dlzc wrote:
Dark Fluid has *no* properties that are substantially improved over
Dark Matter. It *must* substantially decay into the definition of
Dark Matter in the final analysis. It can have no properties
associated with a fluid (say viscosity, or pressure), or it violates
what we see.

Well, this article isn't talking about "Dark Fluid" but "Dark Fields".
Different theories, though I don't know what the explanation of Dark
Fields are supposed to be yet. The only explanation is that it is an
extension of MOND to account for cluster deficiencies.

But getting back to Dark Fluid, why do you say it violates what we see?
Dark Fluid is supposed to be a complete alternative to MOND, Dark Matter
and Dark Energy, so the fact that it "decays" into something similar to
Dark Matter is exactly what it was supposed to do at some particular
scale. Dark Energy is a repulsive force, Dark Matter an attractive
force, both acting on the same medium albeit at different scales. Those
would indicate fluidic behaviour.

You are sniffing up any skirt that seems to offer an alternative to
Dark Matter. And I am telling you, Dark Fluid ain't it.

Just presenting the latest news.

Now what I'd like to propose is, if inertia derives from all the mass
in the Universe (ala Mach), and the speed of *this* effect
(establishment of inertia) is large-but-finite, what if Dark Matter is
simply "echos" of an effect of the event horizons (say) that spent
time in any given bit of space? Expansion also looks like everything
shrinking in place (due to increasing clock rates). I mean if we are
sky-balling...


For that matter, we could even theorize that Dark Matter and Dark Energy
is just standard gravity's symmetry breaking as the Universe cools
toward absolute zero, turning into two different forces: a super-gravity
and an anti-gravity.

Yousuf Khan