|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Random thought: Dark Matter & Dark Energy vs. Strong & Weak NuclearForces
A random thought that just entered my mind a few days back was what if
Dark Energy and Dark Matter were really aspects respectively of the Weak and Strong Nuclear Forces acting out on the cosmic scale? They kind of act the same. The Dark Matter sort of acts like the Strong Force: holds the outer edges of a galaxy from falling off, and holds the galaxies together in clusters, but seems to mysteriously disappear the closer you get to the centre of a galaxy. And then the Dark Energy sort of acts like the Weak Force: it is limp-wristed against the Strong at close distances, but go out far enough and it just dominates the Strong. We've also heard those theories about what if our Universe were just an atom within a larger Super-Universe (SuperVerse)? Then if it's merely an atom (or maybe more like a molecule) of the Superverse, then why not have the Superverse's version of the nuclear forces acting on it? That way the galaxies are just the quarks. They form up into clusters, which are just the atomic nucleii. The clusters come together to form a single complex molecule, with the intergalactic gas being the electron cloud. I'm sure it sounds pretty kooky, but has anyone else thought of correlating the nuclear forces out at the cosmic level? Yousuf Khan |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Random thought: Dark Matter & Dark Energy vs. Strong & Weak Nuclear Forces
On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 01:29:17 -0500, Yousuf Khan
wrote: A random thought that just entered my mind a few days back was what if Dark Energy and Dark Matter were really aspects respectively of the Weak and Strong Nuclear Forces acting out on the cosmic scale? They kind of act the same. The Dark Matter sort of acts like the Strong Force: holds the outer edges of a galaxy from falling off, and holds the galaxies together in clusters, but seems to mysteriously disappear the closer you get to the centre of a galaxy. And then the Dark Energy sort of acts like the Weak Force: it is limp-wristed against the Strong at close distances, but go out far enough and it just dominates the Strong. Not even close. The relative strengths are wrong, the scales involved exclude both, the observed distribution of dark matter and energy excludes both, the behavior of both dark matter and dark energy exclude both, and a general ability to think should exclude the thought. In fact, there are no similarities between the two sets whatsoever. We've also heard those theories about what if our Universe were just an atom within a larger Super-Universe (SuperVerse)? Then if it's merely an atom (or maybe more like a molecule) of the Superverse, then why not have the Superverse's version of the nuclear forces acting on it? That way the galaxies are just the quarks. They form up into clusters, which are just the atomic nucleii. The clusters come together to form a single complex molecule, with the intergalactic gas being the electron cloud. I'm sure it sounds pretty kooky, but has anyone else thought of correlating the nuclear forces out at the cosmic level? No, because both the electroweak and strong nuclear forces are mediated by massive particles whose ranges are signiciantly smaller than the size of everything macroscopic. Yousuf Khan |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Random thought: Dark Matter & Dark Energy vs. Strong & WeakNuclear Forces
On Dec 5, 10:29 pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:
A random thought that just entered my mind a few days back was what if Dark Energy and Dark Matter were really aspects respectively of the Weak and Strong Nuclear Forces acting out on the cosmic scale? They kind of act the same. The Dark Matter sort of acts like the Strong Force: holds the outer edges of a galaxy from falling off, and holds the galaxies together in clusters, but seems to mysteriously disappear the closer you get to the centre of a galaxy. And then the Dark Energy sort of acts like the Weak Force: it is limp-wristed against the Strong at close distances, but go out far enough and it just dominates the Strong. We've also heard those theories about what if our Universe were just an atom within a larger Super-Universe (SuperVerse)? Then if it's merely an atom (or maybe more like a molecule) of the Superverse, then why not have the Superverse's version of the nuclear forces acting on it? That way the galaxies are just the quarks. They form up into clusters, which are just the atomic nucleii. The clusters come together to form a single complex molecule, with the intergalactic gas being the electron cloud. I'm sure it sounds pretty kooky, but has anyone else thought of correlating the nuclear forces out at the cosmic level? Yousuf Khan You could be right about that "SuperVerse", but then just think of dark photons, as in perhaps 1e100 photons per atom. Think of all those pesky black holes containing a core of antimatter surrounded by all of those dark photons. - Brad Guth |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Random thought: Dark Matter & Dark Energy vs. Strong & WeakNuclear Forces
On Dec 6, 8:29 am, Yousuf Khan wrote:
A random thought that just entered my mind a few days back was what if Dark Energy and Dark Matter were really aspects respectively of the Weak and Strong Nuclear Forces acting out on the cosmic scale? They kind of act the same. The Dark Matter sort of acts like the Strong Force: holds the outer edges of a galaxy from falling off, and holds the galaxies together in clusters, but seems to mysteriously disappear the closer you get to the centre of a galaxy. And then the Dark Energy sort of acts like the Weak Force: it is limp-wristed against the Strong at close distances, but go out far enough and it just dominates the Strong. We've also heard those theories about what if our Universe were just an atom within a larger Super-Universe (SuperVerse)? Then if it's merely an atom (or maybe more like a molecule) of the Superverse, then why not have the Superverse's version of the nuclear forces acting on it? That way the galaxies are just the quarks. They form up into clusters, which are just the atomic nucleii. The clusters come together to form a single complex molecule, with the intergalactic gas being the electron cloud. I'm sure it sounds pretty kooky, but has anyone else thought of correlating the nuclear forces out at the cosmic level? Yousuf Khan ----------------- may be you are in the right direction but not deep enough! dark matter seems to me **much finer and tinyer* than week forces agents my candidfate for it is the 'Circlon' look fo r the Circon idea and just remember what old Catto saied: 'no mass ---no real physics '!! ATB Y.Porat -------------------------- |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Random thought: Dark Matter & Dark Energy vs. Strong & WeakNuclear Forces
On Dec 6, 1:29 am, Yousuf Khan wrote:
A random thought that just entered my mind a few days back was what if Dark Energy and Dark Matter were really aspects respectively of the Weak and Strong Nuclear Forces acting out on the cosmic scale? They kind of act the same. The Dark Matter sort of acts like the Strong Force: holds the outer edges of a galaxy from falling off, and holds the galaxies together in clusters, but seems to mysteriously disappear the closer you get to the centre of a galaxy. And then the Dark Energy sort of acts like the Weak Force: it is limp-wristed against the Strong at close distances, but go out far enough and it just dominates the Strong. We've also heard those theories about what if our Universe were just an atom within a larger Super-Universe (SuperVerse)? Then if it's merely an atom (or maybe more like a molecule) of the Superverse, then why not have the Superverse's version of the nuclear forces acting on it? That way the galaxies are just the quarks. They form up into clusters, which are just the atomic nucleii. The clusters come together to form a single complex molecule, with the intergalactic gas being the electron cloud. I'm sure it sounds pretty kooky, but has anyone else thought of correlating the nuclear forces out at the cosmic level? It may be possible that molecular domains of illuminated gas can "cohere" forming a region of space that is more ~conductive~ to gravitational force than less dense regions. ... interactions vanish for a particle of mass m is at kT ~ mc2, in accordance with the results of Donoghue et al. The red-shifted radiative image of local matter, through the magnifying glass of distance, partakes in global coherent modes, in the emergence of the local vacuum and waves the dynamic tapestry of space. In so doing, it binds to matter beyond the range of its generally assumed near field, inducing the 1/r gravitational potential. Since it is the kinetic motions of matter that induce gravity, the fall into a gravitational potential well reduces the fundamental frequencies of free matter, slows clocks down and decreases the mass-energy asymptotically. The inductive coupling takes place in the near field í± c/r12 between coherently coupled individual dipoles, through their red-shifted local antipodal image. This allows the exchanged photons to be virtual and the coherent modes to genuinely belong to the coupled oscillators while ensuring that the range of gravity spans the Universe. --C. P. Kouropoulos http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0107015 The probability of some valid analogy with subatomic interactions is the business of folks that only use clocks and rulers on their lucky days and roll dice when they don't feel lucky. cross posted to sci.physics.particle Sue... Yousuf Khan |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Random thought: Dark Matter & Dark Energy vs. Strong & Weak NuclearForces
Eric Gisse wrote:
Not even close. The relative strengths are wrong, the scales involved exclude both, the observed distribution of dark matter and energy excludes both, the behavior of both dark matter and dark energy exclude both, and a general ability to think should exclude the thought. In fact, there are no similarities between the two sets whatsoever. Yes, that's just about what I would have expected from you. In this case it literally requires outside the box thinking, meaning outside our own Universe. That's exactly why I brought up the term Superverse: I chose the word Superverse as opposed to the oft-used Multiverse because of difference in hierarchal concepts. A Multiverse implies a coalition of equal but independent (kind of democratic) universes barely interacting with each other. The Superverse implies a similar thing, but with each of the micro-universes being governed by the rules of a macro-universe (almost dictatorial). So yes, the Strong and Weak forces of *our own universe* cannot possibly work on such massive scales. But what about the Strong and Weak forces of the Superverse? In the Superverse, our own Universe may be barely just over the Superverse's Planck scale. And about relative strengths of the nuclear forces vs. DM/DE, perhaps the difference of scales weaken those forces in the Superverse? No, because both the electroweak and strong nuclear forces are mediated by massive particles whose ranges are signiciantly smaller than the size of everything macroscopic. And as we all know, there's no possible way that "dark mysterious particles with large mass" could have any effect on the large scale structures of the Universe, right? :-) This may bring up other interesting questions. What if all of the atoms or molecules of our own Universe are really just their own micro-universes? Micro-universes with their own little complex structures like clusters, galaxies, stars, etc. floating around inside them? Therefore that would make our Universe, their Superverse. And perhaps what we interpret as a Quantum scale, is really just a Relativistic scale for these micro-universes? So all of the probablistic quantum-scale actions we see at our own scale, manifest themselves as spacetime warpages within their own scale. We're just too big to detect those warpages directly, so we assign them a Quantum Mechanical statistical explanation (i.e. we have to average them out, since we can't measure them directly). Yousuf Khan |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Random thought: Dark Matter & Dark Energy vs. Strong & WeakNuclear Forces
BradGuth wrote:
You could be right about that "SuperVerse", but then just think of dark photons, as in perhaps 1e100 photons per atom. Think of all those pesky black holes containing a core of antimatter surrounded by all of those dark photons. - Brad Guth I have no idea what you're talking about, care to explain? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Random thought: Dark Matter & Dark Energy vs. Strong & Weak NuclearForces
Sam Wormley wrote:
If you understand the nuclear forces... you would understand that they not infinite forces at the temperature experienced in the universe today. See my reply to Eric Gisse. I'm not saying it is our own Universe's nuclear forces that are acting on us, but rather the Superverse's nuclear forces. Yousuf Khan |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Random thought: Dark Matter & Dark Energy vs. Strong & Weak Nuclear Forces
On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 11:20:46 -0500, Yousuf Khan
wrote: [...] When you can phrase your mumbo jumbo in the form of quantitative predictions, let us know. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Random thought: Dark Matter & Dark Energy vs. Strong & WeakNuclear Forces
Y.Porat wrote:
On Dec 6, 8:29 am, Yousuf Khan wrote: A random thought that just entered my mind a few days back was what if Dark Energy and Dark Matter were really aspects respectively of the Weak and Strong Nuclear Forces acting out on the cosmic scale? They kind of act the same. The Dark Matter sort of acts like the Strong Force: holds the outer edges of a galaxy from falling off, and holds the galaxies together in clusters, but seems to mysteriously disappear the closer you get to the centre of a galaxy. And then the Dark Energy sort of acts like the Weak Force: it is limp-wristed against the Strong at close distances, but go out far enough and it just dominates the Strong. We've also heard those theories about what if our Universe were just an atom within a larger Super-Universe (SuperVerse)? Then if it's merely an atom (or maybe more like a molecule) of the Superverse, then why not have the Superverse's version of the nuclear forces acting on it? That way the galaxies are just the quarks. They form up into clusters, which are just the atomic nucleii. The clusters come together to form a single complex molecule, with the intergalactic gas being the electron cloud. I'm sure it sounds pretty kooky, but has anyone else thought of correlating the nuclear forces out at the cosmic level? Yousuf Khan ----------------- may be you are in the right direction but not deep enough! dark matter seems to me **much finer and tinyer* than week forces agents my candidfate for it is the 'Circlon' look fo r the Circon idea and just remember what old Catto saied: 'no mass ---no real physics '!! ATB Y.Porat -------------------------- My thoughts along this idea were more that we might misunderstand gravity. We might understand its influence on a medium-scale, but what prevents it from being repulsive a large scales? If you think in current terms, according to relativity, a gravity well curves space and looks something like: _______ ________ \/ But what if it looks more like: ____ ____ ..-^ \/ ^-. This could lead to the effect of Dark Energy, close things fall toward the well, far things fall away from the well. -- Daniel Pitts' Tech Blog: http://virtualinfinity.net/wordpress/ |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Updated TOE explains Quarks, Magnetism, Dark matter and Dark energy and how they are related | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | April 22nd 06 07:05 AM |
Dark matter and dark energy are caused by only gravity and the boyancy effect | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 3 | April 16th 06 06:40 PM |
Dark matter and dark energy are caused by only gravity and the boyancy effect | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 1 | April 12th 06 08:03 PM |
Dark Matter, Dark Energy, and Black Holes - New Scientist article | Wally Anglesea™ | Misc | 15 | March 14th 06 05:33 PM |
3D Map of Universe Bolsters Case for Dark Energy and Dark Matter(Forwarded) | Andrew Yee | Astronomy Misc | 0 | October 29th 03 12:06 AM |