icarus2 Posted June 2, 2018 Share Posted June 2, 2018 (edited) All new discoveries were called new discoveries because they were not found until then. Throughout the history of science, among the things that have not yet been discovered, new discoveries have had many examples. In other words, it does not guarantee that undiscovered findings of any physical object will be undiscovered in the future. The history of physics, and even the history of science. Some phenomena of relativity and quantum mechanics are against common sense. Already, accelerating expansion of universe is not what we expected. The rotation curves of galaxies were not what we expected. It is a phenomenon that conflicts with common sense in some aspects. Already, an uncommon event has occurred. In this situation, what we need to focus on is not common sense but does the newly introduced physical quantity explain the phenomenon? To date, no one has ever observed dark matter directly. We do not yet know what the source of the (gravitational) phenomenon we observed. We have observed that the rotation curve of the galaxy is different from that of the solar system, and we are looking for ways to explain it. This may be explained by the presence of additional gravitational sources and may be explained by the presence of additional gravitational effects. There are other ways, of course. In general, we presume that dark matter is something with a positive mass. However, I would like to try a different explanation. Dark matter is Negative mass! 1. Negative mass is an object whose existence is required by the law of the conservation of energy. If the conservation of energy that “energy will be always conserved” is applied to the initial state of the universe, this gives rise to the question of “where the energy of our universe did come from?” The most natural answer to this question is the assumption that the energy itself was not something created and that zero-energy state went through phase transition keeping conservation of energy and generating negative and positive energy. Therefore, in order to offset the known positive energy of matter, negative energy (mass) is needed. 2. Rejection logic of negative mass is wrong. One of physics' fundamental principles, "lower energy state is associated with stability'' can be only applied to positive mass. However, both negative mass and negative energy level have been denied, as it has been wrongly applied to negative mass. F = - m_a (m_ >0) a = - (F/m_) When negative mass exists within potential with maximal and minimal points, different directions of force and acceleration should be considered for negative mass. The acceleration of negative mass is opposite to the direction of force. Therefore, the negative mass has harmonic oscillation at the maximum point and it is also stable at the maximum point. In the case of positive mass, it was stable at the minimum point at which energy is the low. However, in case of negative mass, stable equilibrium is a point of maximum value, not a point of minimum value. It is stable at a low energy state in the case of positive mass. However, it is stable at a high energy state in the case of negative mass. Due to this, "the problem of transition to minus infinite energy level (vacuum instability problem?)" does not occur, therefore negative mass(energy) and positive mass(energy) can exist stably in our universe. 3. Negative mass was found but … From the discovery of the accelerating expansion of the universe, people generally claim the existence of cosmological constants or vacuum energy. However, by borrowing their logic, the accelerating expansion of the universe can be interpreted as evidence for the existence of negative mass. In the discovery of accelerating expansion of universe in 1998, negative mass and negative energy were the first result of the field equation and Friedmann equations. Since those who received the first result had the wrong stereotype of negative mass and negative energy, so they rather modified the field equation. They resurrected the cosmological constant and modified the equation. Nobel lecture by Adam Riess : Nobel Lecture by Adam G. Riess Refer to 10m : 50s ~ ===== "Negative Mass? Actually the first indication of the discovery! " "Days later… What does this mean? There cannot be negative mass, but would Einstein’s Cosmological Constant explain this acceleration? " =====Let's remove his preoccupation and step back and look at the accelerating expansion of the universe. This is a phenomenon that can also be explained by the presence of negative masses.We have to know that not the field equation has disposed the negative mass, but our stereotype disposed that negative mass.And we have to know that rejection logic of negative energy (mass), which is the root of stereotype, is wrong. Negative mass is not dismissed through a fair validation process, so it needs to be reviewed. Moreover 1)We considered vacuum energy as the source of dark energy, but the current result of calculation shows difference of 10^120 times between the two values (observation and calculation), which is unprecedented even in the history of Physics. 2)The model also has a CCC(Cosmological Constant Coincidence) problem. 3)The notion created by the mainstream does not conserve energy. 4)It violates the principle of equivalence of inertial mass and gravitational mass, which is the basis of general relativity theory. Physicists and astronomers have a sense of rejection of negative mass (energy), so they use a trick to introduce negative pressure~ P = - ρ, the pressure term of the vacuum energy, suggests that the pressure P is the energy density -ρ, and its dimension is the energy density. The notion created by the mainstream has an inertial mass of +1(ρ), with gravitational mass of -2(ρ). Not only different signs, but different values. It violates the principle of equivalence of inertial mass and gravitational mass, which is the basis of general relativity theory. (-2ρ) = (ρ + 3P) = (ρ +3(-ρ)) = (-2ρ) Their rejection of negative mass has created this logic or trick. If we accepted the concept of negative mass, we did not have to make these logic or trick. Anyway, negative mass (energy) is a valid solution for accelerating expansion of the universe. And the negative mass (energy) can also explain the dark matter effect. Most people think that dark matter and dark energy are completely different phenomena and therefore have different sources. Since one is an attractive term and the other is a repulsive term, we generally think that two properties are difficult to come from one source. However, the source of dark matter and dark energy is one, and it is the negative mass! 4. Dark matter is Negative mass Negative mass is an object whose existence is required by the law of the conservation of energy. The fundamental properties of negative mass can explain important characteristics of dark matter. 