My Dark Matter Theory

What is Dark Matter? Theorists say its undetectable energy that's neither mass or atomic. In essence we simply cant see it or its effects unlike Gravity or Electromagentics. My theory for Dark Matter is that its "TIME" itself, Time in the universe is a form of mass.

Well don't forget, there is both dark matter AND dark energy, so if dark matter is time, then what is dark energy?

And light energy, light matter, dark matter, and dark energy all exist in the same plane, so it would be mind boggling to just take dark matter out of the mix and claim dark matter to be time.

Alright, now that I have refuted your theory, it's time for my theory which is probably even more ridiculous, but here it is...

I think dark matter is light matter going backwards in time. Our senses are not able to see matter going in the reverse direction in time, so that is why the matter is "dark" to us, but if we were all seeing all sensing beings we would be able to see all matter, and we would be able to see that some matter is going forwards in time and some matter is going backwards in time.

Interesting topic though, there is a lot of room for creative speculation for this type of thing.

Responding to the OP:

Dark Matter can only be detected by it's gravitational effects on that which surrounds it. It has no electro-magnetic effects. At the same time, cosmologists and astronomers have inferred that it makes up a vast majority of the known, phenomenal/noumenal, universe.

Responding to OP and Wang Tang

Time, as we know and recognize it, is a purely human concept.

There is no actual force of time; it doesn't matter if we count hours, minutes, days, weeks, months, years, et cetera; the truth is time is a concept invented by humans.

Take a survey of cultures around the world and you will find that:

A. many measure time differently from "Americans"
B. several don't even know what "time" is

Dark Matter therefore, cannot be any measure of time. Neither forward, nor backwards time.

Time does not exist. We calculate time as a purely metaphysical reference point for ourselves to judge our actions and events by. But if you did not measure time, everything would still occur just as it does when you attach it to an arbitrary moment in existence.

and now for something completely different...

I think 'dark matter' is simply some kind of "reflection" of any/all spiritual universes. Heaven, Hell, the Summer-lands, the Elysian fields, et cetera. Dark Matter is not visible in our universe, but it is present, and woven into our universes fabric.

So, why shouldn't an "invisible" presence that is everywhere be just that - the afterlife poking through.

My theory is probably just as retarded, but, there you go.

reply to post by Wandering Scribe


Interesting idea. Well there really aren't any bad theories to dark matter because there is so little that is known about it.

You say time doesn't exist. Well here I'll give you my definition of time. Time in the universe is a measure of entropy, entropy being the tendency towards disorder.

Light matter as we know it tends to move towards higher entropy, or a higher state of disorder. When an egg falls to the ground, it breaks, and the insides spill out.

In dark matter, things tend to move towards lower entropy, a higher state of order. In dark matter, instead of an egg dropping and cracking and spilling all over the place, the egg would un-spill and become whole again.

reply to post by Wang Tang


I completely agree that the psychological construct of time is real. As we slowly move towards chaos (entropy), things do occur. The "egg spilling out over the masses" I agree is a real symbol, and one that can be used to represent a metaphor for the passing of time.

But time itself is not a physical construct. A moment passed can only be recorded as a symbol of what has occurred, it cannot be relived.

There is no actual, physical "yesterday," it does not exist beyond our memories and records. The same for last Wednesday, the Second World War, or any other event we catalog with a date/time/moment.

That is not to say these events didn't happen, they surely did. But they don't exist in some quasi-spiritual "yesterday" (the Akashic records?) where all of our existence is preserved for eternity.

----------

Again though, our universe continues to throw the Laws of Physics to the dogs. So who knows, maybe tomorrow all that "Dark Matter" will crack, like said egg, and yesterday - today - tomorrow will all come spilling out.

I think it would be awesome.

And I also agree, it's always interesting and worthwhile to discuss all possibilities. Even if they aren't "right," the flow of existence dictates that there is no "truth" in anything.

I'll keep checking back and commenting on here as long as the subject matter and responses are interesting to read.

