interested

Interesting link. Researchers implement entanglement swapping with independent sources over 100km optical fiber https://phys.org/news/2017-10-entanglement-swapping-independent-sources-100km.html?utm_source=nwletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=daily-nwletter

I have come to the conclusion that there is no firm ideas on dark matter the following is a link I think summing up dark matter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter It is any ones guess. Different ideas on how gravity work abound, leaving me with no conclusion ref the abundance of dark matter or even the existence of dark matter. We have theories on everything from hot to cold dark matter and none existing dark matter due to possible new theories on gravity. Which emergent theories on gravity being developed are most likely to explain the dark matter effect? I currently think in order to understand space, quantum entanglement, and where all matter comes from before any theoretical big bang needs a clear understanding of the properties of space is required. I think also that this can only be done by considering the quantum effects with 4 dimensional space. If any one else would like to progress this thread please feel free to do so. I have more questions than answers, and dont feel I am making any progress. Thanks all for the input. After thought, gravity causes space to contract and expand, at what stage on the outer edges of galaxies does space start expanding, would this modify gravity around the edges of galaxies? Could something like the expansion of space modify gravity on the edges of rotating galaxies, causing it not to work the same.

too late to edit but I would like to delete the arxiv link on super gravity it is not helpful

Thanks, I think I read it some time ago, but reading it again has driven home a couple of things. Thanks again, the following links on super gravity will keep me quite for a while. https://arxiv.org › hep-th https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supergravity Ref space I think viewing it as a dielectric which can be stretched and compressed causing gravity and the expansion of the universe, is similiar to the way in which a photon travels through it deforming it as it travels. Considering virtual particles interacting with each other, could they become stable particles, for instance. A particle or photon existing in space causes (ripples in space) virtual particles around it which will interact with other virtual particles or ripples, creating peaks and troughs. All data is from the Particle Data Group. Type Name Symbol Mass (MeV) Mean lifetime Lepton Electron / Positron {\displaystyle e^{-}\,/\,e^{+}} 0.511 {\displaystyle >4.6\times 10^{26}\ \mathrm {years} \,} Muon / Antimuon {\displaystyle \mu ^{-}\,/\,\mu ^{+}} 105.7 {\displaystyle 2.2\times 10^{-6}\ \mathrm {seconds} \,} Tau lepton / Antitau {\displaystyle \tau ^{-}\,/\,\tau ^{+}} 1777 {\displaystyle 2.9\times 10^{-13}\ \mathrm {seconds} \,} Meson Neutral Pion {\displaystyle \pi ^{0}\,} 135 {\displaystyle 8.4\times 10^{-17}\ \mathrm {seconds} \,} Charged Pion {\displaystyle \pi ^{+}\,/\,\pi ^{-}} 139.6 {\displaystyle 2.6\times 10^{-8}\ \mathrm {seconds} \,} Baryon Proton / Antiproton {\displaystyle p^{+}\,/\,p^{-}} 938.2 {\displaystyle >10^{29}\ \mathrm {years} \,} Neutron / Antineutron {\displaystyle n\,/\,{\bar {n}}} 939.6 {\displaystyle 885.7\ \mathrm {seconds} \,} Boson W boson {\displaystyle W^{+}\,/\,W^{-}} 80,400 {\displaystyle 10^{-25}\ \mathrm {seconds} \,} Z boson {\displaystyle Z^{0}\,} 91,000 {\displaystyle 10^{-25}\ \mathrm {seconds} \,} For example can W and Z Bosons be considered virtual particles along with Mesons?. I know nobody knows for sure, but this thread was started under speculations. BUT If virtual particles interacted in space, could they exist long enough to affect gravity, or even to turn into matter, dark or other wise. Virtual particles in space I understand are one possible cause of the expansion of the universe or dark energy, could they also be dark matter, causing a contraction of space. Is the dielectric of space equivalent to the graviton. The graviton must be absorbed or destroyed by mass on contact with it, otherwise the energy or temperature of the mass absorbing the gravitons would increase? Speculation in hope of clarification.

Thanks for the response, and links. Is super gravity a viable idea today? Ref energy I have no problems viewing gravity as a result of a the stretching of space, regardless of the existence or not of gravitons. I also see no problem with the concept of photons as stretching and compressing space in the similar way to what gravity does, neither are particles but both transfer energy. Gravity stretching space continuously or photons just causing a fluctuation in space as they move or exist in space do not need to be particles. If gravity can stretch space and transfer energy as detected by ligo , then I assume photons can also. Neither are particles and both transfer energy via the stretching or compression of space. Everything I have found indicate neutrinos can travel at the speed of light, I was seeking clarification. Thank you To stretch space via the movement of virtual gravitons suggests to me a flow of gravitons towards mass, where gravitons must be absorbed or destroyed without increasing the energy of the mass absorbing them. Could gravitons be assumed to be space, or quantum foam? OR are virtual gravitons stationery?

Thanks both for the replies. If neutrinos cant be dark matter, are you assuming dark matter is a new as yet undetected light particle or a form of energy. Since varying degrees of dark matter seem to be randomly ascribed to galaxies to explain the movement of galaxies could dark matter also perhaps be a mix of multiple types of extremely light particles. It appears to clump and not interact with other particles could it be a left over from the big bang. Ref the speed of neutrinos Is wikepedia definately wrong????: qoute from the following link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino "After the detectors for the project were upgraded in 2012, MINOS refined their initial result and found agreement with the speed of light, with the difference in the arrival time of neutrinos and light of −0.0006% (±0.0012%).[56] A similar observation was made, on a much larger scale, with supernova 1987A (SN 1987A). 10 MeV antineutrinos from the supernova were detected within a time window that was consistent with the speed of light for the neutrinos. So far, all measurements of neutrino speed have been consistent with the speed of light.[57][58]" Is the graviton best viewed as a fluctuation in space travelling in all directions radiating away from mass, OR towards a mass? I have been thinking of this as a single object like packets of energy, which I suspect is wrong. I do not think it is a detectable fluctuation unless there is something like a pair of black holes spinning around each other or a supernovae of some sorts. I suspect Gravity is a fixed stretching of space with no frequency unlike photons which are spin 1 and have direction and frequency. Does spin 2 denote a field in all directions with infinite range, or does spin 2 denote something else. Does other gravitational theories require dark matter, eg modified gravity for instance?. The lensing pointed out by Beecee indicates something is affecting the light passing some galaxies, could a combined modified gravity and a little dark matter explain.

I have managed to confuse my self. Can some one explain spin 0, 1/2, 1, 2 etc. My understanding is fermions have spin 1/2, and mass. Bosons have spin 1 and no mass, gravitons spin 2. Spin 0 is a particle with no spin or a particle antiparticle pair of fermions with total spin 0. Hard to detect. Fermions are normally stationery, and mass increases with speed implying at light speed they would have infinite mass or energy. Bosons are a packet of energy (E=hf) or directional fluctuation (stretch and compress)in space that travels at c. Neutrinos are fermions with spin 1/2, and may produce gravitational lensing and be the source of dark matter, however they can also travel at light speed. Is some dark matter stationery and some moving around? Is dark matter to make the sums work, in individual galaxies. Does dark matter have to be small can it be a mixture of neutrinos and dust particles. Is the graviton best viewed as a fluctuation in space travelling in all directions radiating away from mass, OR towards a mass? I have been thinking of this as a single object like packets of energy, which I suspect is wrong. Rather than a moving fluctuation is it a fixed stretching of space with no frequency unlike photons which are spin 1 and have direction and frequency. Clearly I have managed to confuse myself, not helped by reading neutrinos can and do travel at light speed but may also be stationery dark matter causing the lensing effect thought to be caused by dark matter around some galaxies.

Thanks for the pointer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino The three known neutrino flavors are the only established elementary particle candidates for dark matter, specifically hot dark matter, although that possibility appears to be largely ruled out by observations of the cosmic microwave background. If heavier sterile neutrinos exist, they might serve as warm dark matter, which still seems plausible.[46]

Are you talking about virtual particle pairs which are not stable but on average are there.

I will not argue this point, but do disagree with your speculation ref worm holes. A 4th dimension does not imply wormholes, it just implies forces or points in space can be connected. The entanglement connection we know is extremely weak, and any disturbance can break the connection. This disturbance could be a locomotive or a quantum fluctuation in space. The entanglement of virtual particles for instance, could be decohered by other virtual particles appearing in the vicinity of the first virtual particle. Simplifying and Zooming in, all of space is a quantum cafe with at least a 4th dimension. It is not a smooth set of 3 dimensional x y z coordinates as you would like to believe. Gravitational waves as detected by ligo momentarily stretch space as they also do flowing into black holes. I wont argue with you but do consider your views to be dated ref the smoothness of space and space being fixed x,y,z coordinates.

My current understanding, for what it is worth and is based on speculation is that there is a 4th dimension, connecting the entangled points directly as if they were directly adjacent to each other in 3 dimensional space. no wormhole required with the extra dimension

Gravitational wave detectors could shed light on dark matter. https://phys.org/news/2017-10-gravitational-detectors-dark.html?utm_source=nwletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=daily-nwletter http://ruxandrab.blogspot.co.uk/2011/12/luke-warm-dark-matter-bose-condensation.html Ultra light scalar particles, spin 0, could be a candidate for dark matter according to the above links. To have spin 0 could the particles be made of a particle and antiparticle? Or could virtual particles have on average a mass distributed through out a galaxy?

Please define what you mean by something else.

Can you cast some light on what dark matter may be since you know what dark matter is not?

I might have got the name wrong, I will check what has been posted but think Beecee may have referenced it. No one knows for sure. If I google it, there are lots of ideas out there, with people speculating. Some say it does not exist others say it does, etc. I am just trying to get an idea of what it may be. Could be primordial matter left over from the early universe or is it evolving in space. As space expands does dark matter increase with it, where did it come from. etc

I was referring to my previous questions. It - in this case would be composite stationery bosons Would a composite stationery boson be detectable in outer space. ? I think Beecee answered the question on the dark matter thread page "You can not only measure the amount of total matter, with weak lensing, but you can compare it with where the hot gas is in the X-ray. This combination is a big part of how we know dark matter doesn’t collide with either itself or with normal, atomic matter." If composite stationery bosons of entangled matter and antimatter particles are dark matter. How stable would it be, in a almost zero gravity environment at near absolute zero?

I was thinking more along the lines of a huge cloud of it, as a possible form of dark matter. Having no atomic structure or definable energy levels, would it absorb light like a normal hydrogen atom. ?

Would a composite stationery boson be detectable in outer space. ? How stable would it be, in a almost zero gravity environment at near absolute zero?

Has anyone written any papers on virtual particle behaviour at or near zero and or compared it with actual particles at the same temperature? What drove the big bang? Could Dark matter be material still existing from the big bang or multiple big bangs or a zero energy universe. If it is entangled particles of matter and antimatter existing in space at near absolute zero, how long would it take for them to annihilate, without any external disturbance. Does dark matter exist in hotter space, near the centre of the domino galaxy for example or does it just exist on the periphery in colder space? What does everyone else think dark matter is????????????????????????????????????? an expert speculation might yield better results than me asking questions in the dark on dark matter.

So spin could be 0 or 1 depending on how they are created. Is dark matter predicted in any theory