4–1. Additional centripetal force effect Centripetal force effect that negative mass outside the galaxy creates inside it If negative mass(energy) and positive mass(energy) were came into being together at the beginning of universe, since positive masses have attractive gravitational effects with each other, so it forms stars and galaxy. However, negative masses have repulsive gravitational effects towards each other, so it cannot form any giant structure and may spread out almost uniformly across the whole area of universe. Owing to the effect of negative mass and positive mass, negative mass disappears near massive positive mass structures (such as the galaxy, etc.) after meeting positive mass. However, negative mass, which came into existence at the beginning of universe, can still exist in a vacuum state outside of general galaxy. One of problems regarding movement of negative mass, which researchers are likely to misunderstand is that if there are negative mass particles around the earth (or galaxy), large positive mass, they may not fly to the universe, but freely fall to the earth (or galaxy). Because the acceleration is determined by the magnitude of the other's mass. Thus negative masses are clustered outside positive mass galaxy or cluster of positive mass galaxies. Figure. The structure of the galaxy surrounded by negative mass that is distributed equally.(fig. a)) The white area is the area where negative mass almost does not exist.(fig. a)) Let's examine the effect of the centripetal force of negative mass that is outside the galaxy on mass m, which is located within the galaxy. 1) If we assume that the empty space is filled with both negative mass and positive mass of the same density then, Total energy of the white empty space = 0 = ( + mc^2 ) + ( - mc^2 ) = 0 2) Negative mass is now uniformly distributed over the whole area so the effect of negative mass on mass m becomes 0. (fig. b)) 3) The remaining positive mass is distributed over the white area at the density of negative mass. (fig. c)) Gravity that uniformly distributes positive mass works on positive mass m located on radius r is worked upon only by the distribution of mass within radius r. -Shell Theorem.(fig. d)) Therefore, the effect of negative mass that remains outside of the galaxy is compressive to the distribution of positive mass within the radius r in the galaxy. This means that the dark matter, consisting of negative mass outside galaxy, has additional effect of centripetal force on stars within the galaxy. This effect suggests that the further from the center of the galaxy, the more mass effect exists and agrees with the current situation where the further from the center of the galaxy, the more dark matter exists. Consider a thin uniform circular ring of radius a and negative mass M. A test mass m is placed in the plane of the ring. If r << a, This model explains the presence of additional gravitational effects in the galaxy and the reason why the dark matter is not found on the earth or in the vicinity of the solar system. *Recent XENO1T experiments fail to detect WIMP. https://www.space.com/40766-dark-matter-particles-smaller-than-thought.html?utm_source=quora&utm_medium=referral In this model, dark matter (negative mass) exists outside the galaxy, and there is only a gravitational effect in the galaxy that is not affected by the local gravitational source (such as solar system) in the galaxy. We observed only the effect of matter in the Earth. However, it is presumed that the observation of the gravitational effect of dark matter and dark energy at the galactic scale or above, is due to the existence of negative energy and negative mass outside the galactic structure. 4) The model above is a principle explanation. We assumed a uniform distribution for simple calculations, but in reality, the density of negative mass is higher as it is closer to galaxy or galaxy cluster, and is lower as it is farther. If the density of the negative mass changes to 1 /r^2 or the distribution of the negative mass corresponds to the isothermal sphere, the V = constant expression can also be satisfied. Moreover, axisymmetric distribution due to rotation of the galaxy should be also considered. It is also possible to consider repulsive force affected by negative mass as well as negative mass’s free fall onto the center of the galaxy. 5) Computer simulation If the negative mass is disposed at the outline, the positive mass vibrates. Therefore a kind of centripetal force exists. This corresponds to the "centripetal force” when considering rotation of the galaxy. 4–2. Negative energy (mass) does not have positive energy to produce charges, so is unlikely to have electromagnetic interaction. Since all charge Q is a set of infinitesimal charge dQs and each dQ is electromagnetic source, too, there exists electrostatic potential energy among each of dQs. (When charge Q is present, is there an electrostatic potential energy? Think about it ~ ● = ◐ + ◑ Q = (1/2)Q+(1/2)Q : Since there is a distance between two charges (Q/2), there is an electrostatic potential energy.) However, electrostatic self-energy has positive values for both positive and negative charges. Positive energy (mass) can has charges, since a part of its positive energy or mass is able to be transformed into electrostatic self-energy of charges. However, negative energy (mass) does not have positive energy to produce charges, so it is very unlikely to have charges. This inference suggests that negative energy is unlikely have charges, because electrostatic self-energy is positive mass (energy), which provides an evidence about the fact that electromagnetic interaction does not occur. This corresponds to characteristics required for the dark matter, and also gives some explanations to “why does the dark matter not have electromagnetic interaction?'” 4–3. Repulsive gravity ensuring almost even distribution and lower interaction of dark matter. If dark matter is exist in the galaxy, dark matter will be affected by the distribution of stars and interstellar gas in the galaxy. That is, the density of dark matter around the solar system will be higher than the average of the galaxy. The existing CDM model suggests that there is a local distribution of dark matter around the local gravitational source (such as solar system). The existing CDM models argue that dark matters are almost evenly distributed as they only have gravitational interaction, except for electromagnetic one, even though dark matters are five times or hundreds times more than other masses. However, is this process true? There are more certain explanations and rules in the model of negative mass. Positive masses have attractive gravitational effects with each other, so it forms stars and galaxy. However, negative masses have repulsive gravitational effects towards each other, so it cannot form any giant structure and may spread out almost uniformly across the whole area of universe. Also, negative mass exists outside the galaxy, and there is only a gravitational effect inside the galaxy. This provides strong explanations to the phenomenon that current dark matters do not strongly interact with each other, but are almost evenly distributed. In this model, dark matter (negative mass) exists outside the galaxy, and there is only a gravitational effect in the galaxy that is not affected by the local gravitational source (such as solar system) in the galaxy. 4-4. Gravitational lens effect ~~~~ 4-5. Accelerating expansion of the universe can be explained with negative mass. ~~~~ #Paper : Dark Matter is Negative mass! https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324525352 Edited June 2, 2018 by icarus2 -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiot Posted June 2, 2018 Share Posted June 2, 2018 5 hours ago, icarus2 said: Positive energy (mass) can has charges, since a part of its positive energy or mass is able to be transformed into electrostatic self-energy of charges. You have allowed your speculation to run away with you by this stage of your presentation. Talking of speculation, why is this not in speculations, where it belongs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted June 2, 2018 Share Posted June 2, 2018 Quote Dark matter is Negative mass! Obviously not. The whole reason that dark matter is proposed is to provide the missing mass in and around galaxies. This requires it to have normal (positive) mass. It causes gravitational lensing, which requires it to have normal (positive) mass. So your idea is dead in the water. Which is good because it means I don't have to wade through your incoherent and error filled nonsense. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icarus2 Posted June 2, 2018 Author Share Posted June 2, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, studiot said: You have allowed your speculation to run away with you by this stage of your presentation. Talking of speculation, why is this not in speculations, where it belongs? Considering the initial state of the universe, the most natural state is that the state changes from a state in which something does not exist to a state in which something exists. Also, we have observed pair production due to the collision (or interaction) of photon with atomic nucleus. Such phenomena suggest that the process of pair production exists where the charge Q does not exist. There was no charge before the collision (or interaction). There was no charge before pair production. Therefore, we must examine whether when negative and positive energy (mass) exist, each of them can has charges. And the electrostatic self-energy states that positive energy is needed for the charge to exist. ============ 4-4. Gravitational lens effect by negative mass Generally, it is possible to examine the existence of dark matter with the existence of additional mass with the effect of gravitational lensing. If negative mass is dark matter, so if we try to examine the effect of gravitational lensing, previously the gravity between positive mass is attraction, so it has the shape of convex lens to collect within the form, whereas the force between negative mass and positive mass is repulsion, so a set of massive negative mass can make the effect that distorts observation target in the form of concave lens. In order to observe gravitational lens effects due to negative mass in the universe, the negative mass should independently constitute large mass. However, it is not possible, since the negative masses have repulsive gravitational interaction with each other. Therefore, it is difficult for us to observe gravitational lens effects independently caused by negative mass. However, there are spaces in which negative masses are concentrated, in the universe. They are in the vicinity of the galaxy or the cluster of galaxies, which consist of positive masses, because of attractive gravitational effects of large positive mass on negative mass. Fig.7. Concave Gravitational lensing effect. The left side is the Gravitational lens effect that occurs when the galaxy is surrounded by negative mass. The right side is Gravitational lens effect that occurs when negative mass exists alone. But in the model of dark matter with negative mass in this study, negative mass is distributed out of galaxy, not within galaxy. Therefore, the effect of concave gravitational lensing by negative mass out of galaxy will be presented to an observer on the earth in the same form as the effect of convex gravitational lensing which galaxy works. For the situation presented on the left when observing the light on the earth which passed through galaxy surrounded with negative mass, this study suggested that there is invisible dark matter in galaxy, and owing to this gravity it can be happened owing to the effect of convex lens, it means, if there is any matter on the left and right side of galaxy that plays a role of concave lens, it is difficult to classify convex lens and its form. ~~~~~ It is possible that gravitational lens effects by negative mass are similar with those by positive mass. However, according to this model, the formula for gravitational lens based on the existing positive mass may be accurate for the scale of each fixed star, but inaccurate for the scale more than the galaxy. 4-5. Accelerating expansion of the universe can be explained with negative mass. Negative mass engenders antigravity which is consistent with effects of dark energy that allows for accelerating expansion of the universe. Friedman equation can be induced from 00 component of field equation. But we can also induce this from conservation of energy in classical mechanics, which helps capture the situation definitely. What we are looking for in cosmology is one attraction term and one repulsion term. If a negative mass exists, we can get it. If negative mass and positive mass coexist, gravitational potential energy consists of the following three items. U_{--} : attraction term U_{-+} : repulsion term The present cosmological constant can be obtained by adding potential U_Λ = - (1/6)Λ m(cr)^2 to mechanical energy conservation equation. If we insert "new potential energy term" into mechanical energy conservation equation, we will get a dark energy term and dark matter term. At this time, let's insert the above new gravitational potential energy term into it. If U_{++}, U_{--}, U_{-+} has a ratio(4.9% : 26.8% : 68.3%) between each other, maybe, we will estimate that ratio of energy density such as 4.9% : 26.8% : 68.3% exist. This model can prove the energy composition(Matter : Dark matter : Dark energy) ratio of the universe and CCC (Cosmological Constant Coincident) Problem. Average of WMAP and Planck - Matter : Dark Matter : Dark Energy = 4.75% : 25.05% : 70.20% Average of Pair Creation Model - Matter : Dark Matter : Dark Energy = 4.75% : 25.00% : 70.25% We do not know the origin of dark matter and dark energy yet. We do not yet know what the source of the (gravitational?) phenomenon we observed. We are not in a position to have a firm belief(such as dark matter is positive mass). Therefore, we must hold judgment and wait a little longer. 1.Dark energy https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263468413 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/287217009 2. Dark matter https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324525352 Edited June 2, 2018 by icarus2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiot Posted June 2, 2018 Share Posted June 2, 2018 30 minutes ago, icarus2 said: Therefore, we must examine whether when negative and positive energy (mass) exist, each of them can has charges. And the electrostatic self-energy states that positive energy is needed for the charge to exist. Please explain what you mean by 'electrostatic self energy'? Edit Please note that I haven't flatly rejected negative mass, though I do take issue with your more outrageous suggestions. You might like to know that negative mass dates back to the early 1500s when Paracelcus proposed it as an explanation for the newly discovered fact that metals gain weight when calcined. This was a suprising fact to the wisdom dating back two thousand years to when it was known that calcining limestone cased the stone to loose weight, and that is indeed where the term calcining originated. The proposal ran that since many substances were observed to give off a gas and loose weight when heated, metals must therefore give off something with negative weight. Of course, we have a better explanation today. Negative mass came to the fore again in the early 20th century when offered as an explanation for the 'anomalous Hall effect' where charge particles appeared to move the opposite way to which they were pushed. Again we have a better explanation (though not yet a full predictive one) today. Engineers and scientists have known for a couple of hundred years, of a proceedure called virtual work. This mathematical sleight of hand can be very useful in substantially shortening calculations, but it remains just that. A mathematical device. So too negative mass may ease som calculation in cosmology, but that does not make it de facto correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted June 2, 2018 Share Posted June 2, 2018 (edited) If DM was negative mass then the NFW profile would not work for galaxy rotation curves in the first place... enough said to exlain that DM cannot have negative mass are you perhas referring to DE instead which is a different entity ? Your correct Studiot this thread does belong under speculation however I wish to challenge this thread so will wait for another mod staff member to move it. Edit: I see another mod moved this so here is a question. How can either DM or DE have negative energy when both has positive energy density? Please show this using the energy/momentum equation under SR/GR Edited June 2, 2018 by Mordred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiot Posted June 2, 2018 Share Posted June 2, 2018 12 hours ago, studiot said: 17 hours ago, icarus2 said: Positive energy (mass) can has charges, since a part of its positive energy or mass is able to be transformed into electrostatic self-energy of charges. You have allowed your speculation to run away with you by this stage of your presentation. Are you referring to this? Quote Tolman was the first person to document and explain how a closed universe could equal zero energy. He explained how all mass energy is positive and all gravitational energy is negative and they cancel each other out, leading to a universe of zero energy. Richard C Tolman : Relativity, Thermodynamics and Cosmology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted June 2, 2018 Share Posted June 2, 2018 13 hours ago, icarus2 said: the negative masses have repulsive gravitational interaction with each other. Since the equation is F = -GMm/r^2, how do you get a different sign when the masses are negative? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncool Posted June 2, 2018 Share Posted June 2, 2018 43 minutes ago, swansont said: Since the equation is F = -GMm/r^2, how do you get a different sign when the masses are negative? The forces may be the same, but wouldn't the accelerations be reversed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icarus2 Posted June 4, 2018 Author Share Posted June 4, 2018 (edited) On 2018. 6. 2. at 6:38 PM, studiot said: Please explain what you mean by 'electrostatic self energy'? The concept of electrostatic self-energy is the total of electrostatic potential energy possessed by a certain charge Q itself. Since Some charge Q is a set of infinitesimal charges dQ, it involves the existence of electrostatic or electric potential energy among these dQs and is the value of adding up these. The concept of electrostatic self - energy is the same as the concept of gravitational self - energy. Instead of charge, a mass enters, and electrostatic potential energy enters instead of gravitational potential energy. On 2018. 6. 2. at 6:38 PM, studiot said: Please note that I haven't flatly rejected negative mass, though I do take issue with your more outrageous suggestions. You might like to know that negative mass dates back to the early 1500s when Paracelcus proposed it as an explanation for the newly discovered fact that metals gain weight when calcined. This was a suprising fact to the wisdom dating back two thousand years to when it was known that calcining limestone cased the stone to loose weight, and that is indeed where the term calcining originated. The proposal ran that since many substances were observed to give off a gas and loose weight when heated, metals must therefore give off something with negative weight. Of course, we have a better explanation today. Negative mass came to the fore again in the early 20th century when offered as an explanation for the 'anomalous Hall effect' where charge particles appeared to move the opposite way to which they were pushed. Again we have a better explanation (though not yet a full predictive one) today. Engineers and scientists have known for a couple of hundred years, of a proceedure called virtual work. This mathematical sleight of hand can be very useful in substantially shortening calculations, but it remains just that. A mathematical device. So too negative mass may ease som calculation in cosmology, but that does not make it de facto correct. You mobilized to the example of hundreds of years ago for your logic. Hmm~ Because it was a failed method for hundreds of years, will it fail again? If someone uses your logic, This method has been successful since thousands of years, therefore, it is highly likely to succeed this time too. This method is based on conservation laws and is based on successful methods in many problems. At the birth of the universe, only positive mass creation is contrary to the law of conservation of energy. And, analyzing a similar event, such as the birth of a charge, the pair creation of negative and positive can be seen as a reasonable inference. So if someone borrow your logic, negative mass model is likely to be 99% successful.^^ On 2018. 6. 2. at 6:38 PM, studiot said: So too negative mass may ease som calculation in cosmology, but that does not make it de facto correct. You are merely revealing the antagonism of negative mass. There are some differences between past events and present event. 1. The field equation and Friedmann equations are made independent of the negative mass. However the negative mass is the result of the field equation and Friedmann equations. 2.The accelerating expansion of the universe suggests the repulsion or anti-gravity. It is very likely to be anti-gravity because the phenomenon occurs at the scale of gravity dominant. 3.Nearly flat space-time suggests the presence of negative energy to offset the positive mass energy. 4.The old people did not think of some important characteristics of the negative mass. On 2018. 6. 3. at 5:01 AM, studiot said: On 2018. 6. 3. at 5:01 AM, studiot said: On 2018. 6. 2. at 11:25 AM, icarus2 said: Positive energy (mass) can has charges, since a part of its positive energy or mass is able to be transformed into electrostatic self-energy of charges. Are you referring to this? The above reasoning is not a quote from another person, but my reasoning and my argument. On 2018. 6. 3. at 5:01 AM, studiot said: On 2018. 6. 3. at 5:01 AM, studiot said: Tolman was the first person to document and explain how a closed universe could equal zero energy. He explained how all mass energy is positive and all gravitational energy is negative and they cancel each other out, leading to a universe of zero energy. Richard C Tolman : Relativity, Thermodynamics and Cosmology. I did not know whether Tolman had made such an assertion. The information I know https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-energy_universe The zero-energy universe theory originated in 1973, when Edward Tryon proposed in the journal Nature that the universe emerged from a large-scale quantum fluctuation of vacuum energy, resulting in its positive mass-energy being exactly balanced by its negative gravitational potential energy. Regardless of Tolman being the pioneer of the zero energy universe, their argument is a bit problematic. I can propose two models as an example for zero energy universe model. Model-1. Model that considers gravitational potential energy as negative energy. Model-2. Model that considers negative mass as negative energy. Richard Tolman, Edward Tryon, Stephen Hawking and Alan Guth… assert that positive mass energy could be offset by gravitational potential energy only, like in Model-1. However, Model-1 has some disadvantages. Problem-1. It is possible for the negative gravitational potential energy to offset the positive mass energy. By the way~ Looking for the size in which total gravitational potential energy becomes equal to total rest mass energy by comparing both, This equation means that if mass is uniformly distributed within the radius R_{gs}, gravitational self-energy for such an object equals mass energy in size. So, in case of such an object, mass energy and gravitational self-energy can be completely offset while total energy is zero. Since total energy of such an object is 0. Comparing R_{gs} with R_S, the radius of Schwarzschild black hole, This means that there exists the point where gravitational potential energy becomes equal to mass energy within the radius of black hole, and that, supposing a uniform distribution, the value exists at the point 0.3R_S, a 30% level of the black hole radius. In other words, in order for Model-1 to be established, our universe must exist in a black hole. For some people, this is a problem. *Solution of the Singularity Problem of Black Hole https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313314666 Problem-2. The universe is expanding. The universe is expanding. Mass term +Mc^2 is constant, whereas R increases, and so the absolute value of gravitational potential energy |- (3/5)(GM^2/R) | gets smaller and finally energy state of 0 is broken. In general, the kinetic energy is small compared to the mass energy and can be ignored. And, it's a positive energy. Anyway, focusing on the gravitational potential energy~ To look at how equation is valid by unfolding the formula, Mc^2 - (3/5)(GM^2/R)= 0 M = (5/3)(c^2/G)R M' = (5/3)(c^2/G)R' In this model-1, to establish energy conservation law(Zero energy state) while the universe is expanding, energy needs to be increased, which increases R of the universe. (Bigbang + Steady-state cosmology) In my opinion, this is a fatal problem in Model-1. So, I have a doubt in Model-1. By the way, If a newly appeared energy has antigravity or negative pressure characteristics, it can be used as the model that can account for dark energy. So, I made a toy model. *Size and Expansion of the Universe in Zero Energy Universe https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309786718 Edited June 4, 2018 by icarus2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 (edited) You may support the zero energy universe but its obvious your not looking at it properly. Distinquish between the equations of state for matter, radiation and Lambda. Expansion involves the thermodynamic laws which I do not see being applied anywhere in your modelling. The zero energy universe has been around for quite some time. It has problems in requiring Euclidean coordinates and pseudo tensors however that isn't too great a problem. mass can be negative to some non zero baseline however it still has a positive energy density.. and no we do not need a BH to explain the LCDM model which works quite well...this has been attempted before as well but fails at the early large scale structure formation. Edited June 4, 2018 by Mordred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icarus2 Posted June 4, 2018 Author Share Posted June 4, 2018 On 2018. 6. 3. at 7:49 AM, swansont said: Since the equation is F = -GMm/r^2, how do you get a different sign when the masses are negative? Because the inertial mass is negative, ~ 1.The motion of negative mass and positive mass Negative mass is accelerated in the direction of positive mass, and positive mass is accelerated in the direction to be far away from negative mass. The direction of acceleration a_1 worked on negative mass -m_1 is -r^, so -m_1 moves in the direction of reducing distance r, and the direction of acceleration a_2 worked on positive mass +m_2 is +r^, so positive mass +m_2 is accelerated in the direction that distance r increases, namely the direction of being far away from negative mass. If the absolute value of positive mass is bigger than that of negative mass, they will meet within finite time(attractive effect), and if the absolute value of positive mass is smaller than that of negative mass, the distance between them will be bigger, and they cannot meet(repulsive effect). The type of force is repulsion, so the potential energy has positive value. This property is very important. Negative masses are gravitational bounded to massive positive masses (Galaxy or cluster of galaxies) for massive positive mass has attractive effect on negative mass. If there are negative mass particles around the earth (or galaxy), large positive mass, they may not fly to the universe, but fall to the earth (or galaxy). Because the acceleration is determined by the magnitude of the other's mass. 2.The motion of negative mass and negative mass Both two objects are accelerated in the direction of + r^ which extends distance r, so as time passes, the distance between them is greater than initially given condition, and the force between them is attraction, but the effect is repulsive. The force is attraction (-Gm_1m_2/r^2), thus the potential energy between them has negative value. 3. See the following video produced to help understand movement of negative mass. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZtS7cBMIc4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YaDinghus Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 37 minutes ago, icarus2 said: Negative mass is accelerated in the direction of positive mass, and positive mass is accelerated in the direction to be far away from negative mass Basically what you are saying is that positive mass attracts negative mass, but negative mass repels positive mass. That doesn't seem logical to me. After all, both gain potential the closer they get - according to your own math - and that means they repel each other Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 47 minutes ago, icarus2 said: Because the inertial mass is negative, ~ 1.The motion of negative mass and positive mass Negative mass is accelerated in the direction of positive mass, and positive mass is accelerated in the direction to be far away from negative mass. The direction of acceleration a_1 worked on negative mass -m_1 is -r^, so -m_1 moves in the direction of reducing distance r, and the direction of acceleration a_2 worked on positive mass +m_2 is +r^, so positive mass +m_2 is accelerated in the direction that distance r increases, namely the direction of being far away from negative mass. If the absolute value of positive mass is bigger than that of negative mass, they will meet within finite time(attractive effect), and if the absolute value of positive mass is smaller than that of negative mass, the distance between them will be bigger, and they cannot meet(repulsive effect). The type of force is repulsion, so the potential energy has positive value. This property is very important. Negative masses are gravitational bounded to massive positive masses (Galaxy or cluster of galaxies) for massive positive mass has attractive effect on negative mass. If there are negative mass particles around the earth (or galaxy), large positive mass, they may not fly to the universe, but fall to the earth (or galaxy). Because the acceleration is determined by the magnitude of the other's mass. 2.The motion of negative mass and negative mass Both two objects are accelerated in the direction of + r^ which extends distance r, so as time passes, the distance between them is greater than initially given condition, and the force between them is attraction, but the effect is repulsive. The force is attraction (-Gm_1m_2/r^2), thus the potential energy between them has negative value. 3. See the following video produced to help understand movement of negative mass. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZtS7cBMIc4 So your statement that they are repulsed is incorrect. The force is that of attraction, i.e. the force is toward the other mass, but because the mass is negative the acceleration is away from the other mass. (i.e. F and a are in opposite directions when m<0) It would be interesting to see a treatment of energy in these situations. U = -GMm/r If both are negative masses, the PE is negative for some separation r. But they accelerate away from each other. KE increase, and PE becomes less negative, so it, too increases. Total energy has increased. Where does this energy come from? I will leave the case of one positive and one negative mass as an exercise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiot Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, icarus2 said: On 02/06/2018 at 10:38 AM, studiot said: Please explain what you mean by 'electrostatic self energy'? The concept of electrostatic self-energy is the total of electrostatic potential energy possessed by a certain charge Q itself. Since Some charge Q is a set of infinitesimal charges dQ, it involves the existence of electrostatic or electric potential energy among these dQs and is the value of adding up these. The concept of electrostatic self - energy is the same as the concept of gravitational self - energy. Instead of charge, a mass enters, and electrostatic potential energy enters instead of gravitational potential energy. This is complete and utter nonsense. But since you chose to sneer at the rest of my input, even though I was the only one who has not flatly rejected your propositions, I will leave you to work out for yourself the plainly obvious reasons why you can't compare an assemblage of charges to and assemblage of masses. Edited June 4, 2018 by studiot 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted June 4, 2018 Share Posted June 4, 2018 (edited) I'm still waiting for some appropriate formula to be applied. Why does everyone that wishes to overturn some physics theory always use and try to modify the most rudimentary equations that while involved never have the required detail ? When are you going to place your theory under a geometry treatment ? of course if you did then you would come to the same conclusion made by Strange earlier... On 2018-06-02 at 3:59 AM, Strange said: Obviously not. The whole reason that dark matter is proposed is to provide the missing mass in and around galaxies. This requires it to have normal (positive) mass. It causes gravitational lensing, which requires it to have normal (positive) mass. So your idea is dead in the water. Of course if you looked at the NFW profile and compared the rotation curve of the Milky way you would have realized that the missing mass that DM adds (POSITIVE MASS) is 10 times greater than the baryonic mass. [latex]\rho(r)=\frac{\rho_o}{\frac{r}{r_S}(1+\frac{r}{r_s})^2} [/latex] If DM was repulsive those galaxies would never have formed in the first place. There is great support that DM seeds the first stages of LSS formations. It does so through positive mass density. A simple application of vectors would have told you that. However the NFW profile is one of the most commonly accepted best matches for galaxy rotation curves of spiral galaxies. Notice the formula required a positive energy density to make that match ?????? A negative mass DM would have completely different results than what is observed in nature but again simple vectors would have told you that in the first place ie force applied in the WRONG directions.....enough said on that lol edit well not quite, observational evidence suggests that DM does not exert pressure its equation of state is w=0. Just as any other matter... You can forget DE as well as observational evidence supports a scalar field. ie NO inherent directional component it neither attracts nor repels on average in any direction... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equation_of_state_(cosmology) the last formula is the scalar modelling formula which equates kinetic energy terms to the potential field energy density terms in terms of an EOS. (thermodynamic application of the ideal gas laws under the FRW metric fluid equation ) also on that link (acceleration oft also called deceleration equation)> the required mathematics would need to include the FRW metric so best start familiarizing yourself with them. (ITS under that geometry treatment I keep mentioning ) Then again much like many others you probably never did bother studying what the mainstream studies include in terms of DM and DE. So how do you know if your model is better or worse if you cannot compare to mainstream under the math and to observational evidence ? Edited June 4, 2018 by Mordred 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncool Posted June 5, 2018 Share Posted June 5, 2018 13 hours ago, swansont said: So your statement that they are repulsed is incorrect. The force is that of attraction, i.e. the force is toward the other mass, but because the mass is negative the acceleration is away from the other mass. (i.e. F and a are in opposite directions when m<0) It would be interesting to see a treatment of energy in these situations. U = -GMm/r If both are negative masses, the PE is negative for some separation r. But they accelerate away from each other. KE increase, and PE becomes less negative, so it, too increases. Total energy has increased. Where does this energy come from? I will leave the case of one positive and one negative mass as an exercise. I a honestly uncertain here as to whether you are making a deliberate error here to test icarus2, but you have made an error. There is nothing wrong with the idea of negative mass on a purely mathematical level, and conservation of energy in a situation like the one you posed can be expressed purely mathematically. There may be physical problems (and I think there are), but purely theoretically negative mass does not contradict any mechanical conservation laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted June 5, 2018 Share Posted June 5, 2018 (edited) read carefully the kinematics being described by Swansont. He is applying specific relations to the conservation law of energy/momentum (specifically the KE and PE terms) Edited June 5, 2018 by Mordred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YaDinghus Posted June 5, 2018 Share Posted June 5, 2018 5 hours ago, Mordred said: You can forget DE as well as observational evidence supports a scalar field Can you link me to some in-depth material on this? I've had some thoughts on DE recently and I could use some non-light reading for the occasional day off. While this thread is about dark matter, I think other contributors might also be interested in this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncool Posted June 5, 2018 Share Posted June 5, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, Mordred said: read carefully the kinematics being described by Swansont. He is applying specific relations to the conservation law of energy/momentum (specifically the KE and PE terms) I have, too, although I'm not spelling it out here in case swansont was trying to get more information from icarus2. Suffice to say: any algebraic mechanical equation satisfied for arbitrary positive masses remains true when one or more masses are negative. This is a mathematical fact about real numbers (from algebraic geometry). Conservation of kinetic plus potential energy is such an equation. It has some unexpected consequences that are likely to be unphysical, but I repeat that the math does work. Edited June 5, 2018 by uncool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icarus2 Posted June 5, 2018 Author Share Posted June 5, 2018 (edited) On 2018. 6. 3. at 1:48 AM, Mordred said: If DM was negative mass then the NFW profile would not work for galaxy rotation curves in the first place... Sorry, but at this point I do not agree with your claim. I have not proven that a negative mass model can yield an NFW profile, but the result of the negative mass is not proven to be different from the NFW profile. This is because the density profile has not been calculated precisely through the negative mass model. Therefore, I disagree with the above confirmation at this point. 1. I have explained in the text that negative mass can provide centripetal force. 2. The computer simulation results show that a centripetal force effect exists when the negative mass is located outside. 3. The calculation of the paper is a proof that the centripetal effect exists, which is derived from assuming a uniform density. Below are some actual situations to consider. On 2018. 6. 2. at 11:25 AM, icarus2 said: 4–1. Additional centripetal force effect ~~~~~ 4) The model above is a principle explanation. We assumed a uniform distribution for simple calculations, but in reality, the density of negative mass is higher as it is closer to galaxy or galaxy cluster, and is lower as it is farther. If the density of the negative mass changes to 1 /r^2 or the distribution of the negative mass corresponds to the isothermal sphere, the V = constant expression can also be satisfied. Moreover, axisymmetric distribution due to rotation of the galaxy should be also considered. It is also possible to consider repulsive force affected by negative mass as well as negative mass’s free fall onto the center of the galaxy. 5) Computer simulation https://youtu.be/MZtS7cBMIc4?t=362 If the negative mass is disposed at the outline, the positive mass vibrates. Therefore a kind of centripetal force exists. This corresponds to the "centripetal force” when considering rotation of the galaxy. 4. The density of dark matter by the negative mass model should be determined by placing the profile of the negative mass outside the galaxy, and then calculating the density equation of the centripetal force component (the density equation substituted with the positive mass). By the way, I seem intuitively difficult to calculate. So, I think that someone with a better knowledge than me should do the actual calculations to see if they match or are inconsistent with the NFW profile. I also did not try the actual calculation because the calculations seem complicated. Do you calculate the density profile with a negative mass model and can you prove that the density equation obtained is clearly different from the NFW equation? The possibility has not yet been ruled out. 8 hours ago, Mordred said: If DM was repulsive those galaxies would never have formed in the first place. There is great support that DM seeds the first stages of LSS formations. It does so through positive mass density. I do not think so. If the negative mass exerts an additional centripetal force effect on the gas cloud of positive mass, it will naturally promote the formation of galaxies. The same or similar result can be obtained. Edited June 5, 2018 by icarus2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted June 5, 2018 Share Posted June 5, 2018 25 minutes ago, icarus2 said: I have not proven that a negative mass model can yield an NFW profile Then there is no reason for anyone to take your guesswork seriously. Come back when you have model that works. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
icarus2 Posted June 5, 2018 Author Share Posted June 5, 2018 (edited) 19 hours ago, YaDinghus said: Basically what you are saying is that positive mass attracts negative mass, but negative mass repels positive mass. Right. 19 hours ago, YaDinghus said: That doesn't seem logical to me. After all, both gain potential the closer they get - according to your own math - and that means they repel each other ???????? The acceleration is determined by the magnitude of the mass of the other party. So whether they are near or far depends on the mass of the other. The motion properties of negative mass are already understood and verified by many scholars. Negative mass conforms to the law of conservation of energy and the law of conservation of momentum. It would be nice to see the above equations and videos again. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZtS7cBMIc4 19 hours ago, swansont said: So your statement that they are repulsed is incorrect. Because I do not speak English well, there can be many mistakes in English expression. I am so sorry. It's not a big deal, I said "repulsive gravitational interaction", not "repulsion". Also, in the case of other researchers, the expression is almost similar to the above. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_mass The following sentence is presumed to be a sentence written by Sir Hermann Bondi ===== - Positive mass attracts both other positive masses and negative masses. - Negative mass repels both other negative masses and positive masses. ===== 1) By describing the situation on the basis of active mass or acceleration 2) There is a situation where the characteristics of force and motion do not match. It depends on whether the description is based on the force definition formula or the motion characteristics. Anyway, It's not a big deal. 19 hours ago, swansont said: It would be interesting to see a treatment of energy in these situations. U = -GMm/r If both are negative masses, the PE is negative for some separation r. But they accelerate away from each other. KE increase, and PE becomes less negative, so it, too increases. Total energy has increased. Where does this energy come from? I will leave the case of one positive and one negative mass as an exercise. “KE increase” is wrong! In the negative mass model, the kinetic energy has a negative value of (1/2) (- m)v ^2. Therefore, as the speed of negative mass increases, kinetic energy decreases. So, there is no problem at all. For negative mass model, you need add "-m" to all expressions that have a mass m. Negative mass has both negative inertial and gravitational mass. You can know it from the description of the negative mass of the wiki. ======= He(Hermann Bondi) pointed out that this does not entail a logical contradiction, as long as all three forms of mass are negative, but that the assumption of negative mass involves some counter-intuitive form of motion. ~~~~~~ ======= 1 hour ago, Strange said: Then there is no reason for anyone to take your guesswork seriously. Come back when you have model that works. There are a lot of arguments in my paper. Although there is no proof of the NFW profile, the rest does not disappear ~ Edited June 5, 2018 by icarus2 -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YaDinghus Posted June 5, 2018 Share Posted June 5, 2018 1 hour ago, icarus2 said: Right. ???????? The acceleration is determined by the magnitude of the mass of the other party. So whether they are near or far depends on the mass of the other. The motion properties of negative mass are already understood and verified by many scholars. Negative mass conforms to the law of conservation of energy and the law of conservation of momentum. It would be nice to see the above equations and videos again. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZtS7cBMIc4 Because I do not speak English well, there can be many mistakes in English expression. I am so sorry. It's not a big deal, I said "repulsive gravitational interaction", not "repulsion". Also, in the case of other researchers, the expression is almost similar to the above. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_mass The following sentence is presumed to be a sentence written by Sir Hermann Bondi ===== - Positive mass attracts both other positive masses and negative masses. - Negative mass repels both other negative masses and positive masses. ===== 1) By describing the situation on the basis of active mass or acceleration 2) There is a situation where the characteristics of force and motion do not match. It depends on whether the description is based on the force definition formula or the motion characteristics. Anyway, It's not a big deal. “KE increase” is wrong! In the negative mass model, the kinetic energy has a negative value of (1/2) (- m)v ^2. Therefore, as the speed of negative mass increases, kinetic energy decreases. So, there is no problem at all. For negative mass model, you need add "-m" to all expressions that have a mass m. Negative mass has both negative inertial and gravitational mass. You can know it from the description of the negative mass of the wiki. ======= He(Hermann Bondi) pointed out that this does not entail a logical contradiction, as long as all three forms of mass are negative, but that the assumption of negative mass involves some counter-intuitive form of motion. ~~~~~~ ======= There are a lot of arguments in my paper. Although there is no proof of the NFW profile, the rest does not disappear ~ You've been leaving a lot of the wikipedia article on negative mass out - namely the parts that contradict your theory, and that's most of the article 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiot Posted June 5, 2018 Share Posted June 5, 2018 (edited) I see you 11 hours ago, Mordred said: Why does everyone that wishes to overturn some physics theory always use and try to modify the most rudimentary equations that while involved never have the required detail ? Whilst at the same time they usually seem to want to make things needlessly complicated, rather than check their ideas on simple completely known examples first. +1 icarus2 Why do you not want to show how you can compare gravity (positive or negative) with electrostatic effects? If you work it out you can see the differences as well as the similarities. But let us go back to your claim about negative mass. There are two distinct and separate effects of mass in Physics that can be modelled by force. Inertia and gravity. Now the forces are different. Inertia produces a directed line vector - the classic push or pull with a specific point of application and line of action. Gravity produces a distributed force a so called 'body force' So it is easy to see what happens when a body force is applied to a mass with a negative sign. Repulsion. But what happens to a classic line vector force for instance a poke with a stick, which is a contact force? A mass with a positive sign moves in the direction of the poke in response, as it is pushed by the stick But Which way do you think the mass with a negative sign moves in response to such a poke? Edited June 5, 2018 by studiot spelling 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts