Dark matter map of KiDS survey region (region G12). Credit: KiDS survey
At a cosmology lecture some years ago I asked the speaker at the end of the talk if dark energy and dark matter might be “equivalent” as ordinary energy and matter are according to Einstein’s E=mc^2. She answered, without really giving it much thought, no. Then went on to the next person asking a question. I suspect she hadn’t any idea one way or the other.
So we close the book on the search for dark matter and open another on negative mass.
Sounds balanced to me.
> If you were to push a negative mass, it would accelerate towards you. <
Well, that explains my last girlfriend.
Take a cubic meter of space.
Suck EVERYTHING out of it. Get to a theoretical complete vacuum.
Now shine a light through it.
The light passed through that space. No problem.
So was something ‘there’ when the light was in it?
What is a photon passing through, when it is passing through empty ‘space’? Is that space still empty?
People who did not like the Big Bang came up with a steady state model that involved continuous creation of matter. This new paper took a failed idea from 70 years ago and applied it to dark matter/energy.
In 1970, Jean-Marie Souriau demonstrated, through the complete Poincaré group of dynamic group theory, that reversing the energy of a particle (hence its mass, if the particle has one) is equal to reversing its arrow of time.
Negative mass leads to some funky stuff. Who knows? Some of the wild conspiracy theories about hidden science could be right.
“Repelling all other material around them”
Aaahhhhhh.....the Joy Behar phenomenon.
Science always has a fancy term for things we don’t understand. Whether it is “phlogiston”, “ether”, “dark matter/energy” or perhaps now “negative mass” it all means the same thing: “here be dragons”.
I wonder why he felt the need to do a press release.
If the theory passes muster with other physicists we’ll hear about it soon enough.
95% of the cosmos is missing?
I’ll look in the garage. There’s a lot of stuff out there.
IOW, FLUBBER!
For later
Dark energy and Dark matter are completely undetectable. But somebody’s calculation shows they should be there. So they conclude it’s undetectable.
Very similar to the search for Planet X. A mistake in calculations of observations of Neptune’s orbit predicted a planet would be there. Back then they figured out the calculation did not accurately describe observed reality. That was called the scientific method.
Today, this bunch of clowns would conclude that it’s obvious Planet X is invisible, and would get to work on theories explaining it’s invisibility.
This guy has a tremendous future in climate change modeling.
If you wof water!of ant on or off the Electric Universe Ping List, Freepmail me.
This theory is useless. It doesn’t bolster man-made global warming.
What science needs particularly in physics is less theories and more empirical evidence of a kind I surmise will not be seen for generations yet to come, when humans are actually, personally, exploring a universe they now only observe at the most remote distances, and even then translating the meanings of what is observed based on our kindergaten of understanding.
We observe something, which we don’t quite understand, so we develop a theory to explain it, and theory correct or not it continues to be the explanation for what is observed. Of course the observations match the theory - the theory was made for the observation. It’s what I call the circular logic of modern physics.
More here...
Negative-Mass Dark Fluid: Astonishing New Theory Could Explain Universe’s Missing 95%
Dec 5, 2018 by News Staff / Source
The standard cosmological model known as LambdaCDM can only explain 5% of the observable Universe. The remaining 95% is famously made up almost entirely of two invisible components called dark matter and dark energy. Yet the physical nature of these two components remains a mystery.
A new study by University of Oxford researcher Jamie Farnes suggests both dark phenomena can be unified into a single substance — a negative-mass ‘dark fluid.’ Dr. Farnes’ theory may also prove right a prediction that Albert Einstein made 100 years ago.
http://www.sci-news.com/astronomy/negative-mass-dark-fluid-06687.html