Speed of Dark???

Hi All

In the questions and answers page of Tuesday's Daily Mail is the following
question.

Q: Images of distant galaxies contain both light and dark matter that is
only visible to us after millions of years of travelling across space. Does
this mean that dark, like light, has momentum, and if so what is the speed
of dark?

Isn't darkness simply an absence of light? Should be interesting to see what
answers they get ;-)

Neil

www.ugamegold.com, a professional, loyal and reliable wow gold exchange corporation online. We have been an ebay power seller and paypal confirmed seller for years. So you may come here any buy world of warcraft gold in the safest and securest way. We are sure that you can really get the world of warcraft gold on your order. Many players prefer to buy game gold, for instance, World Of Warcraft, which is a very popular game with gold trade, most players focus on improving their level-up as there is no more time spent on making gold and equipments, They are more willing to seek third-party companies to complete the work for their will, and since 2004 to now, many companies for virtual game gold trading established, how to choose suitable company to ensure your safety?

On Jul 2, 12:25*am, "Neil" wrote:
Hi All

In the questions and answers page of Tuesday's Daily Mail is the following
question.

Q: Images of distant galaxies contain both light and dark matter that is
only visible to us after millions of years of travelling across space. Does
this mean that dark, like light, has momentum, and if so what is the speed
of dark?

Isn't darkness simply an absence of light? Should be interesting to see what
answers they get ;-)

Neil

Ignoring the pirate spammer with poor English skills...

Dark matter and dark energy are not merely the absence of light.

"Shadow only has value where substance has fled." (or words to that
effect) ;-)

Hi Chris

"Chris.B" wrote in message
...
Q: Images of distant galaxies contain both light and dark matter that is
only visible to us...

Dark matter and dark energy are not merely the absence of light.

Good point (I stand corrected as usual) but it isn't visible to us (yet)
which is why it's dark isn't it?

"Shadow only has value where substance has fled." (or words to that
effect) ;-)

Having trouble getting my head round that one but thanks for the reply.

Neil

On Jul 7, 10:38*am, "Neil" wrote:
Hi Chris

"Chris.B" wrote in message

...

Q: Images of distant galaxies contain both light and dark matter that is
only visible to us...
Dark matter and dark energy are not merely the absence of light.

Good point (I stand corrected as usual) but it isn't visible to us (yet)
which is why it's dark isn't it?


Neil

I wasn't trying to correct you. Merely disguisuing the fact that I had
no useful answer to your question.

Following your logic the radiation from dark matter (if any) would
need to have a very low velocity not to have got here by now from the
nearest object containing dark matter.This assumes you had a detector
which could sense its presence once it got here if it was not in the
form of light. Dark matter cannot become light or "light up" in the
distant object otherwise it would get here at exactly the same speed
as light. Our universe would be constantly getting brighter as dark
matter converted to light emitting matter.

On Tue, 01 Jul 2008 23:25:14 +0100, Neil wrote:

Hi All

In the questions and answers page of Tuesday's Daily Mail is the following
question.

Q: Images of distant galaxies contain both light and dark matter that is
only visible to us after millions of years of travelling across space.
Does this mean that dark, like light, has momentum, and if so what is the
speed of dark?

Isn't darkness simply an absence of light? Should be interesting to see
what answers they get ;-)

Neil

The Daily Mail printed that guff?

lol

Alleged dark matter is not visible at all - that's why it is dark.
It has nothing to do with ordinary unilluminated matter. Dark matter is
a conjectured form as is dark energy. It's all tosh btw as is the bb.

--
___ _______ ___ ___ ___ __ ____
/ _ \/ __/ _ | / _ \ / _ \/ _ |/ / / / /
/ // / _// __ |/ // / / ___/ __ / /_/ / /__
/____/___/_/ |_/____/ /_/ /_/ |_\____/____/

P.S.
___ _______ ___ ___ ___ __ ____
/ _ \/ __/ _ | / _ \ / _ \/ _ |/ / / / /
/ // / _// __ |/ // / / ___/ __ / /_/ / /__
/____/___/_/ |_/____/ /_/ /_/ |_\____/____/

Anyone know why ASKII art like this is always scrunched up and meaningless
until I copy and paste it in to Notepad? I'm using Windows 98 and Outlook
Express 6. I've probably just answered my own question haven't I.

Not really, it's because you are using a variable pitch (proportional)
font (virtually any TT or type 1 - Arial, Times, Zapf, Garamond etc. )
to view news postings and ASCII 'art' demands a fixed pitch font such as
Courier (there are others but very few).

Essenially, the width of a each character, in a proportional font, is
the number of pixels required to form the character plus a lead-in and
exit amount of 'white'. This is further adjusted by reference to the
font's kerning table depending upon the preceding and following
character pairs so that text on a page looks 'tidy' and not full of
'white holes' between characters.

Fixed pitch fonts (as the name indicates) have a fixed number of pixels
allocated to each character so an 'M' takes up just the same amount as
an 'i' or '.'.

JG

Thanks JG. That's much better.

Neil

On Sep 5, 1:10*am, "Neil" wrote:
Thanks JG. That's much better.

Neil

Occlusion delay.

Mitch Raemsch