Dark energy remains a mystery. Maybe AI can help crack the code

[Questioner]

'Aggregating around galaxies' is very vague and non-specific.

Particulate matter would create gravitational vibrations as all those hypothetical DM particles pass by one another or pass visible matter. Moving mass moves matter whether it is visible or invisible.
Each little particle pulling and releasing over & over.

If it interacts in no other way gravity requires mutual mass interactions.

 

[Unclear Engineer]

Bill, I would not put those 2 "observations" in the same category as the star orbits and the light lensing. These other 2 are just postulated effects of somebody's theory about what dark matter might do, if their theory about what it is is correct.

You linked article even said:
"Unfortunately for dark matter hunters, the specifics of the probes’ observations do not match up well with theories that predict cosmic rays resulting from dark matter annihilation. Along with electrons and positrons, dark matter annihilation should produce other signals like extra antiprotons (protons’ antimatter siblings), gamma rays and radio waves. But detectors have found no evidence of any of those signals."
and
"Adam Falkowski, a particle physicist at the National Center for Scientific Research in Paris, is more pessimistic: “There's absolutely no way that measurements of the positron spectrum may give us a robust evidence for dark matter, not now, and not anytime soon,”

So, I would not add these observations to the 2 that indicate that something appears to be there.

 

[Unclear Engineer]

'Aggregating around galaxies' is very vague and non-specific.

Particulate matter would create gravitational vibrations as all those hypothetical DM particles pass by one another or pass visible matter. Moving mass moves matter whether it is visible or invisible.
Each little particle pulling and releasing over & over.

If it interacts in no other way gravity requires mutual mass interactions.

Not seeing any way that what you are saying would produce any detectable signals for astronomers or particle physicists to detect and identify as only being able to be caused by dark matter. Regarding "gravitational vibrations" of sub-atomic particles passing sub-atomic particles, we would have no way to detect them, much less determine their origin.

Detecting emissions from what appears to be "empty space" would give us some clue. But, even those are not much help if their is also similar emissions from known sources. There is even some discussion of trying to find anti-matter "left over from the Big Bang", so there are going to be competing theories to explain just about anything we detect, unless it is something really novel.

 

[Questioner]

I say it's tachyons all the way down.

 

[Unclear Engineer]

Well, tachyons should be hard to detect, since they supposedly are going faster than light. Our experiments might look like some sort of time reversal effect, if there are really tachyons and they really have some effects.

That said, I often wonder if some of our "great mysteries" are rooted in our lack of understanding about how time really works.

 

[Questioner]

Tachyons make nice little packets of inverted time.
Seems like a potential source of time-dilation when they marry space-time.

 

[Atlan0001]

Tachyons make nice little packets of inverted time.
Seems like a potential source of time-dilation when they marry space-time.

What do you mean by "inverted time"? If dark matter moves with galactic movement then it moves like a mirror movement of the object galaxy that is not necessarily gravitational but quite possibly extended EM/EW (deep up and out into the macrocosm) coordinate point SPACETIME, else it would be thrown away. It obeys no centrifugal force, nor centripetal force, yet it is where it should obey the effects of such force if it were gravitationally inclined. There is something odd there in the fact that it doesn't, yet keeps swirling galaxies contained as a pretty strong binding, essentially nuclear-like though external, force . . . (strangely strong potentially even beyond EM/EW)!

 

[billslugg]

Bartender says: "I'm sorry, we don't serve your kind here."
A tachyon walks into a bar.

 

[Atlan0001]

Remembered and had to come back.

An observable observation of a past history out of the past light cone:
A would-be tachyon walks into a bar.
Bartender says, "What will you have?"

An unobservable observation of a future history out of the future light cone:
Bartender says, "I'm sorry we don't serve your kind here."
A tachyon (that same once would-be tachyon) walks into a bar.
--------------------

Albert Einstein (or this is attributed to him) once said that if any answer in physics doesn't generate at least two questions, it must be a wrong answer.

 

[Questioner]

A photon travels at the speed of light and time for the photon is stopped.
A hypothesized tachyon travels faster than light and is going backwards in time.
My thought is if one merges the backwards in time tachyon with forward moving time of space-time one gets slowed time or time-dilation.
That's the essence of mass (gravity).

 

[Atlan0001]

A photon travels at the speed of light and time for the photon is stopped.
A hypothesized tachyon travels faster than light and is going backwards in time.
My thought is if one merges the backwards in time tachyon with forward moving time of space-time one gets slowed time or time-dilation.
That's the essence of mass (gravity).

How can so many have it so wrong?! It is a point of coordinate point SPACETIME! It's being a point in SPACETIME is like traveling backward in time at the constant of the speed of light in the universe, but if you are smart enough to realize the environment of the universe it is in, you must realize the point-lock in SPACETIME is doing no such thing as traveling backwards in time! Its SPACETIME coordinate point of emission is falling backwards in the space and time of the universe due to the point-lock in the past histories past light cone as the universe (as opposed to the future histories future light cone) turns (verse: turn: to turn), rounds, in swirls of vortex in space and time, in fact expanding to nowhere, but that has nothing to do with linearly traveling backwards in time! In infinities of paralleling horizon universes all time exists at one and the same time, but there is no such thing as traveling backwards in any longitudinal line of it.

Try to understand the "coordinate" element in "coordinate point SPACETIME"!

 

[Unclear Engineer]

Atlan0001 beat me to responding to the tachyon in a bar scenario. But, I have a somewhat different "take" on the idea of traveling backwards in time:

Going backwards in time would look more like (1) tachyon flies through bar door into arms of bouncer, (2) who places tachyon at bar, (3) where tachyon spits whisky into 5 shot glasses, (4) which somehow jumps up into the mouth of a whisky bottle as the bartender holds it above each glass in sequence, (5) before the tachyon says "Whisky" and the bartended sees to respond with "What'll you have?" Or, should they be calling it "yksihW"?
My point is that we are trying to talk about what a tachyon would "see" as if it is looking at what we see being run backwards. That is not the correct way to look at an interaction with a tachyon from either its frame of reference nor ours.

Clearly, the laws of physics would not change in our frame of reference just because there is a tachyon nearby. So, whisky is not going to jump into a bottle above a glass just because a tachyon ordered it. So, the issue is what would an interaction with a tachyon actually produce in the way of evidence in our frame of reference?

Still using the joke as the scenario, if a tachyon could come into a bar and take down a bottle and pour itself a drink, what those watching (extremely fast) would see would depend on where they are in the bar, and how soon the light gets to them from each place that something observable happens due to the tachyon's presence. Those near the door where the tachyon enters would see the light of the tachyon going by before the light gets to them showing the whisky being poured, while those at the bar would see the whisky getting poured before they see the tachyon come through the bar to get to the bottle. It is the folks near the bar that would see the tachyon appear to leave the bar backwards after pouring the drink. Of course, this all depends on how much faster than the speed of light the tachyon is traveling. So, that tends to make it near impossible for "researchers" to agree on what they have seen if a tachyon makes some observable effects. Without at least some pre-existing knowledge of the tachyon's properties, observations would probably just look like "noise" in the data.

 

[Questioner]

It could be more like the/a linking mechanism that stitches things into sequence,
but the tachyon has an unstitching mechanism.
The tachyon wouldn't necessarily be unstitching our or any coherent sequence, but it might have that capacity to undo single stitches of a sequence or if targeted/focused maybe it could undo the run of a sequence.

 

[Atlan0001]

What would a tachyon see of our observable universe? Nothing whatsoever because it would not relate to our "observable universe", no more than dark matter and energy (shadow matter and energy that disperses, goes away, into the dark shadows of space and time) really relates to our "observable universe." In advance, the tachyon that [isn't] there, and yet [is] there, doesn't get served in that bar ("Yesterday, upon the stair, I met a man who wasn't there...," 'Antigonish', by William Hughes Mearns)!

The "observable universe" is solely relative to the finite locality (such as the Earth, or even to an individual of the Earth). There are countless many unobserved and unobservable finite localities which fracture and define more or less as "universe" . . . like a diamond shattered into infinitely countless infinitesimal shard pieces -- of paralleling universes, accelerations, decelerations, nonrelative velocities, nonrelative positions -- on the concrete of a sidewalk (self-similar fractal zooms universe structure minus the reduction to a base fundamental set and reset).

 

[Questioner]

Maybe time-dilation is the slipping of some of the stitching which slows the stitching progress of time down?

 

[Atlan0001]

Maybe time-dilation is the slipping of some of the stitching which slows the stitching progress of time down?

The only "time dilation" is between object realities and subject relativities. It's a triangulation of objective and subjective universes that expands in outgoing and contracts in incoming. There is a divide in universes because the speed of light isn't fast enough to keep up with reality (which is why it is everywhere (local) relative . . . and the physics are known as "Relativity" rather than "Reality").

Remember above the diamond shattering into countless many shards? The constant of the speed of light can and will shatter into countless many diamond shards . . . countless many points of light . . .countless many "coordinate points of SPACETIME"! Relativity predicts its own break down, it breaks down in outgoing, thus equally but oppositely, relativity builds up in incoming!

 

[Questioner]

Is time the sequence or the fabrication of sequence?

 

[Atlan0001]

Is time the sequence or the fabrication of sequence?

Coordinate point SPACETIME's past histories past light cone (t=+1), and future histories future light cone (t=-1) deal in sequences, but not the fabrication of sequence. That is the province of universally spontaneous concurrent REALTIME 'front' (frontier) (t=0).

Fabrication also happens to be the province of the collapsed cosmological constant, in horizon superposition, P/BB Horizon Mirror (t=*1*).

 

[Questioner]

(persistent?) sequence gives a frame of reference.
(parallax)
We see the sequence as having a single progression direction.

The question is does 'backwards in time' mean going along the/an existing sequence in reverse order or does it mean deconstructing/disassembling the sequence in reverse order?

What extent of sequence is required to be identified as 'backward in time'?
Is breaking or traversing a single pair length sufficient?

An aside notion is removing an element embedded in a sequence and does the sequence fragment or does it anneal back together with that element gone?

 

[Unclear Engineer]

Good questions, but no real answers from established theory. Lots of people have ideas, but who knows whether there even are particles that travel faster than light, much less what those particles could do to a time sequence from the perspectives of us here on Earth.

Even the idea of time not passing from the perspective of a photon is hard to logically apply to observations. Is that how "entanglement" really works? Is that why there appears to be "superposition of states" until an observer observes? Most of our observations occur with photons in the observation processes for at least one stage.

 

[Questioner]

If the speed of gravity for black holes [only] can be shown to be faster than light it would lend credence to the idea that tachyons are the source of mass/gravity.
That's to say the front edge of a moving black hole's gravity well gets there sooner than light could have traveled from the black hole's initial position.
So something faster than light would have had to make that happen even if it didn't/couldn't have happened through space-time.
I don't think it would have any bearing on relativity.

If it's not the case it still doesn't disprove the proposition.

 

[Atlan0001]

There is no going backward in time since that is where all travel to anywhere starts from. BACKWARD IN TIME (EVEN TO 14-BILLION YEARS BACKWARD IN TIME) RELATIVE TO ANYWHERE AND EVERYWHERE CONCURRENTLY EXISTING IN THE UNIVERSES!

Think about it as you look out to the observable universe or even look across the street or room and realize the unobserved unobservable future universe there relative to yourself! YOU ARE ALREADY THERE (BACKWARD IN TIME)!!!! YOU START FROM THERE (BACKWARD IN TIME)!!!! Past histories past light cone! Thus! You travel only future histories future light cone to all destinations, period, even those just slightly across a room, or to the farthest unobserved, unobservable, horizon (in your future!) of the universe!

Once more! You don't time travel backward in time, period, because the universe always starts you . . . will start you . . . from however far backward in time, up to and surpassing 14-billion years backward in time starting.

We can joke around about it, but seriously, try to understand how it really works, where the universe will always start you from: A sheer endless beginning to time (t=0 (0-point) and/or t=*1*)!

 

[Questioner]

In logic 'forward' and 'backward' are arbitrary assignations on a sequence.

For us (the universe) there does seem to be a built-in temporal bias to our sequential experience.

If one defines time as the linking/appending to a pre-existing sequence then one could readily understand de-linking (unzipping) the latest element at the working end of a sequence as going backward in time, perhaps to relink/append the same element or append a different element.
Like backing your car up to redirect it elsewhere.

If on the other hand one defines 'backward in time' as the 'inverse' traversal of an existing sequence, which is how we generally conceive it, one is already locked into a/the sequence which of necessity exists in the past.
The only temporal sequence we know is the past.

Memory/history forms our conceptual frame of reference.
A frame of reference photons & tachyons are unlikely to have.

Putting any sequence [overhead] on a single tachyon/photon seems a lot to me.

According to Einstein the phase oscillation of EM between magnetic and electric is the tick toc of time.
It sounds like a ratchet mechanism and perhaps tachyons are cot kcit-ing (un-ratchetting) instead.

So possibly photons link & tachyons unlink?
Saddling those simple workings with a freight train of sequence is difficult to fathom.
The accrual of sequence is probably as a[n indirect?] result of those simple mechanisms.

Aside: If one drives the legally intended direction down the road in reverse/backwards (using the rear view mirror) is one traveling backward or forward?

 

[Questioner]

Even going 'forward' is a reference to/in the past.

 

[Unclear Engineer]

As I already posted, thinking about time is hard for humans.

Some people believe that the future is already "there", waiting for us to "travel through". That is known as "Block Universe" theory. See https://www.abc.net.au/news/science...eory-time-past-present-future-travel/10178386 .

If that is really true, then something like a tachyon traveling backward in time would be carrying influences of its past, which is our future, in a manner consistent with the pre-existing "block" of space-time spanning all of the past and the future. Even if the tachyon has some effect in our past, nothing would be changing in the past, because it is already consistent with the future, and always has been. We would just have no way of knowing that.

I am not a believer in, nor a fan of "Block Universe Theory" because it basically says we have no control over what happens to us at all. People can use it to argue that there is no reason for them to do things that could benefit themselves in the future because their future benefits are already determined no matter what they try to do. They can argue that they were predetermined to hurt others because that was their future before they did the crime. I see it as a very destructive way of thinking. And I see no reason to believe that it is true. Just because we can imagine something does not mean it is real or even possible.