~ Wandering Scribe

Originally posted by Wandering Scribe
reply to post by Wang Tang

 

I completely agree that the psychological construct of time is real. As we slowly move towards chaos (entropy), things do occur. The "egg spilling out over the masses" I agree is a real symbol, and one that can be used to represent a metaphor for the passing of time.

But time itself is not a physical construct. A moment passed can only be recorded as a symbol of what has occurred, it cannot be relived.

There is no actual, physical "yesterday," it does not exist beyond our memories and records. The same for last Wednesday, the Second World War, or any other event we catalog with a date/time/moment.

That is not to say these events didn't happen, they surely did. But they don't exist in some quasi-spiritual "yesterday" (the Akashic records?) where all of our existence is preserved for eternity.

This dark matter question certainly does bring up lots of interesting questions about our universe... the biggest question being time. If we can't agree on what time is we won't be able to go farther in speculating what dark energy is.

I agree our concept of time is a human creation, but I believe there is also universal time. Our human version of time is not a completely accurate representation of universal time because we only experience a small portion of the universe.

As I said, I believe universal time is based on entropy. Human time is based on the rotation of the earth around the sun. We do this because this is the most reliable natural occurrence to keep track of time in our lives because time in the universe goes by too slowly for us to recognize that time is going by.

The basis for my argument that time is based on entropy is that the universe as we know it is based on the universe before the Big Bang and black holes. The universe before the Big Bang was in an almost perfectly ordered state. After the Big Bang, matter expands into disarray, and clusters of matter forms into stars... after these stars die out some of them turn into black holes, the highest state of entropy in the universe. In the beginning is a perfectly ordered universe. In the end is black holes. We are somewhere in the middle.

If we apply time as entropy in our lives, we would see that "time" is going both forwards and backwards in our lives. Humans try to gather into a higher state of order, while at the same time the world around them falls slowly into a state of disorder. If time is entropy, then humans are fighting the flow of time. In the bigger scheme of things, the forces of the universe will overpower humans, but this does make reasonable sense to me as humans do try to get the most out of their time on Earth. Because humans have a sense of what time is, they try to give themselves more time.

I'll even try to bring a theological argument here. Before man ate from the Tree of Knowledge, man lived with peaceful minds not trying to fight the flow of time. But once man ate from the Tree of Knowledge, man realized not only that he was naked, but that he was going to die, and because he realized he was going to die, he wanted to stop the flow of time so he wouldn't die. By trying to stop the unstoppable flow of time, man put a heavier burden on his mind and soul, and as a result lived much shorter lives.

reply to post by Wang Tang


An interesting enough set of theories that I'll toss some cannon fodder your way. I'm intrigued by a few things in your response:

First off, you say that "before the Big Bang there was a perfectly ordered Universe..." I'm curious where this view comes from. Astronomy and Cosmology both agree that no one knows what existed before the Big Bang. In fact, it's mostly because of the rapid expansion of the Universe outwardly that Astronomers and Cosmologists are able to arrive at the theory that a "big bang" ever occurred. So, I'm curious to learn about this "pre-big-bang" Universe. Care to elaborate?

Secondly, the chaos theory is still something I agree with, though not in the same sense as you I think. You state that the Universes eventual tilt towards entropy is based on stars being born, super-novae, and black hole creation. This isn't entirely true though. A living star, which goes into supernovae does not automatically become a black hole; several are reborn, thus creating new stars and or solar systems.

I think the shift towards entropy is something less theoretical. The Universe is expanding, causing more "dark matter" to come into existence in the spaces where there is now "nothing;" this expansion causes all kinds of instabilities in galaxies and solar systems. So bad in fact, that our own Milky Way and our nearest neighbor, Andromeda, will eventually collide into one another. I think that it is a combination of these factors: expansion, life/death of astronomical bodies, and the birth/expansion of dark matter which are leading our Universe towards entropy.

Thirdly, I'd love to accept your Garden of Eden reference as grounds for your theory. In the hopes of keeping this from becoming a theological debate (another of my strong suits) I will just accept it, and ask you then what evidence there is for this "perfect time" existing in the Garden of Eden.

All interesting theories, I look forward to learning more about them from you.

