypothesis is officially dead. It CANNOT account for the observational evidence. Period.


    NS, please stop claiming you have solved the MDM problem years ago. Instead, you should feel ashamed that it only took me a few minutes to crack this nut and it illuded you for years.



    I don't feel like arguing about the sources of solar flares so that's all.

    I do encourage you to try to come up with an alternative... you may be correct the next time.

    Take care,
    william
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Detroit Metropolitan area
    Posts
    565
    Zwolver quote
    but the question is.... does dark matter have a color (black) or is it emptyness with a huge gravitational ability (like a black hole)?

    reply
    In the galactic clusters, YES, because there is EM radiation from these regions. X-rays, if you can consider that a color but it is a segment of the EM spectrum.

    526 quote
    What about Milgrom Mordahie's MOND theorie? I like that better than the dark matter theory. it is more proveable.

    reply
    MOND is a byproduct of the CMBR to provide a crutch for the BB..
    This radiation is explained by me as a 'thermal equalibrium' temperature of the current space particles such as star dust, interstellar and intergalactic molecules and their subsequent radiations according to the 'Second Law of Thermdynamics'..

    NS
    Real science is objective, not subjective
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Detroit Metropolitan area
    Posts
    565
    William quote
    By your own words you describe an inner region of positive charge and an outer region of negative charge. This would have to be the case, otherwise, if the + and - ions/charges intermingled they'd become neutral and there goes your hypothesis.

    reply
    In the outer hydrogen gas regions, all these atoms are neutral. So when one atom catches an electron to become a -HI, it is then - to all the other neutral HA's. So it attracts all the surrounding atoms to create a clump of neutral atoms surrounding the -HI. It would not take many of these clumps to enhance the gravitational effect by ten to the inner positive regions of the spirals.
    The positive nuclei in the central regions would take time to recover, so there would always be an attractive effect to the outer region of gases. Hence, this then creates the apparent presence of added DM.

    quote
    Okay, now here is the catch (and you can't get away from this one with fancy talk...). The galaxy you describe would NOT reproduce the rotation curves of Zwicky and Rubin that you referred to in your very first sentence!! (You were referring to the rotation curves whether you knew it or not by the way.) A galaxy with two distinct regions (the inner part positive and the outer negative) would behave much differently than what is observed.
    I'll give you a hint:
    it has something to do with Gauss' law.
    (Now you're going to have to look this one up for yourself.)
    As I said, there is NO escaping this one!

    reply
    In the spirals, (Rubin's et al work) the content is relatively stable with very little relative motion to the other objects, so the magnetic component would be virtually ineffective to this added DM either way.

    NS
    Real science is objective, not subjective
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Ph.D. william's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Wherever I go, there I am
    Posts
    935
    Hi NS,
    Just a quick comment:

    Me: Okay, now here is the catch (and you can't get away from this one with fancy talk...). The galaxy you describe would NOT reproduce the rotation curves of Zwicky and Rubin that you referred to in your very first sentence!! (You were referring to the rotation curves whether you knew it or not by the way.) A galaxy with two distinct regions (the inner part positive and the outer negative) would behave much differently than what is observed.
    I'll give you a hint:
    it has something to do with Gauss' law.
    (Now you're going to have to look this one up for yourself.)
    As I said, there is NO escaping this one!

    You: reply
    In the spirals, (Rubin's et al work) the content is relatively stable with very little relative motion to the other objects, so the magnetic component would be virtually ineffective to this added DM either way.
    I wasn't referring to magnetism....
    (Hint #2: There is a "gravitational" analogue of Gauss' law. And specifically what you need to think about is the Gaussian surface. That is, what is the difference in being outside this surface as opposed to being inside? And you have to consider Gaussian surfaces at different locations.)

    By me giving you these "homework" problems, I'm trying to get you (and everyone else) to look up these things and get into the quantitative aspects of physics. Ideas are great, but they then have to be tested against observation and the laws of physics. Doing the math is the first step. Math doesn't lie. And I haven't asked anything that's at that high of a level of math. So far, I think all you have done is blown off my attempts and not really tried.

