I need a theoretical physicist, please.

Great response thank you for taking the time

If we could determine according to the dark matter map where this exotic material was, do we have the tech to see what it looks like in our reference though?

I imagine sending a probe into the dark matter is not necessary. I think we are just looking at what it is ejecting a bit poorly. Also i assume dark matter has the opposite effect of gravity which would make a probe very hard?

I want the readers of this to imagine sending a signal from a matter dense planet. Lets say its a flashlight. We send the signal at a certain " wavelength" but please for now just think of this as a width of a beam. As we send this beam out it expands because it enters a lesser gravitational field. Over time we have to compress and speed up this beam to view it as it was originally sent. When we are viewing planets using radio ( because the visible light spectrum stretched ) it is due to the effects of the beam going from a stronger gravity field into a lesser over time ( im sort of making this part up ).

I am imagining if we turned this flashlight on from a "white-hole" ( im really sorry this is probably ridiculous ) that it would blue shift into a tiny tiny tiny wavelength before it entered our fields of our negative pressure gravity ( and then refract or dilate a bit?).

In easy mode, if we were listening to a voice recording that is in a stronger gravitational field than ours it would be low octave and slow. So can i assume that something from a negative gravitational field would be really fast and high pitched? And can we mess with that?





Imagine

a reply to: Arbitrageur

a reply to: Exit89

Dark Matter is a conceptual issue. It's effective definition is 'mass without interaction with light', or rather, an attempt to add inertia to the system.

Excessive amounts of research has gone into trying to observe or prove dark matter in ways like you suggest, but they have all failed. In terms of reconstructing highly shifted images, that is possible, but there is likely a limit. If we consider a highly shifted wave that gives us a 1 Hz wave (1 peak per second), we could consider this as '1 photon per second'. If we relate this to the 1420 Mhz of the Hydrogen line, this would correspond to a slowdown of '1.4 trillion %' or a source that is moving 99.999999993% the speed of light. As we get to even lower photon rates, this quickly becomes unreasonable, but also implies that anything we cannot see is moving faster than the speed of light.

This is where modern physics literally breaks down. Currently I believe there are 7 competing theories on this topic on how and why the observations do not line up with any current model.

Think about a jet flying away from you at Mach 1.5, will you hear it? Will you ever hear it?

One of the reasons this gets so complicated is the concept called 'Inertia'. If you shoot a cannon out of a car moving as fast as the cannon, the cannon ball will go either 0 relative to the medium (someone watching) or 2x as fast if shot forward. Mythbusers have a video on this. In terms of light, this is the doppler shift. If we shoot forward, air resistance dampens the effect, as the speed of light dampens light moving forward.

This damping effect is the non-linear component of compression of the wave, which as it approaches infinity results in a 'singularity'. In air-space, this is a sonic boom, in light-space (ether) this is not widely believed to be possible.

Redshift is the case of 'moving away'. This is the linear portion of the effect. A curious case of this is that unless the light is moving exactly away from us, or is moving significantly faster than light, we will always see it.

For the Time question, the concept of the 'medium' has to come into focus. Most traditional science will tell us that earth moves through the medium. However, all attempts to experimentally show this have failed and imply the opposite. en.wikipedia.org...

Remember that the speed of light, and the perceived speed of light are two different things. Most of our concept of Time is based on the perceived speed of light. When thunder and lighting happen, are you seeing into the future, or hearing the past? In order for both to be in the past, we need to have an 'aetheric time', but that is not a time we can perceive. At least not yet.

I know this is sort of a non answer in some ways, but new age mysticism effectively says if you come to this answer you ascend to the 'next vibrational frequency'.

You wouldn't check a newborn baby for Colon cancer would you,

was going to say

but

there is a second line tradition around these parts!



messed up quoting you " but"

a reply to: Exit89

Not sure about and answer to your question i like your thinking though
I was going to suggest Arbitrageur but I see they have already responded

it reminded me of an idea of David Bohms when explaining one of his theories in the book Wholeness and the implicate order, about a solution of highly viscous fluid with ink spots and then you turn it and the ink winds round in thin lines and then you rewind it and the ink goes back.
I think in understood his idea of that book that the whole universe is one continual thing with no disconnect and that all the information in it is there because its all the one thing. I think potentially you could find all the information you want you just need to know how to look

Thats a good point, kind of forgot about that.
a reply to: sapien82

Again dude im blown away at your responses youre obviously either very smart or work in this field.

I re-read your response quite a few times. Ive stumbled upon everything youve said, and i feel like it should be inferred that i understand these things that youre saying.

I think all evidence would show that something above the sound barrier is heard. We can send hypersonic ballistic missles using lasers to produce a plasma shockwave that travel at like.... a lot. And after the sonic boom we still hear these in real time, but the boom is a harmonic resonance thing that happens the moment we reach the speed of sound?