Thanks for confirming that. I have been googling again and found this also which I think is related. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.07698.pdf MeV dark matter (DM) particles annihilating or decaying to electron-positron pairs cannot, in principle, be observed via local cosmic-ray (CR) measurements because of the shielding solar magnetic field. In this letter, we take advantage of spacecraft Voyager 1’s capacity for detecting interstellar CRs since it crossed the heliopause in 2012. This opens up a new avenue to probe DM in the sub-GeV energy/mass range that we exploit here for the first time. From a complete description of the transport of electrons and positrons at low energy, we derive predictions for both the secondary astrophysical background and the pair production mechanisms relevant to DM annihilation or decay down to the MeV mass range. Interestingly, we show that reacceleration may push positrons up to energies larger than the DM particle mass. We combine the constraints from the Voyager and AMS- 02 data to get novel limits covering a very extended DM particle mass range, from MeV to TeV. In the MeV mass range, our limits reach annihilation cross sections of order hσvi ∼ 10−28cm3 /s. An interesting aspect is that these limits barely depend on the details of cosmic-ray propagation in the weak reacceleration case, a configuration which seems to be favored by the most recent boron-tocarbon (B/C) data. Though extracted from a completely different and new probe, these bounds have a strength similar to those obtained with the cosmic microwave background — they are even more stringent for p-wave annihilation Yes that is why they are called virtual particles. Also at approaching 0 Kelvin they last longer, entropy is seen to be reversed at very low temperatures. The first law of thermodynamics needs to be included in any theory, energy can not be created or destroyed, heat does not come from nowhere. The heat in the big bang was a result of energy that came from some where. The zero energy universe creates matter from nothing ie quantum fluctuations, at around 0 kelvin in space. What models predict what dark matter is? Can electron positron pairs be detected in space a few billion miles away? or would they just appear as a transparent gas, dark matter? with a spin 0, 1/2, or 1. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.07698.pdf might be of interest to you. Dark matter may decay to electron positron pairs.

Thanks for the response. Do a particle/antiparticle pair also have 0 or 1 spin being the result of a positron and electron with 1/2 spin? Would a particle pair in space be detectable and interact in any way, could entangled particle pairs be dark matter?

Trying Again ! Assuming Relativity is correct, could the big bang have some left over remnant in the form of dark matter? Quantum fluctuations or waves produce field excitations which are particles. Dark matter has mass and is therefore a particle of sorts. Spin 0, 1/2, 1 etc All of space is full of quantum fluctuations. There is no empty space where there are no quantum fluctuations. Space is expanding possibly due to quantum fluctuations. Is it possible that dark matter is a mixture of particle pairs. That appeared out of the vacuum still in an entangled state. Could this particle pair production still be ongoing in the colder parts of space. Particles do not stay Entanglement in a hot environment like a big bang. Fields gives rise to particle production of the particle/anti particle pairs, and prior to any heating in the universe as a result possibly of a big bang would have happened at near absolute zero. Could dark matter be a leftover from the big bang or from a zero energy universe, something like an electron + positron pair. Would this be detectable as it would be electrically neutral and possibly not respond to electromagnetic waves. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ref the rest above, the flowing space analogy like a water fall reminded me of the Cahil paper, who might well be a crackpot. There are many crackpots in the world and I suspect there are a few on this forum also. He was working in Adelaide Australia in a University so I assume he was reasonably clever. I have not checked him out so do not know. Quantum fluctuations were happening long before Heisenberg was born. I hope I am more correct this time. Thanks for the response. After thought is a crackpot worse than an educated idiot.

Thanks for your input anyway I do not think I was making up quantum fluctuations as the origins of everything, unless of course you believe god did it which I do not, so I will leave it at that also.

Summarizing I think I am correct in thinking the following The effect claimed to be Dark Energy is possibly quantum fluctuations. I never said Space is stuff it is quantum fluctuations, without which there is no space. Quantum fluctuations are absorbed in hot environments and by matter. The effect claimed to be Dark matter which does not interact with matter but affects gravity, may have originated in the or one of many big bangs, which was initiated by quantum fluctuations OR in a zero energy universe which again came from quantum fluctuations. Quantum fluctuations are the cause of the effect known as the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Everything is a result of quantum fluctuations. From the above summary IF I am correct, I think it is fair to assume, the effect of dark matter in space is a result of quantum fluctuations, these fluctuations do not interact with matter because they may be being absorbed by it, as they would be in a black hole. There are theories out there written by clever people that disagree with the claim that "It is thought that the quantum foam (non-zero background energy) could explain dark energy but it appears to be 10120 times too large. " One such theory was posted under Itoeros Hologaphic universe thread by Handy andy https://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0307003.pdf there are many other more recent papers along similar lines. This paper is by MOND https://arxiv.org/pdf/1704.00780.pdf again it is a version of quantum gravity, and will add to my reading this week. There are dozens of links for Poplowskiiand I am not sure where to start with this fella https://arxiv.org/a/poplawski_n_1.html any clues would be appreciated. Thanks all.