    Regards,
    william
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Detroit Metropolitan area
    Posts
    565
    William quote
    wasn't referring to magnetism....
    (Hint #2: There is a "gravitational" analogue of Gauss' law. And specifically what you need to think about is the Gaussian surface. That is, what is the difference in being outside this surface as opposed to being inside? And you have to consider Gaussian surfaces at different locations.)

    reply
    The Gaussian theorum applies to 'closed systems'.
    The spiral galaxies are not closed systems. Who knows how much matter exists on the outer edges of spirals. The preumption is that there is an extended ring of hydrogen gas surrounding these spirals. Spirals viewed 'edge on' have a streak of dark gasses or such similar components.

    Regarding the 'closed' GS in an electrical field like the 'static' electric charge generators, the electrons all collect on the outer surface due to mutual repulsion.
    Without exploring any further, this surface charge could apply to the Gaussian theorum. My opinion.

    This is a complex theorum I am not interested in.

    NS
    Real science is objective, not subjective
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    27
    Well, if you're going to ignore scientific evidence because it "doesn't interest you," then perhaps you shouldn't be trying to pass off theories that are unsound on multiple levels.

    My first example (which is minor, and you can skip if you're, as you've stated elsewhere, "uninterested in MINOR trivialities), solar flares are connected to sunspots and intense magnetic fields in the corona. They happen far too frequently to be caused by impacting bodies, and are far too powerful, plus their frequency changes with the number of sunspots, while the number of bodies impacting the sun are not.

    Now, as to the -H ions creating a false gravitational attraction, you'd think, because electrical charges are rather obvious, and not something that would remain COMPLETELY undedected by modern scientists, that we would have noticed by now. The area, both inside the 100K LY region and between it and the 300K LY region have no signs of such a thing. Plus, how exactly does this explain why the outer area doesn't have a smaller rotational velocity than the inner region. How do you account for that, oh Einstein II?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Detroit Metropolitan area
    Posts
    565
    Legend quote
    Well, if you're going to ignore scientific evidence because it "doesn't interest you," then perhaps you shouldn't be trying to pass off theories that are unsound on multiple levels.

    reply
    I ignore these theories because they are irrelevent to my promotion of the Universe.
    But I will reply to other subjects that need solutions.

    quote
    My first example (which is minor, and you can skip if you're, as you've stated elsewhere, "uninterested in MINOR trivialities), solar flares are connected to sunspots and intense magnetic fields in the corona. They happen far too frequently to be caused by impacting bodies, and are far too powerful, plus their frequency changes with the number of sunspots, while the number of bodies impacting the sun are not.

    reply
    you ignored the evidence I provided regarding the MDM. That NASA solar x-ray satelite recorded the residual positive ions after there was a giagantic flare observed.
    These ions (iron, sulfur and OXYGEN) were present. What do you think the presence of oxygen would do in that environment?
    These impacting bodies contain a variety of different oxides and they decompose at different temperatures. So there could be more tha one explosion from a single body.
    The magnetic fields are caused by the residual ions left in the Sun. Believe it or not but 'negative hydrogen gas ions' were detected in the Sun at those high temperatures. Besides the Nasa observation given, there was another observation of a couple of comets that landed on the Sun with a subsequent gigantic flare.
    I will post that later if I still have it in my files.

    quote
    Now, as to the -H ions creating a false gravitational attraction, you'd think, because electrical charges are rather obvious, and not something that would remain COMPLETELY undedected by modern scientists, that we would have noticed by now. The area, both inside the 100K LY region and between it and the 300K LY region have no signs of such a thing. Plus, how exactly does this explain why the outer area doesn't have a smaller rotational velocity than the inner region. How do you account for that, oh Einstein II?

    reply
    The Lyman intergalactic clouds are neutral because of their remote and isolated locations.
    In the spirals, the outer gaseous regions containing these 'negative HA ions create a stronger attraction and false illusion that there is more mass. This would create an added attraction that would INCREASE the velocity to level off the outer spiral matter to a greater velocity than the predicted 'virial' velocity.
    I hope you can understand that.

    NS
    Real science is objective, not subjective
    Reply With Quote  
     

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