~ Wandering Scribe

Originally posted by Wandering Scribe

First off, you say that "before the Big Bang there was a perfectly ordered Universe..." I'm curious where this view comes from. Astronomy and Cosmology both agree that no one knows what existed before the Big Bang. In fact, it's mostly because of the rapid expansion of the Universe outwardly that Astronomers and Cosmologists are able to arrive at the theory that a "big bang" ever occurred. So, I'm curious to learn about this "pre-big-bang" Universe. Care to elaborate?

You caught me there. It was not a perfectly ordered universe, it was as close to perfectly ordered that the universe has ever gotten in known history, but you are right, it was never perfectly ordered. Here is what my source says:

"As the clock is turned back to ever earlier times, the whole of the cosmos is compressed to the size of an orange, a lemon, a pea, a grain of sand, and to yet tinier size still. Extrapolating all the way back to "the beginning," the universe would appear to have begun as a point in which all matter and energy is squeezed together to unimaginable density and temperature. It is believed that a cosmic fireball, the big bang, erupted from this volatile mixture spewing forth the seeds from which the universe as we know it evolved." -p. 83 Brian Greene in The Elegant Universe

Secondly, the chaos theory is still something I agree with, though not in the same sense as you I think. You state that the Universes eventual tilt towards entropy is based on stars being born, super-novae, and black hole creation. This isn't entirely true though. A living star, which goes into supernovae does not automatically become a black hole; several are reborn, thus creating new stars and or solar systems.

You got me again, it is true only the biggest stars have the possibility of turning into a black hole. However, it is also believed that at the center of every galaxy is a super massive black hole, so regardless of whether the star turns into a black hole or not, I'm assuming the entire galaxy is eventually going to be sucked into the super massive black hole anyways. I don't know if that is a safe assumption to make, but I would think a super massive black hole in the center of a galaxy would have the power to suck in the entire galaxy, but again I don't have any evidence for this.

"A supermassive black hole is the largest type of black hole in a galaxy, on the order of hundreds of thousands to billions of solar masses. Most, if not all galaxies, including the Milky Way, are believed to contain supermassive black holes at their centers." -Wikipedia "super massive black hole"

Thirdly, I'd love to accept your Garden of Eden reference as grounds for your theory. In the hopes of keeping this from becoming a theological debate (another of my strong suits) I will just accept it, and ask you then what evidence there is for this "perfect time" existing in the Garden of Eden.

I'm not so sure what you mean by "perfect time." I'm going to assume you are referring to humans before they ate from the Tree of Knowledge; what were they like before they ate the Forbidden Fruit? They were just like any other animal, they were the product of Evolution. Without the power to reason, these humans were pretty much like apes and monkeys, they lived and died without knowing or worrying about what death was.

Now this is all speculation on my part, there is no hard evidence for my argument, only the words of Genesis and the theory of Evolution to support my speculation.

reply to post by Wang Tang


First Point:

I believe we have the same understanding of the Big Bang, and the methodology that researchers have used to arrive there. This is cool, I can definitely agree with the "if you rewind the Universe it becomes a single point of insanely dense and hot matter" approach. That's how I've always understood cosmic evolution.

Second Point:

I know of the theory that a super-massive black-hole exists at the center of every galaxy, and such is the reason for our spin, or existence, etc. I think it's true, I support your theories on that S.M.B.H. will one day swallow our galaxy.

Unless our S.M.B.H. and Andromeda's S.M.B.H. merge when the two galaxies collide, in which case we're goin' down in a S.M.B.H. duel, ha ha.

Concerning entropy, I don't know if a B.H. of any magnitude necessarily means it's chaos. There might be some as-of-yet undiscovered beauty and order to B.H. distribution and creation. But I do fully believe we'll either see a Big Reduction (reverse Big Bang) or we'll all be swallowed inside the ever growing B.H. army as our inevitable end-time.

Third Point:

I call "perfect time" the belief that before the Fall man was somehow "perfect" because knowledge of good and evil had not yet been introduced into mankind's world. Anything from this blissful utopia I characterize as "perfect," like: perfect diets, perfect aging, perfect time, perfect knowledge, perfect health, etc. Man was seemingly perfect until the Fruit and inevitable exile from the Garden.

I don't generally consider Genesis to be an adequate historical document, but I'm not unfamiliar with those who do see it as the inerrant word of God. Which is why I do my best to keep theology out of the equation. You and I most likely have different views on the importance of Yahweh on mankind's existence. And it has been my experience that when debating over religion people's civility often tends to diminish rather quickly.

~ Wandering Scribe

Third Point:

I call "perfect time" the belief that before the Fall man was somehow "perfect" because knowledge of good and evil had not yet been introduced into mankind's world. Anything from this blissful utopia I characterize as "perfect," like: perfect diets, perfect aging, perfect time, perfect knowledge, perfect health, etc. Man was seemingly perfect until the Fruit and inevitable exile from the Garden.

I don't generally consider Genesis to be an adequate historical document, but I'm not unfamiliar with those who do see it as the inerrant word of God. Which is why I do my best to keep theology out of the equation. You and I most likely have different views on the importance of Yahweh on mankind's existence. And it has been my experience that when debating over religion people's civility often tends to diminish rather quickly.

~ Wandering Scribe

First of all regarding your second point, I read in another book by Brian Greene The Fabric of the Cosmos that matter in a black hole is in the highest state of entropy known in the universe, so that is where I say time "ends" at least in our understanding.

As for your third point, I consider my theological knowledge erratic at best, it definitely is not one of my strong points, so I would actually appreciate it if you enlightened me on your theological arguments, our combined knowledge could lead to a better understanding of time and dark energy.

As for your experience that debates over religion become chaotic, I would agree, but I assure you that our viewpoints on God will not clash because I am completely open minded and tolerant when it comes to religious views, partly because I myself don't have any fixed religious views at the moment.

What I'm trying to say is if we get into theology I guarantee you it will stay a civilized discussion.

reply to post by Wang Tang


Well, when an object crosses the event horizon of a black hole of any size, time does theoretically stop - to the outside observer. No one really knows what the experience would be like for the internal observer who is caught at the event horizon.

Whether or not I consider that seeming moment of suspended existence to be "chaotic" is up for debate. I'd likely consider it to be more of a state of non-existence than a state of chaos; this due to the fact that theoretically we would experience nothing as our atoms are swallowed whole. Perhaps my view of non-existence and yours of chaos are really the same thing though.

----------

Concerning religion:

I'm more of a spiritualist when it comes to theological matters. I consider all faiths equally in my pursuit of perfecting the spirit. As such I also openly embrace and spend time in as many of them as I can. Through this I try to find similarities and connection; like the need for salvation present in monotheistic religion, against the passion for Earthly existence found in polytheistic traditions, coupled with the desire for higher education from the atheist and agnostic, and the goals of perfect living and perfect dying present in Buddhist philosophy.

I'm not sure if you're familiar with all of those faiths / types of faiths so if you'd like I could go into a little more detail on them. In the end though, I study what I consider to be the human condition and find supports from various faiths so that I can try to live - what I believe to be - the most beneficial human life; while still trying to prepare myself for the most beneficial 'afterlife' in the event that one does exist.

How this all relates to black holes? I'm not entirely sure, ha ha. But, the idea of chaos, control, existence and non-existence are present in a multitude of faiths - as they are in cosmology and astronomy. Maybe there's some kind of connection, maybe not.


~ Wandering Scribe

reply to post by Wandering Scribe


Well it seems like we are pretty much on the same page when it comes to theological matters. I believe that all religions are parts of the one real religion, that god gave different ways of worship to different people. You know how at Pentecost, the people of the world got mixed up and started speaking in different languages? I believe this is when people started splitting up into different religions. They were still worshiping the same god, but they did in in their own ways because they couldn't communicate with each other.

One thing I've noticed is the possibility that the beliefs of different religions may overlap. Buddhists follow Buddha, but Buddha never claimed to be a God, so a Buddhist could also worship the Christian God while being a Buddhist. In fact, a Buddhist who worships God may be a "better" Christian because of his ability to clear his mind and cleanse himself of worldly desires.

