Dark matter and dark energy question.

[befuddled]

Could it be possible that dark energy and dark matter are just two dimensional?

[ajb]

In what sense?

[ACG52]

A dimension is simply a possible direction of movement. It is not another universe, or a place at all.

[befuddled]

I kind of think of a dimension more as an aspect of existence than a direction. But, thats just me. I loved the answer from AJB. "In what sense?" My answer to that is "nonsense" perhaps. I have done quite alot of systems analysis over the years and you have to understand that in order for me to see systems, I have to find a way to frame them in my mind. That being said, and as you know, there are many similarities among electrical, hydraulic and pneumatic systems. But, sometimes I think about the things you physics types ponder and wonder if there is a system at work here too. I asked if dark energy and dark matter could be just two dimensional because it seems more logical, given what I've read, that Time might be more like a wave of forces and charges passing over a two dimensional surface such as dark energy, raising it for an instant to three dimensions and then leaving two dimensional dark matter as a result. That wave might not be any wider that the life of a Higgs, but it could be 14 or 15 billion years wide and stretching. Please understand that I do not claim to be a scientist at all, but just wondering what you guys think about that possibility.

Sorry, I meant 14 or 15 billion years long, not wide.

[ajb]

I asked if dark energy and dark matter could be just two dimensional because it seems more logical...

I do not understand what you mean by two dimensional here. You mean that dark matter and dark energy is really something to do with 2 dimensional extended objects in space or space-time or something similar?

[befuddled]

As you know, according to Einstein's theory, you get a massive amount of energy from a small amount of matter and I suppose the reverse is true if you could manipulate energy. On a dimensional basis, I assume that one dimension would be perhaps a line and two dimensions would pull the line sideways creating a flat plane. Any matter or energy along that plane would most likely exist more like data or imformation not as matter or energy as we would view it in three dimensions since it would have no height. I was just wondering if it is possible that a wave of charges and forces passing over this two dimensional plane of data could, for a brief instant, raise up a third dimension thus creating the three dimensions that we exist in. Of course, this wave is continuous and our consciousness and senses would view this as Time or Space Time. I guess you could think of it as writing on a scroll or making a fabric. To make such a system work, I don't know, but it looks to me like there would need to be some sort of scripted imformation on that surface in order to animate the third dimension. Maybe that application is accomplished at the quantum level by using something like the Higgs boson. Maybe that's stretching it too far. I'm just asking what you think about this not trying to make some new theory. Physics is not what I do. Thank you for your time.

[deadman]

Ok I'm no expert on matters like this either but I do design oil rigs in CAD and I think I might be able to shed some light on this for you but I might be wrong (hopefully I'm not telling you something that is wrong)

I think your missing a few things to your understandings

Ok so as far as I understand it

It works something like this

 

One dimensional space is simply a point in space

 

Two dimensional space is a line that goes left, right, (referred to as X) and up, down (referred to as Y)

Each are know as an axis but the two dimensional space that you are talking about can only be seen on a surface like a piece of paper

 

Three dimensional space has left, right, up, and down just like the 2d world but it also has a Z axis

This image might help

http://www.google.com/search?q=XY+and+Z+axis&hl=en&gl=us&source=android-browser-goto&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=uFCjUZGDG4uE9QT3yYC4BQ&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAQ&biw=369&bih=615&sei=9VCjUdTbIYa-9QSiqoHACA#biv=i%7C6%3Bd%7CcqDasEqZDzXsvM%3A

 

As far as your question

is it possible that it simply exists only in two dimensional space

I'm making the assumption that you are asking this trying to understand why we can't see it

meaning does it only have length and width but no depth

and I would have to think that's not possible because wouldn't the flow of time have the same affect on all matter including dark matter

II honestly don't think there's an answer to that question at this time but it is interesting theory

 

however if my understanding of your question is incorrect and you're referring to the fact that it exists on another plane of existence referring to the multiverse theory then that has to do with strings and I'm not really sure that I understand how that all works

 

*edit*

I referred to it in the two-dimensional sense as up and down but what I really meant to say was forward and backward

up and down would in-fact be the Z-axis

I apologize for any confusion this may have caused

 

Also I apologize befuddled I must have been typing out my response when you posted your former post referring to your post just above this one

after reading it I see that you have a grasp on understanding dimensional space I apologize

Edited May 27, 2013 by deadman

[EdEarl]

DM causes gravitational lensing, as shown in some Hubble photos. Thus, it seems three dimensional to me.

