I think I possibly discovered the source of dark matter.

If you think of quarks as point particles, the neutron is a 2 dimensional triangle with +2/3 charge at one corner and -1/3 charge at the other two corners, giving it a net charge of 0. If you take 3 neutrons, each one rotated by 60 degrees and stack them on top of each other, you have a trineutron with zero charge on all three corners, zero charge but no charge distribution unlike the neutron. This new particle cannot interact with other particles except through gravity. It is a purely gravitational particle with three times the mass of a neutron. The problem is forming the particle. It would require extreme temperatures to form since during formation you have a pair of -1/3 charges at each corner that want to repel each other. The +2/3 charge cancels out both of these charges once they can be pressed together. The conditions necessary to do this could only have occurred sometime in the beginning stages of the Big Bang. After the quark gluon plasma cools to form neutrons and protons, most of the neutrons may form these non interacting particles. It is possible that only neutrons formed first. If this is the case, the universe of nucleons consisted of only trineutrons plus free neutrons. The left over free neutrons decay into protons with time releasing an electron and electron antineutrino. That's where the stars come from. The rest of the universe is just these trineutrons that do nothing but interact gravitationally.

a reply to: Adaluncatif



Okay, so ^that^ was my reaction to your post. I clicked on it because I understand enough to know that if someone did discover the source of dark matter, that would be some sort of scientific miracle or something. For some reason, I thought I would actually understand whatever was posted inside your thread. HA!

So anyway, if you did, congratulations! If someone smarter than I comes along and debunks your theory, well... sorry pal.

I'm not being sarcastic at all, I promise!

a reply to: Adaluncatif

I came to this thread fully expecting a picture of my ex wife.

a reply to: MojaveBurning

Or they'd be paid off to keep quiet or killed.

I'm sure your theory has some scientific credence but I'm a layman and the principles go over my head. S + F for sharing your info. Now, can anyone explain this in simple "non-scientific" terms?

originally posted by: rockpaperhammock
a reply to: Adaluncatif

I came to this thread fully expecting a picture of my ex wife.

For me it was the new years eve on the sidewalk in Monterrey Mexico 5 years ago... what came out of my mouth.


Thought I had been outed or something, I think its still on youtube somewhere

originally posted by: rockpaperhammock
a reply to: Adaluncatif

I came to this thread fully expecting a picture of my ex wife.

LMAO...

I expected PHAGE to be here already with his swamp gas derailment explanation.

originally posted by: Yeahkeepwatchingme
a reply to: MojaveBurning

Or they'd be paid off to keep quiet or killed.

I'm sure your theory has some scientific credence but I'm a layman and the principles go over my head. S + F for sharing your info. Now, can anyone explain this in simple "non-scientific" terms?

That was a layman explanation.

A non-lay explanation would look more like...

a reply to: Adaluncatif

I think you are taking the geometric figures in school physics textbooks a little too literally.

They searched for the trineutron back in the 60s and concluded its nonexistence back in the 80s no?

a reply to: boncho

Yep. The Nonexistence of the Trineutron.

a reply to: Adaluncatif

As I read in a tweet the other day

"I find that controversies in astrophysics are less stressful if you don't understand what's going on. "

Can't remember who said it, but I find it quite truthful.

Here is something on the subject

Link to Exploring the monstrous creatures at the edges of the dark matter map from ArsTechnica.

It's an interesting idea which makes me think of how such 'chargeless' heavy particles would behave in proximity to each other without the presence of electron orbits. I imagine them intimately clumped together forming the densest imaginable accumulation of mass with ultra-extreme gravitational characteristics.

I think a name for such an anomaly has already been coined but that's all unproven theory at this stage.

a reply to: Adaluncatif


Pppssshhhh

I can dispell your naive conjecture with SIMPLE physics.


48.76(.0926·23.06) < 31096.4 £\261.4pf ~.0058^ +®^

Best to leave these things to the pro"s.

^^^^^^^^


My recipe for toffee.

Yum.

I meant to say rotate the triangles by 120 degrees, so that you are stack three triangles on top of each other. Each of the corners of the trineutron will then have a charge of zero.

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: Adaluncatif

I think you are taking the geometric figures in school physics textbooks a little too literally.

You don't agree that quarks are point particles? If they are points neutrons and protons have to be 2 dimensional. Three points not in the same line form a triangle. Three dimensions of nuclei come about when nucleons are joined together in certain ways. The deuteron is two dimensional. It is a proton stacked on top of a neutron. Each corner has charge +1/3, leaving the deuteron with overall charge of +1.

a reply to: Adaluncatif

Wow!

I really like your theory. In fact its now my going theory "I read somewhere" that I will parrot when the subject comes up.
It makes perfect sense!

Really, well done man. S&F

EDIT TO ADD:
"Pros"? Wanna be´s only play with words so that no one understands. Masters can explain things so others can understand. Your not good until you can make others do what you do.

a reply to: Adaluncatif

Interesting theory but it would have been discovered in a large collider, if it was such.

a reply to: Adaluncatif

First of all, as has been mentioned, you are taking the idea that quarks have triangular shaped way too literally. Second, you might be right...who knows, but without a crap load of maths and calculations to accompany and more importantly, PROVE your idea, you will never be taken even remotely seriously.

So, i know the answer must be yes, since you are atempting this, but you have a degree in Quantum Field Theory and are well versed in Quantum Chromodynamics right?

Oh, and you better start booking your time at the LHC to prove all this and win yourself an nobel prize.

Well done!

Joking aside, the way that particles and quarks occupy and travel through space is exceedingly complicated. Read "The particls at the end of the universe" and if you can get your head round the later chapters that talk about what you are interested in...then congrats

Joking aside...its a phenomenal book that kept me up many many nights with the info and the ASTOUNDING things it revealed about particles, quarks and fields.