Sure, there are religions that just don't overlap, but I think this has to do with the fact that over time religions have been abused and changed and reformed... take for example the fact that Muslims believe Jesus was only a prophet while Christians believe he is the Son of God. Only one side can be right... unless every man on this Earth is a Son of God and Jesus was nothing special... which DOES make sense because aren't we often called the "children of God?" So there is room for both Muslims and Christians to be right, but religious people are too blind by their religious knowledge that they can't accept the fact that another religion might be right. So I agree with you, a person who understands and follows all religions will certainly be an enlightened person.

Now to try to relate this to dark matter... lots of religions emphasize meditation, and being able to control ones mind, namely Hindus and Buddhists. Gnostic Christians practice something similar; once they clear their minds they use different levels of consciousness to find God. In the Gnostic Book of Judas, Jesus talks about different stars belonging to different people, how the brightest star in the sky belongs to Judas. What does this mean?

I get from this that there is an unknown connection between stars and humans. Somehow stars manifest themselves on Earth as humans... I've thought about this before, that if every living thing in the history of Earth were counted up, it could equal the number of stars in the universe.

And I now have no idea how I'm going to relate this to dark matter. Damn. I'm tempted to just delete everything I just wrote but again there's a chance you might be able to make sense out of it.

reply to post by Wang Tang


I'm very glad that you didn't delete everything. Regardless of whether or not we'll loop it back to dark matter and/or black holes is of little consequence at this point. Discussion points are discussion points, and as such they should all be embraced as they arrive on the scene. I'll do my best to fulfill that function. And who knows, maybe I'll bring it back to dark matter somehow. Here we go:

Many religions overlap in dogma, creed, belief and ritual. I'm so glad you recognize this fact. It's intolerably difficult to converse with someone who believes his/her religion is entirely their own, with no counter-point or evolution through history. Baptism is an Egyptian polytheism ritual, which was adopted by the Jews and then the Christians.

Man-gods have existed in almost every pre-Christian religion (Gilgamesh, Shiva, Horus, Amenhotep, Mithra, etc) so the idea of Jesus being the Son of God has bearing much more ancient than a 1st century Jewish carpenter. On and on, I'm sure you know of many such overlaps yourself.

So, it does seem natural that all religious teachings should converge somewhere. I, however, don't think this is entirely true. Instead it is my belief - purely from my own experiences - that there are three types of religion: soteriological, humanitarian, atheistic.

In the soteriological the goal is on preparing the spirit or soul for the afterlife. Christians, Muslims, Jews, Mahayana Buddhism, Egyptian polytheism, Sikhism, Jainism, Baha'i and to some extent the Hindus are all examples of this. The ultimate goal is to live some kind of "pure" life in the eyes of your specific god so that you can go meet them in the next life.

In the humanitarian religions the goal is worldly fulfillment. LaVeyian Satanism, Paganism, Wicca, Neo-pagans, Druids, again to an extent the Hindus, and several other Earth-centered beliefs tend to fall in this category because they focus on empowering the human intellect, aiding the Earth in preservation of all species and generally trying to move the human experience forward.

In the atheistic branch you have (obviously) the atheist and the agnostic. You also have the Hinayana Buddhists, pantheists, chaos magic, and all forms of mystics. These individuals aren't content with just enlightening the human experience, or being subservient to some gracious Creator. They aim to escape all of those ties and truly reach a state of pure being, Nirvana, or merging with the god-head.

Again though, this is just my personal theory. Three different "goals" of faith, maybe there's a series of "types of lives" we all live. One towards subservience, one towards bettering our world, and one towards ultimate absorption into the Universe. (I can sense I've almost branched our two topics, I'll take another swing at it below).

----------

Aleister Crowley, a famous magician/spiritualist once said in what is arguably his greatest work, The Book of the Law, these words:

Every man and every woman is a star

Now, right away, this ties directly with your idea of the stars 'projecting our lives down to this planet Earth' (yes, I borrowed that line from the Band Modest Mouse, they're pretty good too). A metaphysical concept I've considered myself. And, if not us, then maybe every star is one of our 'gods' out there, enlightening it's flock.

But, to get back to the science aspects, this quote from Neil deGrasse Tyson's Cosmic Sermon also lends some credence to the theory:

We are all connected;
To each other biologically,
To the Earth chemically,
To the rest of the Universe atomically.

And science has definitely gone a long way towards proving that 'star stuff' is responsible for our planets, comets, meteors, and entire solar system in general.

Since we as humans evolved (according to the Abiogensis theory) from sludge and gas on our planet struck by a super-charged bolt then it would make sense our evolution comes from the exact same stuff as a star's evolution.

Seeing every human as it's own star is simply a metaphysical way of examining a scientific theory. It is my belief that these two theories can be married without too much complaint.

Therefore, is it any less preposterous to believe that the death of a human being turns it's soul or spirit into dark matter, or a black hole? Both dark matter and a black hole seem to be the result of the death or disappearance of a star, and if all humans are stars, then maybe we're all responsible for the black matter or black holes all over our Universe.

And BAM, tied it all in... kinda. Ha ha.


~ Wandering Scribe

reply to post by Wandering Scribe

"Every man and every woman is a star"

"We are all connected;
To each other biologically,
To the Earth chemically,
To the rest of the Universe atomically."

Perfect. Those were exactly the quotes I was looking for. Here are the passages from the Gospel of Judas I was referring to. These are all quotes of Jesus talking, there are parts missing though so it's a little annoying to read.

"Again I say to you, my name has been written on this ... of the generations of the stars through the human generations."

Jesus said to them, "Stop sacrificing... which you have... over the altar, since they are over your stars and your angels and have already come to their conclusion there.

"Stop struggling with me, each of you has his own star, and everybody..."

Judas said to him, "In the vision I saw myself as the twelve disciples were stoning me and persecuting me severely... Master, take me along with these people."
Jesus answered and said, "Judas, your star has led you astray." He continued, "No person of mortal birth is worthy to enter the house you have seen, for that place is reserved for the holy."

Jesus said, "Come, that I may teach you about secrets no person has ever seen. For there exists a great and boundless realm, whose extent no generation of angels has seen, in which there is a great invisible spirit."

which no eye of an angel has ever seen
no thought of heart has ever comprehended
and it was never called by name

Jesus said, "Truly I say to you, for all of them the stars bring matters to completion. When Saklas completes the span of time assigned to him, their fist star will appear with the generations, and they will finish what they said they would do."

Jesus answered and said, "I am not laughing at you but at the error of the stars, because these six stars wander about with these five combatants, and they will all be destroyed along with their creatures.

"Lift up your eyes and look at the cloud and the light within it and the stars surrounding it. The star that leads the way is your star."

There is a lot to deduct from these quotes, most obviously from the last one, when Jesus says to Judas, "The star that leads the way is your star." This clearly states a relationship between man and star.

So I think you are on to something when you say black holes and dark matter come from the death of a human or a star. I see a connection here between dark matter, both cannot be seen, touched, heard, tasted, smelled, or understood by humans. Dark matter, like death, is something we just can't wrap our minds around as humans.

With this in mind, one passage reaaally grabs my attention, "For there exists a great and boundless realm, whose extent no generation of angels has seen, in which there is a great invisible spirit." Jesus states that not even his angels have experienced this boundless realm, and I am going to suggest that this boundless realm is dark matter. If dark matter and death are in fact related, it would make sense that no angels have experienced death, because if an angel dies it's not an angel anymore.

And then it says,
"which no eye of an angel has ever seen
no thought of heart has ever comprehended
and it was never called by name"
And I'm like, whoa, dark matter fits well to this quote. Not perfectly, because we have a name for dark matter, but it is true no eye of an angel has ever seen it and no heart has ever comprehended it.

So I'm thinking dark matter is the realm of death, not death as we know it as the end of life, but as the beginning of life in a different realm. As far as my mind can conceive, I'd imagine this other realm could be a spirit world like in our dreams or a part of the universe where we live going backwards in time. When I say going backwards in time I mean living in a realm where the universe is going towards a state of lower entropy. So there, we did manage to tie in dark matter to this discussion. Wonderful work my friend!

Sorry guys/gals - looking at time is a red herring when examining “dark matter”. The scientists have correctly identified some of its characteristics, but they still do not have a clue what they’ve got.

I think I have a good guess what it is out there. Here’s a description that goes a little beyond what the literature has to say. And by the way, the phenomena has another description called “Hawking Radiation”. You might Google it for a description from his point of view.

The dark matter can be described as follows:

While it is a given that all matter in our universe is electronic; that is, it is made up of different charges and polarities that are balanced within a discrete atomic organization, not all radiation that is detected should be assumed to be in an electronic state. Black matter (as erroneously named) is the case in point not to make such an assumption.

The so-called “minimum energy” detected in our universe background is a radiation which emanates from energy that is pre-electronic. Consequently, it will not behave according to the rules of materialization, or matter’s reaction to the effects of gravity on it, but it does react to extremes in temperature. Consequently, it will often be detected around areas of near absolute zero. Black bodies are usually burned out stars which have collapsed and compressed their electronic constituent parts to the point that even x-rays can not penetrate them. The lack of electronic activity plunges temperatures to near a fraction above absolute zero around them. However, absolute zero can not be found precisely because of the activity of Hawking radiation or black energy as called here. The slightest motion in space creates heat.

This radiation has no debt to gravity. It has anti-gravity effects which it can turn on and off depending upon its axial velocity. It’s axial velocity is directly affected by temperature. Now, this is not a particle. It is not antimatter. All of those things are related to the electronic organization of materialized energy. In this case, however, the radiation is not materialized but an energy which is just above the spectrum of universe energy (electronic) and below force (cosmic energy). Its correct spectrum description should be called “emergent” energy - a most unusual state to be found no where else in the universe. It is unique.

It exists as pre-matter having emerged from cosmic energy which is not measurable as anything but as degrees of force. A good example of force is the science fiction use of the idea of a force field - an invisible energy expanding outwardly and, if strong enough, a wall that can not be penetrated. When this field is broken down this radiation appears, and it appears in 100 distinct versions of itself, each version having a different axial spin in three dimensions. Only like axial spins attract each other as this radiation “clumps” together in discrete packets when temperature affects its neutrality to move it into discrete particles. The electron is composed of this radiation in exact numbers of self-organization requiring 100 same-type radiation entities to form the electron.

The electron has mass. It is affected by gravity. But that which composes an electron is reactive to pre-material force only because it has no mass and no central organization. Here you are seeing why it is true that matter can not be destroyed. It is composed of radiation that is eternal. These radiation pieces can react to particles as a catalyst to cause disruption of certain atomic elements requiring immense power to overcome by man. It forms neutrons, protons, quarks, and even photons, and passes right through the empty space in the atom with enough approximate scale as the room earth has between Jupiter and our sun.

Now there are particles in our universe that have no mass (e.g. photons belonging to the boson group), but the boson particles do react to gravity even if it requires x-rays to trigger such reactions. These black radiation entities are unique and non-reactive and can be mistaken for electronic background radiation until someone like Hawking found them out in the 1970's. I see no further development of the theory much beyond his original thesis about evaporation of black bodies even today. So we must wait for science to catch up to verify what is shown to you above. Then the real fun begins to invent ways to capture these pre-material radiational entities to put them to work.

My sources are discretely hidden so I prefer to keep them that way. You are welcome to question me, but I will not provide source material unless it can be found in published literature and then full acknowledgment will be made.

Oh, and as regard to the subject of time: this radiation, the black matter as it is sometimes called, avoids taking time to do its thing. It has a “flash” presence– it’s only tip of the hat to time and that flash is the radiation being discovered and has science scratching its head.

I hope this provides some reason for creative debate. The subject badly needs new ideas to bring the concept into greater maturity and understanding.

Aronolac

Dark matter is just the mainstreams interpretation of Plasma. There is no need for dark matter in Plasma Cosmology. More info in these ATS threads.

