Author Topic: A Quack theory on Dark Matter  (Read 12302 times)

rrr314159

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
Re: A Quack theory on Dark Matter
« Reply #30 on: April 06, 2016, 12:31:16 PM »
I'll write that into the plot
I am NaN ;)

hutch--

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4931
  • Mnemonic Driven API Grinder
    • The MASM32 SDK
Re: A Quack theory on Dark Matter
« Reply #31 on: April 06, 2016, 01:39:21 PM »
 :biggrin:
hutch at movsd dot com
http://www.masm32.com    :biggrin:  :biggrin:

Raistlin

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 259
Re: A Quack theory on Dark Matter
« Reply #32 on: April 06, 2016, 03:48:18 PM »
patootie <--- Had to google it (thanks for the new word rrr - so which did you mean? - or are they interchangeable dependent on mood)

Meanings provided :
--------------------------
1) a girlfriend or a pretty girl
2) a person's or animal's buttocks.

LOL - yes gentleman the era of the quack is among-st us - but it's too "dark" to see.

nidud

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1410
    • https://github.com/nidud/asmc
Re: A Quack theory on Dark Matter
« Reply #33 on: April 08, 2016, 07:50:25 AM »
Quote
If you set up a basic "template" to describe a universe you can easily add something to express a new idea - including real physics not just "alternate".

Or a template to explain the origin of real physics.

A void of nothingness will logically start with zero so the tip tap toe of creation will then be:

   0.   Void
   1.   Singularity
   2.   Movement

So in the beginning there is nothing. No mass or time, just eternal space of nothing. At this point the laws of physics don’t apply so both mass and void is absolute.

The gravity from the void is then absolute and will work on any potential object of mass equally from all sides, so if a perfect sphere is inserted into the void it will not move. It will however create a sphere-shaped energy field around the ball.

At this point we have a static situation with mass and energy but no movement so time doesn’t exist.

The next thing that happens is that Thor swings by and hit the sphere with his hammer and manages to make a dent in the ball. As a result the ball starts to rotate and the clock starts ticking.

This rotation will then generate a two-dimensional energy field that sort of cut the sphere of dark energy in half. The rotational speed of the ball will then be the clock frequency of the known universe, which is pure energy.

In reality the 2D surface is the flat screen of the programmer’s computer. When he turns it on the CPU generates a clock frequency needed for the simulation. This generates a holographic 3D reality of pure energy. However, before he turns on the computer he has to connect it to the power grid.

The physicians from the holographic society call this Dark Energy.

rrr314159

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
Re: A Quack theory on Dark Matter
« Reply #34 on: April 08, 2016, 04:23:53 PM »
nidud: "In reality the 2D surface is the flat screen of the programmer’s computer."

If there is a programmer, then from his POV that may be right. But from your POV, the flat screen is the thin "2-dimensional" neo-cortex folded around the rest of your brain.

now, it's obvious where Thor comes from - anyone can figure that out. And since there was mass, his hammer is inevitable. But before there was movement, how could he swing his hammer? And how could that event be the "next" thing, when there was no time?

Maybe it's just one of those "Nordic Logic" things that only people who are always cold can understand
I am NaN ;)

Siekmanski

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1145
Re: A Quack theory on Dark Matter
« Reply #35 on: April 08, 2016, 07:40:54 PM »
Preview: New Theory Prof. Erik Verlinde unmasks 95 percent of the universe,
( It's written in Dutch )

http://www.newscientist.nl/nieuws/vooruitblik-nieuwe-theorie-ontmaskert-95-procent-van-het-heelal/

Prof. E.P. (Erik) Verlinde proposes that gravity is not a fundamental force but rather an amalgamation of other forces. If Verlinde’s gravitational theory is correct, then that will have huge consequences for how we think about the universe and its evolution.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iigNHgUGjYA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSYXt3Xu3xI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyomGtZCsmI

nidud

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1410
    • https://github.com/nidud/asmc
Re: A Quack theory on Dark Matter
« Reply #36 on: April 08, 2016, 09:56:02 PM »
Quote
Maybe it's just one of those "Nordic Logic" things that only people who are always cold can understand

 :biggrin:

True. The Norse image of the world is a sphere with a flat surface in the centre where people live.

But I actually do hold the view that nothing exist, and that this is still the main source of energy. If it’s possible to insert mass into this equation without generating movement is another question.

rrr314159

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
Re: A Quack theory on Dark Matter
« Reply #37 on: April 09, 2016, 04:00:26 AM »
Well you might as well check out Null Physics. I don't have any use for it but he (Terence Witt) certainly pushes the idea that "nothing exists" as far as it can go
I am NaN ;)

nidud

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1410
    • https://github.com/nidud/asmc
Re: A Quack theory on Dark Matter
« Reply #38 on: April 09, 2016, 05:39:09 AM »
I have always assumed the universe to be eternal and the time and space section of it to be limited but expanding. I have to admit that I haven’t really paid much thought to this but I assume this expansion needs additional space.

Maybe that’s where the sphere comes in as an image where the simple logic is that nothing includes everything and beyond every thing else there is nothing.

rrr314159

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
Re: A Quack theory on Dark Matter
« Reply #39 on: April 10, 2016, 01:51:02 PM »
Supposedly spacetime itself is expanding. So yes the expansion "needs additional space" but it wasn't already there, it's created by the expansion.