 

Moreover, DE is causing space to expand in three dimensions. Thus, it seems three dimensional to me.

[deadman]

DM causes gravitational lensing, as shown in some Hubble photos. Thus, it seems three dimensional to me.

 

Moreover, DE is causing space to expand in three dimensions. Thus, it seems three dimensional to me.

I agree but I do have a question that I can't understand about DM and DE

If it makes up the majority of the universe then why is it not expanding our Solar System or even the space between me and the keyboard that I'm typing on right now

or is it and I'm just not aware of it ?

Edited May 27, 2013 by deadman

[EdEarl]

At short distances, its effect is less than the four physical forces, namely gravity, electromagnetic, weak and strong.

[deadman]

At short distances, its effect is less than the four physical forces, namely gravity, electromagnetic, weak and strong.

Ok but I watched a show that said that gravity is the weekest force in nature so if this is true then how is it possible that it is responsible for the expansion of the universe

or is my understanding of the expansion of the universe is incorrect

 

I mean don't get me wrong I'm not disagreeing with you I'm just trying to rap my mind around this and some of it just doesn't really make sense to me

lol

the universe is a very very strange place

Edited May 27, 2013 by deadman

[EdEarl]

My understanding is that DE is causing the expansion, where the force of gravity which decreases with the square of distance is too weak to overcome DE. DE is thought to be constant (i.e., force of DE) throughout the universe.

 

A Leonard Susskind lecture on youtube ( if my memory is correct, the one about String and M-theory) explains this subject.

[deadman]

Ok that's something I didn't consider

referring to the fact that gravity gets weaker over distance

 

And cool I'll check that out thanks for the input

Edited May 27, 2013 by deadman

[EdEarl]

yw

[deadman]

That was an interesting and informative video

Thanks again

[befuddled]

I guess the consensus here is that DE and DM is three dimensional and not two dimensional. It would sure be more fun to talk about if it were two dimensional. I respect and appreciate the time you folks put into answering my question. You do a great job and this is a very interesting forum. Thank you very much. By the way, I have been watching the videos of Leonard Susskind and they are great and alot to take in. Sometimes, when I listen to these physicists, their viewpoint makes me think of (to use an analogy) the difference in designing an aircraft that could fly itself with no assistance and one with a pilot. The self contained aircraft requires a considerably more complex system to make it automonous than a piloted one. I'm not saying they are wrong, but sometimes it seems they overcomplicate to support whatever view they have. On the other hand, they make some very good cases for what they believe and I enjoy listening to them. I will check in on these forums from time to time. Again, thanks.

[imatfaal]

...

One dimensional space is simply a point in space

 

Two dimensional space is a line that goes left, right, (referred to as X) and up, down (referred to as Y)

Each are know as an axis but the two dimensional space that you are talking about can only be seen on a surface like a piece of paper

 

Three dimensional space has left, right, up, and down just like the 2d world but it also has a Z axis...

 

Erm no. Sorry Offtopic - but needed clarifying.

 

Zero dimensional is a point in space - ie does not have any extension.

One dimensional is a line - it extends in one direction only (say the x axis or the line y=x etc.

Two dimensional is a plane - it extends in two directions at same time (say the x-y plane or the whole sheet of graph paper you drew the line upon). Three dimensional is a volume - it extends in all the dimensions we can recognize (its the x y and z - the graph paper, and the air above, and the desk below)

[bEarthly]

Could it be that dark matter and energy are just nonsense? Almost like religious pride it's a refusal to go over the basic fundamental structure of space. Observable calculations don't match so let's invent new stuff. Here's a common-sense approach-if everything big is made from everything small why would there be different mechanics to explain one from the other?!

The Schwarzschild Proton!

[EdEarl]

Could it be that dark matter and energy are just nonsense?

No. Two things have been indirectly observed that do not interact with photons (i.e., electromagnetic radiation including light, reason for calling them Dark). DM exhibits gravity (reason for calling it Matter), and DE exhibits a force opposing gravity (reason for calling it Energy). Otherwise, not much is known about them.

[deadman]

 

Erm no. Sorry Offtopic - but needed clarifying.

 

Zero dimensional is a point in space - ie does not have any extension.

One dimensional is a line - it extends in one direction only (say the x axis or the line y=x etc.

Two dimensional is a plane - it extends in two directions at same time (say the x-y plane or the whole sheet of graph paper you drew the line upon). Three dimensional is a volume - it extends in all the dimensions we can recognize (its the x y and z - the graph paper, and the air above, and the desk below)

Yep that is correct

thanks for the clarification

 

 

I have a few questions

Can sound or rather a wave bend light?

If so then is it possible that they might be wrong about dark matter and dark energy

 

I'm asking this question because its well-known that the theory behind matter is simply because when we observe the light coming from distant galaxies that their appears to be something that we can not see bending that light

Because of this we make the assumption that something we can not see must be responsible for this action

also we see the galaxies moving away from one another at an accelerated rate

In a nutshell this is the theory behind dark energy

So is it possible that its just a wave that is responsible for the bending of the light?

 

If that question turns out to be correct then is it also possible a wave could responsible for pushing all the galaxies apart

 

Is it possible for a wave to keep accelerateing matter?

Or would it simply excelerate matter to a constant speed

 

But that still opens the door for the question...

If it would accelerate matter but only to a specific speed

Then would that happen instantaneously or what it take time to get up to said speed

 

also another question

if string theory turns out to be correct

Then does that mean that all matter is actually just really dense balls of energy compressed into what looks like solid matter?

 

and if everything is just simply a compressed balls of energy

Then would that not mean that black holes are just basically cosmic recyclers?

 

I ask this question based on the fact that we have images of massive jets of energy shooting out the center of some galaxys caused by what is know as supper blackholes

 

so if string theory does turn out to be correct and all matter does turn out to be just extremely dense compressed forms of energy then would that not be a sensible thought process

 

Again I'm not saying that my understanding of any of this is correct

I'm just trying to make sense of it and ask a few questions

Edited June 11, 2013 by deadman

[ACG52]

deadman

 

Can sound or rather a wave bend light?

No, only gravity can bend light.

 

the theory behind [dark] matter is simply because when we observe the light coming from distant galaxies that their appears to be something that we can not see bending that light

That is known as gravitational lensing, and that's only one reason for the dark matter hypothesis. The orbital velocities of stars in the galactic spiral arms are too fast, and are only possible if there is a 'halo' of gravity producing something permeating the galaxy. Since this gravity producing something can't be seen, and apparently does not interact electromagnetically with ordinary matter, it's called Dark. Which just really means we don't know what it is yet.

 

also we see the galaxies moving away from one another at an accelerated rate

In a nutshell this is the theory behind dark energy

Yes, the universe's rate of expansion is accelerating, and there must be an energy source causing it. We don't know what it is, so it is called Dark Energy. It has nothing to do with Dark Matter. It's just lousy naming.

 

So is it possible that its just a wave that is responsible for the bending of the light?

No.

 

If that question turns out to be correct then is it also possible a wave could responsible for pushing all the galaxies apart



Is it possible for a wave to keep accelerateing matter?

Or would it simply excelerate matter to a constant speed



But that still opens the door for the question...

If it would accelerate matter but only to a specific speed

Then would that happen instantaneously or what it take time to get up to said speed

It's not correct, so the rest of this is moot.

 

also another question

if string theory turns out to be correct

Then does that mean that all matter is actually just really dense balls of energy compressed into what looks like solid matter?

It means that all of what now we think are elementary particles, i.e. quarks, electrons, gravitons, are themselves made from strings of something totally basic and the smallest possible, vibrating in different ways through 11 dimensions.

 

and if everything is just simply a compressed balls of energy

Then would that not mean that black holes are just basically cosmic recyclers?

No, it really has nothing to do with Black Holes.

 

I ask this question based on the fact that we have images of massive jets of energy shooting out the center of some galaxys caused by what is know as supper blackholes

The jets do not come out of the Black Holes. They are caused by gas in a cloud surrounding the BH, which is swirled by the rotation of the BH so violently that it heats up and radiates x-rays and gamma rays, which are funneled to the poles of the BH where they are collimated into the jets which shoot out in opposite directions.