Do we maybe have the tech to see below 1hz?

Like, if a frequency was very small, and coming from a relativistic zone that had a very fast accumulation of events, does this mean there is a massive amount of information at a very small wavelength i guess is my question?

If i am missing something you are trying to get through to me i am sorry

a reply to: Nodrak

Galileo did that pretty good.
reply to: sapien82

a reply to: Exit89

Have a look into magneto-hydro-dynamics.

Its a self reinforcing, self balancing system in Electricity (Electrons), Magnetism (Moving Electrons), and Ionic Matter (Plasma, Liquid Metals, Water, Gasses, etc).

This is the basis for many things, including cyclotrons (microwave ovens), electron orbital distances. If you heard of china's new engine for their missiles, this is it.

That ink thing is amazing. I get how that works but its weird to think about the interaction. Because it seems like putting the toothpaste back in the tube.

The continual universe thing may play into my line of thinking with this. Its a rough theory from a regular guy that has no higher math concepts so it would be naive to assume i am correct, however, the casimir effect is funny.

When you make a vaccum matter appears. Casimir effect.

Should we just take this as an obvious and assume that dark matter spots are where regular matter is causing the fabric to tear and release matter? And also does this make the univers finite? Or does it assume it has a center that can be stretched and ripped? I feel like one of these questions might be a proper line of thought.

Anyways it seems surprising to me that if a wavelength was compressed, that we cant just stretch it and see whats up.
In fact it seems harder to receive something that has red shifted into a huge wavelength because we run into detector issues with the size of the field.

Cant we just stretch the signals and slow them down?

a reply to: sapien82

I love physics, I’ve studied it as an interested layman for years. Just recently read Michio Kaku’s latest book, the God Equation. Pretty good book. He is a string theory guy but does give objective analysis on it. He is a fan of what they call in physics, symmetry, and Supersymmetry.

I regret not going into Physics in college. Just took chemistry and that kicked my butt, so I could imagine what physicists would have done to me!

Great questions in the OP. I hope some experts here can give us some answers.

Dark Energy, Dark Matter, Black holes, big bang are all fascinating topics.

Looking forward to reading about it later and i have to go to sleep now.
It's been precious.

a reply to: Exit89

As an amateur radio operator, when we listen and talk to the ISS, we have to allow for doppler shift as the ISS passes azimuth, straight above us. Here are some sites that can explain it better than I can:

www.ariss.org...

www.qsl.net...

hotarc.org...

This gives a broad spectrum of communicating with the ISS:
www.amsat.org...

The sites should help with the doppler shift of radio waves, just like a train whistle changing tones as it passes...
I think that since light can't escape a black hole after the event horizon, I doubt that radio waves will escape the event horizon, either.
www.space.com...

ETA:, Re: The Casimir Effect: www.asc.ohio-state.edu...
Possible maybe with 2 exact or near exact sized black holes at the appropriate close position to each other without gravitationally breaking each other. Would be an interesting science project...

HTH, NF

Dude these are honestly amazing links and i am absolutely going to click these and further learn, but i understand these concepts. I have a very rudimentary understanding, but if im referencing them just assume i know what the casimir effect and the doppler effect are.


So with the doppler effect assume you need to read something that was coming at you faster than the speed of light, so you needed to expand the wavelength into a coherent spectrum.

Like, i cant do the noise, but REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE//:OOOOOOOOOM. ( this is a car or a train or something cool )

When we are looking at the REEEEEE it is dilated and if we needed to hear the legit noise we need to hear it at //:.

This effect you HEAR is also something we SEE.

If we needed to SEE something thst was hyper REEEEE how do we do this?

Someone reading this that gets what I mean may giggle at how I wrote this, and i agree with them.

a reply to: NightFlight

a reply to: Arbitrageur
Excellent .

a reply to: Nodrak

As a wave travels through space, it hits atoms and gets absorbed. The frequency of this wave that gets absorbed is related to the energy required to alter electron orbits. These happen in things called 'Quanta'. In math terms, thees are just whole numbers.

Is this related to Zyklotronresonanz? The resonance frequency needed to transfer energy from EM waves to free electrons in the ionosphere, for example?




Add: Saw this just now I think it answers my question but I would appreciate some input

This is the basis for many things, including cyclotrons (microwave ovens), electron orbital distances. If you heard of china's new engine for their missiles, this is it.

Was that not theatrical?

The photon transition is pretty convincing.
If the photons came in waves as measured i would imagine the results would be more impressive.a reply to: Nodrak

It's like nothing you could have imagined.

A little piece of yellow plastic in my possession is an interesting subject on the matter. Since the piece is called the udder, mere centimetres in size. Found it surfaced in a divot some years ago. So i kept it and identifying it immediately as the udder. I haven't ventured very far from understanding it was a piece of a switch. reply to: Nodrak