Similarly time itself is part of the expansion: it wasn't "already there" but began at the Big Bang. And there's no future time "ahead" of us, it too is being created by the expansion. That's why they say the question "what came b4 the Big Bang" is meaningless.

Does that make sense? Well, it might, but it does NOT really answer the question. Ok, maybe our local time axis is finite, but that probably means it's just part of a bigger picture - somebody else's time axis. So you can still imagine that in that sense the universe is "eternal".

Alternatively, you can suppose modern physics is on a wrong track entirely. Certainly possible.
I am NaN ;)

jj2007

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7752
  • Assembler is fun ;-)
    • MasmBasic
Re: A Quack theory on Dark Matter
« Reply #40 on: April 10, 2016, 04:43:00 PM »
this expansion needs additional space

Dumb question from a mere mortal: that "extra space" expands against what? Non-space? Matter? Vacuum?

When looking at "the universe", aren't we rather looking at a sphere in infinite space, i.e. a ball filled with matter, more or less densely, whirling in a bigger area that has absolutely no trace of matter?

rrr314159

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
Re: A Quack theory on Dark Matter
« Reply #41 on: April 10, 2016, 07:25:49 PM »
It's important to note, you don't have to actually believe modern physics.

When they're talking about the here and now they're amazingly accurate. For instance they know how much heat will be released burning a barrel of oil, and how rainbows work, and so on.

But when it's about events 14 billion years ago, when the entire universe fit in a space smaller than a grain of sand, you have to take it all with a grain of salt.

jj2007: Dumb question from a mere mortal: that "extra space" expands against what? Non-space? Matter? Vacuum? When looking at "the universe", aren't we rather looking at a sphere in infinite space, i.e. a ball filled with matter, more or less densely, whirling in a bigger area that has absolutely no trace of matter?

- General Relativity specifically assumes there is NO thing outside - not space, time, matter, vacuum or even "non-space".

That's partly what makes the math difficult. GR doesn't assume a larger space we're "embedded" in. The point of differential geometry is to describe timespace "from the inside", from local curvature only. Then you piece together different local curvatures to get the total timespace. You may have heard of "Christoffel coefficients": that's what they're for.

The details don't matter (unless anyone is interested), I'm just emphasizing that in GR there is, deliberately, NO "super-timespace" we're embedded in. As the universe expands, it creates the time and space to expand into.

Note, GR doesn't insist there's no super-space, only that it's not necessary for GR's purposes. But, if GR's right, that super-timespace has to be a different time and space continuum. It can't just be more of the same old time prior to the Big Bang, and more of our type of space to expand into. For instance in the simulation theory it's the timespace inhabited by the programmers; our "lesser" timespace is just an artifact of the program (somehow).

OTOH If GR's wrong (entirely possible) then the Big Bang (if indeed it ever happened) could have been just a huge explosion, more or less as you imagine. Time could go back forever before the event, and "infinite" space could have always been there ready for the explosion to expand into.

Don't forget the whole thing might be an illusion anyway! It's good to understand what modern physics says about this issue, but it's not worth too much cogitation; the answer simply is not available.
I am NaN ;)

nidud

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1410
    • https://github.com/nidud/asmc
Re: A Quack theory on Dark Matter
« Reply #42 on: April 10, 2016, 09:08:02 PM »
The basic structure of this reality is an atom with a three way split of an electron, a proton, and a neutron. This three way split also apply to living organisms where A consumes the droppings of B, B of C, and C of A. If one of them grows faster than the other two this symbiotic relationship will collapse. However, if there are three with the same problem, A in the first, B in the second, and C in the last one, they will benefit from a merger and that’s how a more complex organism is created.

The same thing applies to the atom. It expands, merges, and creates complex structures, which in turn end up as living organisms. This means that everything in the known universe derives from this simple atom.

I had a very enthusiastic teacher when I went to school and he took us down to a football stadium with a tomato and a pea. We put the tomato in the centre and the pea at the end to sort of illustrate the size of the elements compare to space it occupy. We then calculated the volume of the sphere (and the cube) with a diameter equal to the field and compare this to the volume of the tomato and the pea. This will give you a ruff estimate of the potential mass compare to space occupied by these elements. However, these elements are more "pure energy" than "real mass" so you end up closer to nothing than something.

This is referred to as inflation from solid mass (not made by atoms) that exploded (the Big Bang) and thus created the known universe.

This is called the Initial singularity where a body containing all mass explode so I will assume "the rest" is empty space. The question that pops up here is whether this vacuum accumulate space, which it sort of have to in my view. However, the idea that the expansion "creates space" will still be logical if you calculated it from within this inflation but it gets rather complex from that point of view.

rrr314159

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1383
Re: A Quack theory on Dark Matter
« Reply #43 on: April 11, 2016, 01:40:07 AM »
That's fine but let's not waste too many brain cells on this issue. We need to conserve them for important things, like finding our glasses. No doubt you and I, working together, could figure out the origin and underpinnings of the universe in a heartbeat. But what the heck, let's leave a few puzzles for future generations to work on.

If you want to understand the "big picture", the key (as I've mentioned before) is consciousness. That topic is truly worthy of your precious neurons.


I am NaN ;)

nidud

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1410
    • https://github.com/nidud/asmc
Re: A Quack theory on Dark Matter
« Reply #44 on: April 11, 2016, 04:26:56 AM »
We need to conserve them for important things, like finding our glasses.

Had to switch to Extra Large font size a few days ago  :lol: