Dark Matter Question

[foodchain]

If the universe originated with say the big bang why is dark energy and or matter so exotic compared to the rest of the universe. I mean to suggest that physical laws are constants of nature suggests a very strong homogenous universe then in regards to such Which connects with the big bang right? So basically I just don’t understand why dark matter and or dark energy happens to be so exotic then such as basically impossible to observe outside of us thinking it exists for various reasons.

[antimatter]

As far as I know, it's not exotic. In fact, Dark matter and dark energy make up most of the Universe.

[Klaynos]

Dark matter and dark energy are two completely different phenomena.

 

They are exotic compared to what effects our day to day lives...

[antimatter]

Who knows, perhaps our matter is the one that is exotic in the universe...

[Klaynos]

If you look at the numbers it is

[antimatter]

Numbers?!?!?!

[Klaynos]

The quantity of normal everyday atoms compared to neutrinos, photons, and dark matter...

[antimatter]

Ah.

I knew that.

Is there really that much dark matter compared to the other particles?

[Klaynos]

Off the top of my head I can't remember nor which set of course notes I've got it written down in :|

 

taking neutrinos as an example though, there's 2 or 3 in your thumb at any moment... the universe is packed full of em.... And ofcourse photons from the CMBR... dark matter I just can't remember though grrrr...

[antimatter]

But there is more dark matter than neutrinos?

Wow.

That's rather impressive.

[foodchain]

Well I think the observable universe is to be a product of the big bang if I have my facts in order, so I am just confused as to why the dark stuff is so different. I have read up of course at places like wiki and other locations on the net, but it lacks to me as my curiosity is just to much simply because its so exotic and or unknown really. As far as dark matter is that to be simply just say certain types of matter(with mass?) in bulk? As far for the energy aspect is that a vacuum effect or something to do with spacetime warping or what is dark energy really?

[antimatter]

What is dark energy?

The short answer: we don't really know.

the long answer: it's what we think keeps our universe growing.

IIRC

Edited June 7, 2008 by antimatter
Bad word choice

[Dark matter]

Dark Energy is linked to the big bang because it's what keeps the universe expanding in all directions.

[antimatter]

Well, we don't KNOW that for sure.

[merlin wood]

Well, we don't KNOW that for sure.

 

So dark energy and, I'd say, the right kind of dark matter - since it hasn't been directly detected and identified - could just be fill-ins for an altogether different kind of theory. And especially if, as the "axis of evil" in the CMBR suggests, cosmic inflation theory is wrong.

[antimatter]

Well, what do you mean by 'fill-ins'...cosmic inflation could be wrong, we just have no way of knowing.

Edited June 8, 2008 by antimatter

[foodchain]

I found this link at Nasa. I don’t know exactly how relevant it is.

 

"Now, in an extensive search of the local universe, astronomers say they have definitively found about half of the missing normal matter, called baryons, in the spaces between the galaxies. This important component of the universe is known as the “intergalactic medium,” or IGM, and it extends essentially throughout all of space, from just outside our Milky Way galaxy to the most distant regions of space observed by astronomers."

 

The link is modern as of 2008 is when its posted, here is the link with the rest of the story.

 

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/science/hst_img_20080520.html

[Gilded]

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/science/hst_img_20080520.html

 

"Astronomers caution that the missing baryonic matter is not to be confused with 'dark matter,' a mysterious and exotic form of matter that is only detected via its gravitational pull."

 

Hmm, I thought dark matter was simply a term used to refer to all matter that's "invisible" in the EM spectrum that could consist of any combination of particles (not excluding baryons), and thus wouldn't be completely "exotic" per se.

[antimatter]

Hm.

This is a rather interesting link I found about it. (Say hello to my new desktop background)

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/image_feature_827.html

[BumFluff]

I was looking for information regarding this subject after reading this post and came across this http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_matter.html which states that baryonic matter is very different than dark matter as dark matter is also known as non-baryonic matter.

[Klaynos]

Hmm, I thought dark matter was simply a term used to refer to all matter that's "invisible" in the EM spectrum that could consist of any combination of particles (not excluding baryons), and thus wouldn't be completely "exotic" per se.

 

It's called Dark because we don't know what it is.... so it's therefore exotic, it's quite unusual (read bloody odd) for massive matter to not be visible at any wavelength therefore I think it counts really as exotic... Although there was some talk of it being caused by neutrinos, current thoughts are I believe that there's just not enough of them to make up the mass and certainly the distribution required....

 

Actually, I've developed what I think is a quite well argued hypothesis that, from th observable natural evidence and (non-inflationary) Big Bang theory, gives a wide range of reasons to consider that a cause acts non-locally on the astronomical scale in addition to the forces, and which derives from a non-local hidden variables interpretation of quantum mechanics.

 

My account is not (yet) supported by any measurements, calculation or mathematical formulae I'm afraid, but I have been able to illustrate the action of a nonlocal cause using diagrams.

 

Diagrams without calculations or maths are meaningless.

 

So I assume to start with that the indeterminate Copenhagen type interpretation of quantum mechanics is wrong, whereas a causal Bohmian mechanics interpretation is at least essentially right. Quantum objects in motion are both laterally extended waves and particles each with a single definite trajectory. And the quantum wave has definite causal properties, with the wave behaviour of objects in motion being of a particular continuous form. Bohmian mechanics is a detailed and well developed theory that is consistent with a wide range of experimental ervidence, and decribes an additional cause called the quantum potential, as well as ridding quantum theory of the paradoxes arising from the Copenhagen interpretation.

 

Work from just the maths not the interpretation, it removes many difficulties and misunderstandings...

 

One can reasonably propose, therefore, that standard model quantum theory, which assumes the action of the forces alone, predicts everying but fundamentally explains nothing about how the form and organisation of matter is possible. So one may ask Could this be also be true of any cosmological theory that just assumes the action of the forces?

 

My own conclusion is that a detailed and systematic theory can be developed that sufficiently justifies and describes details of a cause that acts nonlocally both on the small and cosmic scale. While a universal property of this cause can be described as material form conserving. This cause thus acting so as to conserve the forms and organisation of both atoms and molecules despite the action of the forces as well as, in particular, spiral galaxies, but also galaxy clusters and cosmic voids.

 

Without maths you don't really have anything :|

[Dark matter]

Well, we don't KNOW that for sure.

 

We don't know almost anything for sure about Dark Energy. However, this is a very highly regarded theory.

[BhavinB]

We don't know almost anything for sure about Dark Energy. However, this is a very highly regarded theory.

 

Strange how that is though. I hope cosmologists and astronomers understand the tentative nature of these theories.

[foodchain]

Well the baryonic matter or hydrogen discovered could account for some of the massive amounts of matter missing from the universe. I wonder if the hydrogen has taken on any kind of a weird allotrope, that being said I wonder what is bonder with it even in a minor amounts. I know that complex organic molecules have been found in space along with combinations of carbon and titanium, titanium being physiologically inert(?) though as far as we understand does not appear promising though.

 

As for the dark matter I don’t know why this is not all the rave. Simply put if it exists it points to new physics as far as I am concerned simply because it does not interact with what is standard save gravity.

A monitored or observed collision of galactic clusters supposedly revealed massive amounts of dark matter, that upon impact simply kept going I guess. I think this was the bullet cluster? I think this data is also on the Nasa website.

 

Simply put you have normal matter which is standard model stuff, yet dark matter is not standard model stuff, thus why I think its exotic and a pointer to new stuff.

[Phi for All]

Merlin Wood's hypothesis and its replies have been split off, moved to Speculations and can be found by clicking this link.