Notices
Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Is Dark Matter the Ether?

  1. #1 Is Dark Matter the Ether? 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    9
    From what I've read, Dark Matter seems to be every where in the Universe, Although it neither reflects nor emits light (hence, the term "Dark", I assume), it is all around us. Could this be the Ether that scientists from previous centuries thought light waves travel through?

    I imagine Messers Michaelson and Moreley are turning over in their graves over this suggestion. But has anyone opined there might be a relationship between Dark Matter and the transmission of light?


    MickeyC
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Bachelors Degree The P-manator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    474
    How can the "Dark Matter" survive in the vacuum of space? Or are we suggesting that space is not a vacuum, instead it is full of "Dark Matter"?


    Pierre

    Fight for our environment and our habitat at www.wearesmartpeople.com.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Posts
    9
    I've always understood the vacum of space referes to the absence of air. To create a vacum on this planet you have to remove air from an object such as a cylinder or glass tube.

    Although space is a vacum, it is full of lots of stuff other than air, such as stars, asteroids, planets and lots of sub atomic particles. And, apparently, lots of Dark Matter which I'm wondering if it could be the Ether.
    MickeyC
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    when you look at a burning fire, you see what your eye/brain can receive as light. above what you see is still energy that you do not see. you place your hand in this area and and feel it.

    dark matter is simply anything we currently call matter that does not or can not emit light to our level of sight. matter it open space should have some level of reflection. that is light from some sources (distant star)
    is reflecting, but at very low intensity. this would be true to stars in formation or burning out, as yet or reduced in intensity. the energy continues and its this energy that gives rise to the theory of dark matter.

    no any matter around us should have a reflection from the our sun similar to what is seen on the moon. the moon of course emits no light to our concept. there are things in our area we do not see from earth such as a small second moon, where reflections are to low for concept.

    space is a near vacuum. we exist in this vacuum just as all matter. we just happen to be traveling at the correct speed and have a central gravity force to maintain a position. many think there is a great deal of dark matter in orbit just inside or outside our solar system. some has been seen by NASA's probes. there however is no indication of "a great deal". just how much of this matter has importance to the general current concept of gravity.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Hello!

    Since light was traveling through space and dark matter was said to be in space as well,
    there surely need to be interactions of both, light and dark matter. They do share a
    common environment.

    The ether in question rather was some material searched for on earth(s ) (atmosphere )
    I understand. It might be some subatomic existence of which atoms are structured later
    on, I would suggest.

    Steve
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Professor river_rat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,517
    Steve, most proposed forms of dark matter do not interact with light (or any other radiation) - that is what makes them dark.
    As is often the case with technical subjects we are presented with an unfortunate choice: an explanation that is accurate but incomprehensible, or comprehensible but wrong.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Professor Pendragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Nederland
    Posts
    1,085
    Just to be sure: if light travels through an enormous band of dark matter, none of it is lost or altered?

    And would light with an infinitelly high frequency still not interact with dark matter?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Guest
    RR,

    Is it the case [as I currently believe] that dark matter is more a generic name for all matter that we cannot detect (EM wise) - and therefore includes dead stars, dead planets etc as well as matter of a kind we do not yet understand?

    Second question, our own galaxy must have a fair amount of DM in it perhaps even all around us at the moment yet I am not aware of any 'local' research - have I missed something here?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pendragon
    Just to be sure: if light travels through an enormous band of dark matter, none of it is lost or altered?

    And would light with an infinitelly high frequency still not interact with dark matter?
    So far as I know there is an upper limit to the EM spectrum - it is tied to planck length.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Professor river_rat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,517
    Some of it is just dark normal stuff: failed stars, planets, dust etc. But even taking that into account you have to introduce something that does not interact with radiation or the strong force to get the correct rotation curves and this was the stuff i was referring to, the proposed new forms of matter aka WIMPS. The problem is that WIMPS only interact via gravity and the weak force, so you cant detect them "locally" very easily but thats not to say people aren't trying - the CDMS at the Soudan Mine comes to mind.
    As is often the case with technical subjects we are presented with an unfortunate choice: an explanation that is accurate but incomprehensible, or comprehensible but wrong.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Guest
    THanx for that, I'll have a look in that direction as time allows..
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Quote Originally Posted by river_rat
    Steve, most proposed forms of dark matter do not interact with light (or any other radiation) - that is what makes them dark.
    When they share the same region (space ), how could they not interact? Light and dark matter had to be completely separate,
    all the time. Unthinkable I mean, and, I thought space was so dark cause nothing was there to be seen.

    Steve
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    10
    dark matter is only proposed particles whether energy or mass that needs to be there according to the big bang theory. As far as i know only about 3 or 4 % of so called dark matter has been found or fits in with theories of the composition of space. The absence of these particles have introduced an even more far out proposition of antigravity and such energies.
    I'm not too sure about the specifics but some interisting information about the current state of dark matter and all those particles can be found at www.cosmologystatement.org
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Professor river_rat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    1,517
    Jako - dark energy comes from the fact that the universe seems to be expanding at an ever increasing rate, not from the missing mass paradox.

    About the www.cosmologystatement.org, have you seen some of the groups that have signed it? It somehow reminds me of the creationist petitions...
    As is often the case with technical subjects we are presented with an unfortunate choice: an explanation that is accurate but incomprehensible, or comprehensible but wrong.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    10
    Hi i dont know anything about the dark energy just that anti-gravity is now proposed and the artcle i read said it was something to do with mass as well, it was from science.com or something cant remember exactly, and the article itself is what i refered to was just showing how some astrophysics ppl felt about the big bang and lots of them are secular as this was published in new scientist first, all those other ppl like the engineers and independant researchers well yeh they might be creationists but i found it quite interisting and true from my own studies at monash uni and i majored in astro but it was only a bachelors degree so i dnt know to much about the specifics, but will read up on it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Ja jako!

    Sounds pretty cool. :?

    Steve
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    in away, what Hubble can now see by way of its complex lens and photographic methods, is or has been dark matter. matter as we understand it, emitting energy and very much like what we have seen for generations of telescopes, but unknown. so much is based on concepts or the limits of concepts. unless the reflections created by clashing energies from a source are with in our visual abilities we are not going to see that action.

    as we understand matter, light (energy) is absorbed by matter. matter can be clouds, gas, solids or any combination. as with our sun all the energy is not absorbed through the atmosphere, but most is. the planet or solid matter will complete the process.

    when energy is emitted from a source it has direction. we do not see any of the energy as its in motion. what we do see is the reflections that are created as this energy impacts matter. blue sky, a red balloon or your neighbors wife.

    also dark matter itself creates energy. this is why some feel its there. this itself indicates this matter should be much like what we do see but do not. a forming star for instance involves great masses of material and of many elements, creates enormous energy, but may not include, in formation the energy we can see.

    way i read it...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Hi, Jackson!

    Do you say dark matter was dark matter hence having the distinction of steadily emitting energy?

    Steve
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Miller
    Hi, Jackson!

    Do you say dark matter was dark matter hence having the distinction of steadily emitting energy?

    Steve
    its energy from unknown or areas where nothing is seen, that has given rise to the idea of dark matter. as to constant; its hard to say since it should be hard to study something you cannot see, with the assumption you and it are moving. i would presume however it should be.

    at some point even Hubble cannot find an image where reflections are not or at levels below reception ability.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Ph.D. Steve Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Magdeburg, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
    Posts
    782
    Dark matter was energy with an unknown origin?

    Steve
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Miller
    Dark matter was energy with an unknown origin?

    Steve
    energy from an unknown source. speculation is this is unseen matter. the origin is likely matter from previous matter we understand. a former star system or whatever.

    some think this represents up to 90% of total universe matter and some give it exotic meanings. some think it holds all else to some form of routine. as i said its unseen and hard to study, but makes for good explanations for other things, also not understood.

    i just happen to think its unseen for reasons of capabilities, nothing exotic and probably less than 20% of total...
    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
  •