Edited June 11, 2013 by ACG52

[Popcorn Sutton]

I agree that all things can be reduced to two dimensions (at least for computational reasons), and even furthermore that they can be reduced to one dimension (length), and furthermore, that they can be reduced to two different states of zero dimensionality (one repulsive, and the other being parametric). It's all, imo, about where the interest is and where it will be. That, imo, is the unified field approach. Quantum mechanics seems to support this hypothesis, as well as computational neuroscience, genetics, psychology, and every other field (to my knowledge).

[EdEarl]

Yep that is correct

thanks for the clarification

 

 

I have a few questions

Can sound or rather a wave bend light?

If so then is it possible that they might be wrong about dark matter and dark energy

 

I'm asking this question because its well-known that the theory behind matter is simply because when we observe the light coming from distant galaxies that their appears to be something that we can not see bending that light

Because of this we make the assumption that something we can not see must be responsible for this action

also we see the galaxies moving away from one another at an accelerated rate

In a nutshell this is the theory behind dark energy

So is it possible that its just a wave that is responsible for the bending of the light?

 

If that question turns out to be correct then is it also possible a wave could responsible for pushing all the galaxies apart

 

Is it possible for a wave to keep accelerateing matter?

Or would it simply excelerate matter to a constant speed

 

But that still opens the door for the question...

If it would accelerate matter but only to a specific speed

Then would that happen instantaneously or what it take time to get up to said speed

 

also another question

if string theory turns out to be correct

Then does that mean that all matter is actually just really dense balls of energy compressed into what looks like solid matter?

 

and if everything is just simply a compressed balls of energy

Then would that not mean that black holes are just basically cosmic recyclers?

 

I ask this question based on the fact that we have images of massive jets of energy shooting out the center of some galaxys caused by what is know as supper blackholes

 

so if string theory does turn out to be correct and all matter does turn out to be just extremely dense compressed forms of energy then would that not be a sensible thought process

 

Again I'm not saying that my understanding of any of this is correct

I'm just trying to make sense of it and ask a few questions

You have asked many questions not related to the OP. They show you need a basic science education, which is more than you should expect from this forum. I recommend you log in to https://www.khanacademy.org/ and study physics, chemistry and maybe math to learn the basics. It is much more fun than sitting in public or private school rooms.

[befuddled]

I want to thank all of you that have contributed to this discussion. You do a great job. After reading these questions and answers, I have a question that you might help me with. Could it be that dark matter is simply the elemental particles that we know exist minus the forces and charges (except, perhaps, for gravity) that make them into what we see as regular matter? Further, could it be that the regular matter is being formed somehow by a process which applies these forces and charges to dark matter in an ongoing way. This would explain dark energy, as well as, the formation of dark matter around regular matter since it is being processed into regular matter. Basically, dark matter would be raw material for regular matter.

[EdEarl]

I want to thank all of you that have contributed to this discussion. You do a great job. After reading these questions and answers, I have a question that you might help me with. Could it be that dark matter is simply the elemental particles that we know exist minus the forces and charges (except, perhaps, for gravity) that make them into what we see as regular matter? Further, could it be that the regular matter is being formed somehow by a process which applies these forces and charges to dark matter in an ongoing way. This would explain dark energy, as well as, the formation of dark matter around regular matter since it is being processed into regular matter. Basically, dark matter would be raw material for regular matter.

I think scientists are befuddled about DM and DE. It is really difficult to understand something that cannot be seen by any kind of instrument. It reminds me of the blind men and the elephant. Newton's Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica was published 5 July 1687, which was the beginning of modern physics. Quantum Mechanics and Relativity have been studied for little more than a century. The phenomenon of these sciences can be observed using instruments.

 

DM and DE discoveries are more recent and understanding is slow because they cannot be directly observed. Speculation without observation is often incorrect, even when one uses math to help with the speculation. Otherwise, speculations are usually incorrect. For that reason, I have not published my own speculations. But, since you started it. I will venture a wild ass guess.

 

There may be subatomic dark matter particles, analogs to quarks, that combine to make analogs to neutrons, protons and electrons, which in turn make dark matter analogs to atoms, which clump together to make bigger dark matter objects. Maybe there are DM stars and galaxies. But, AFAIK there is no observational evidence for any of this wild ass guess. It is more likely my guess is wrong than right. I have a few more of them. I have fun inventing them, but don't propose them because I don't like someone who actually knows something about DM and DE telling me my idea is screwy. You are more brave than I.