Keep up to date with the Space calendar 2022: Rocket launches, sky events, missions and more!
A large quantity of temporary matter/gravity = a permanent changing quantity of gravity/matter.There is nothing temporary about the spiral galaxies which are rotated around a magnetic hub at the center [called a supermassive black hole] by the magnoflux spin effect.
Brilliant idea, but rod would be the best person to know whether this effect does anything to the motions of the planets etc. I understand about the added gravity, but why does it account for the dark energy ?A large quantity of temporary matter/gravity = a permanent changing quantity of gravity/matter.
If we have 10 temporary particle creations happening all the time 5 will overlap and add gravity.
If we add up all of the universe temporary particle creations from quantum fluctuations we have a lot of gravity/energy at any given moment.
Easy solution to what dark matter/energy might be.
If true it will be very difficult to detect other than crunching numbers to see what the mass of temp particles is and if that number is big enough to keep galaxies from flying apart.
Thanks David,Brilliant idea, but rod would be the best person to know whether this effect does anything to the motions of the planets etc. I understand about the added gravity, but why does it account for the dark energy ?
'Steady state of the infinite' theory
Infinite space - lnfinite universes - no beginning - no end
Length of time they produce gravity and destruction energy.Matter is made up of protons, neutrons enclosed in electron shells with a magnetic inertia field pushing the charges apart. These temporary particles of quantum creation you are talking about must be made of charges which cancel out under normal conditions meaning that you have interfered with the magnetic inertia field in some way.
And the 64 thousand$ question is what is keeping quantum fluctuation in check?While an interesting viewpoint, larger sample sizes provide more credibility in such studies. Also they should corroborate this hypothesis with other metrics for the rate of expansion, such as other main sources of evidence: cosmic microwave background radiation and baryon acoustic oscillations.
I myself would have a difficult time rationalizing a universe without dark energy and dark matter. I never like the introduction of a cosmological constant without a proper foundation. And while the terms 'dark energy' and 'dark matter' are simplistic terms to describe the mechanics of how the universe interacts, they provide a working model that exceeds the notion of an unexplained 'cosmological constant'.
Even theories like the alternative theories presented in the book, 'The Evolutioning of Creation: Volume2', uses recognized culture queues to discuss the structure of a universe from nothingness to existence. Filling in the discussion points for this transition should logically flow from the foundation of the presented hypothesis, and need to address the expectant formation of what we now observe of the total energy in the universe.
Considering the current hypothesis of the standard model for cosmology, the current measurements provide for the decomposition of total energy in the universe as 68% dark energy, 27% mass-energy via dark matter, and 5% mass-energy via ordinary matter. In which case, any phase transition would have to address the dark matter along with the ordinary matter.
If we propose a foundation of dark energy as the universal medium of space-time fabric wherein any creation of matter must retain a zero sum difference to maintain a balance of our continuum. If we conjecture that this dark energy is responsible for the increasing universal expansion, we can logically understand that it does not interfere with our observation of ordinary matter. Rather we have only identified that black holes interfere with our observation of ordinary matter.
The other concept of ordinary matter, as embedded in the dark energy medium, is that there is a displacement of the dark energy surrounding the ordinary matter; a warping of space-time if you will. This displacement is a force in and of itself that begets the gravitational field by which ordinary matter can accrete and congregate. As this complementary displacement insulates the newly created positive mass density in an envelope of negative density matter, the balance of the continuum is maintained.
Therefore while we tend to think of ordinary matter as separate of dark matter, it turns out that they are part and parcel of our existence in the universe. In this case, dark energy is the manifestation of the gravitational force that imbibes within all ordinary matter. Without dark matter, ordinary matter would disintegrate within the universal medium of dark energy.
I believe our universe is the result of a collapsed black hole that reached its density maximum and this inflated then froze for a moment which created the big bang, as the continuing inflation blasted past the frozen part. So our expansion is a result of the release of the contractive energy of a BH and would be faster than light speed initially which was the inflation. It's FTLS because a BH can trap light so it is FTLS or has more energy than lights speed, so if the energy is released it would be inflationary or FTLS...and if the energy of inflation is tense like a spring its energy would increase as it is stretched so the speed would increase...I call this theory Tension Dark Energy.I’m new to this page and not qualified in physics so forgive me if I sound naive or replying to a person rather than the source post.
Now everything I have read about space indicates it is NOT ”nothing” containing mass but rather a “thing” described as “spacetime”. Given that the universe is expanding, and that it arose from the “singularity“, why are we looking for a “force” “pushing” matter apart? Doesn’t it fit the spacetime model better if we imagine that the universe was originally “compacted” by a force? Using this concept, the expansion of spacetime does NOT occur due to “dark energy” but is rather the result of spacetime “losing” energy as it unfolds. Think of a spring that is compressed by a force and then released - it will initially accelerated as the force is “released” - it won’t spring apart due to new forces being input into the system.
Is this useful or ridiculous?
C could simply be the time it takes to go from one quanta energy level to the next.As I have tried to describe before, with the speed of light being so slow through the observable universe, so slow in creating the "observable" universe, and with curvature to the universe, there is no doubt 'offset' between the observable universe of histories, of ghosting, and the unobservable, far more immediate in space and time, universe. The immediate universe being dark at all distance gained from 'immediacy' anywhere in it. Gravity may curve space but it does not necessarily follow that particular physic overall. We may be observing gravity in the curvature, and at the same time, sensing it, from the unobserved and unobservable "offset" universe in other ways, otherwise (multiplying to more and more offset universe(s) that will progressively lose relativity to us).