ATS - Galactic Plasma Flows
ATS - Missing Matter found in Deep Space
ATS - Another thread on missing matter
ATS - New Discoveries confirming electric universe
ATS - Electric star model
ATS - Black Holes are a Myth
ATS - Mathematician Claims Black Holes don't Add Up
ATS - Hidden History of Plasma Cosmology
ATS - Electric Universe VS Bohr Institute

reply to post by Aronolac


I'll accept your science. I'd heard of, but never really looked into, Hawking Radiation, so I did take a look at Wiki's review of it while I read through your account. Your review of it seems on par with what is accepted of it right now.

And yes, concerning black holes, it would seem that they can be created and destroyed if Hawking is to be believed. Certainly no logical reason for me to doubt Hawking, he's a brilliant mind.

However, dark matter and black holes seem to be different things. At least, they were when I studied them in college during my astronomy courses. Maybe science has changed in the year I haven't taken any astronomy courses, but, I still don't believe that dark matter and black holes are the same thing.

Dark energy seems to be something else entirely. So, until I educate myself more on dark energy I will restrain from comment on the veracity of your claims about it's ability to exist as neither matter, nor anti-matter.

Naturally though, when you state that your "hidden" sources must remain without names or review I am not wont to believe everything you say.

I've encountered many ATS users who claim to have a higher understanding of science than the most brilliant leading minds of our scientific community. I have yet to see any of them demonstrate such though.

Thank you though for the Hawking Radiation aspect. It certainly adds something new to the discussion.

~ Wandering Scribe

reply to post by Ionized


You state this with such veracity you'd wonder why science hasn't yet announced that a spiritual and unproven substance (plasma) is in fact the black matter permeating our universe.

Such a belief has no more veracity in it then what Wang Tang and I have been discussing on this thread. First you must prove the existence of plasma, then you must prove that this invisible, near-unmeasurable 'matter' we call dark matter is actually said substance.

I'll read the links though, and see the claims others' have brought concerning this. While patiently waiting for mainstream science to support your claim.

Edit # 1:

If you actually meant this kind of plasma, then I recant my response and will instead wait until examining all of your links to make a statement on the gaseous plasma.

If you meant the "ectoplasm" style of plasma, my original comment still stands.

~ Wandering Scribe

[edit on 17/3/10 by Wandering Scribe]

reply to post by Wang Tang


Stars were always important beacons to the ancients. Most cultures measure time with them, attached importance to their positions and movements, and even planned crop seasons and war seasons around the stars, or their counterpart the planets.

I wouldn't be surprised then that religious lore is littered with references to man and stars. Jesus was born under a specific star God created to guide the Magi after all. Religious thinkers for the most part have always considered 'space' to be another realm where things have the ability to exist.

Perhaps our "perfect bodies" exist as, or among the stars too. I'm sure it's been suggested before. Theosophists widely consider star and starlight to be instrumental in the construction and use of the Body of Light (typically called the Astral Body).

Your conclusion - that dark matter is the realm of death - echos back to my original stance that dark matter is all afterlives poking through into our Universe. Although this theory does require the belief in some kind of parallel universe, or maybe a multi-verse.

I've always been leery of just yelling to the skies that there must be many Universes surrounding our one. I still believe that if there is another "state" to the Universe it probably somehow co-exists with our one, instead of standing next to it in some weird fashion.

reply to post by Wandering Scribe


Spiritual and unproven? You clearly have not researched the topic. Plasma Cosmology is based in empirical laboratory studies as opposed to strictly theoretical mathematics, which is where mainstream cosmology solely resides.

Plasma is a collection of neutral particles, ionized matter, and electric and magnetic fields operating under differing regimes of process. Nothing 'spiritual'' and 'unproven' about that... You must have been thinking of 'dark matter', which is far more unproven than plasma.

edit: just saw your edit. Yes, I meant Plasma. Plasma Cosmology is real science. Also, I have nothing to prove to you. I spent years getting the public aware of the paradigm behind Plasma Cosmology and it is now up to others to study it for themselves. I am far beyond having battles with mainstream proponents, and am only interested in giving information to those with open minds.

[edit on 18-3-2010 by Ionized]