Dark matter/Dark Energy


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Dark matter/Dark Energy

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 . . . 11 · Next
Author Message
Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32051
Credit: 13,723,964
RAC: 26,031
United Kingdom
Message 1437360 - Posted: 3 Nov 2013, 13:33:43 UTC

I think that there are far too many scientists that concoct theories to try to explain what they are observing. This formuala will work if we can find substance X, so lets go looking for X. Perhaps they should be taking the opposite approach. Let's use the LHC to find new particle and stuff, then lets see how they might fit into what we already know.

There is no one single "God Particle" there will be many of them, each one a piece of the unfinished jigsaw. Scientific journals have to make a living. I predict that the LHC over the next few years will find many new particles that change what we already know.

Profile Sarge
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Aug 99
Posts: 9258
Credit: 1,498,882
RAC: 1,566
United States
Message 1437417 - Posted: 3 Nov 2013, 17:09:38 UTC - in response to Message 1437360.

I think that there are far too many scientists that concoct theories to try to explain what they are observing. This formuala will work if we can find substance X, so lets go looking for X. Perhaps they should be taking the opposite approach. Let's use the LHC to find new particle and stuff, then lets see how they might fit into what we already know.

There is no one single "God Particle" there will be many of them, each one a piece of the unfinished jigsaw. Scientific journals have to make a living. I predict that the LHC over the next few years will find many new particles that change what we already know.


Darn that Leonhard Euler. Why did he spend his Sunday afternoons trying to walk the 7 Bridges of Koenigsberg? Who cares if it had a solution or not? Who cares if this started the field of study known as graph (network) theory? Who cares that it took 100 years or more to bear fruit via applications in such diverse areas as chemistry, scheduling, traffic flow and so on ... . He was just one of those far too many mathematicians trying to solve a silly riddle and concoct new areas of mathematics.

OzzFan
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 13625
Credit: 30,987,311
RAC: 20,036
United States
Message 1437557 - Posted: 3 Nov 2013, 23:10:35 UTC - in response to Message 1437417.

I think that there are far too many scientists that concoct theories to try to explain what they are observing. This formuala will work if we can find substance X, so lets go looking for X. Perhaps they should be taking the opposite approach. Let's use the LHC to find new particle and stuff, then lets see how they might fit into what we already know.

There is no one single "God Particle" there will be many of them, each one a piece of the unfinished jigsaw. Scientific journals have to make a living. I predict that the LHC over the next few years will find many new particles that change what we already know.


Darn that Leonhard Euler. Why did he spend his Sunday afternoons trying to walk the 7 Bridges of Koenigsberg? Who cares if it had a solution or not? Who cares if this started the field of study known as graph (network) theory? Who cares that it took 100 years or more to bear fruit via applications in such diverse areas as chemistry, scheduling, traffic flow and so on ... . He was just one of those far too many mathematicians trying to solve a silly riddle and concoct new areas of mathematics.


Agreed. I think it would help Chris S. and others to actually understand how and why theoretical physicists and other scientists arrive at their hypotheses, which in turn explains why they go looking for X. Yes, it may be that X doesn't exist, but even if it doesn't exist, it still tells us something.

But I guess it's easier just to believe they're blowing millions of dollars on equipment to chase wild geese when most people haven't a clue about such things.

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3754
Credit: 387,845
RAC: 112
Italy
Message 1437687 - Posted: 4 Nov 2013, 5:56:10 UTC
Last modified: 4 Nov 2013, 5:57:08 UTC

Einstein said: it is theory that determines what can be observed. I think he is right. The Higgs boson is nothing but a Goldstone boson of a Yang-Mills field. See for instance "Recent developments in high energy physics" by Leo van Hove (another Belgian,incidentally) in 'Trends in physics", Volume of plenary lectures of the Second general Conference of the European Physical Society, Wiesbaden, October 1972. The article mentions Peter Higgs, in 1972.
Tullio
____________

Profile James Sotherden
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 16 May 99
Posts: 8907
Credit: 35,838,460
RAC: 43,800
United States
Message 1437693 - Posted: 4 Nov 2013, 6:05:27 UTC

I cant grasp the notion that a particle that is known to exist, dosent have some kind of mass. If it exist it has to have some kind of mass however small.
____________

Old James

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3754
Credit: 387,845
RAC: 112
Italy
Message 1437719 - Posted: 4 Nov 2013, 8:27:44 UTC

A photon has no rest mass. A neutrino must have one but it is very small.
____________

Profile William Rothamel
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 2591
Credit: 1,180,227
RAC: 46
United States
Message 1437739 - Posted: 4 Nov 2013, 10:32:42 UTC - in response to Message 1437719.

A photon is a disturbance in the electo-magnetic fields. Nothing travels; just like a wave in a football stadium. The wave travels (a disturbance) but nothing actually moves around the stadium--just the wave.. Because it can be focused and "Aimed" precisely it is said to behave like a particle.

A wave can have energy, however, and hence an equivalent mass. Is dark matter simply an imputed mass from the energy that we have trouble accounting for in Astrophysics ?

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3754
Credit: 387,845
RAC: 112
Italy
Message 1437742 - Posted: 4 Nov 2013, 11:08:34 UTC - in response to Message 1437739.

A photon of sufficient energy emits an electron when hitting a solid. This is the photoelectric effect for which Einstein received his only Nobel prize. So, even if a photon travels like a wave. it acts as a particle when it is absorbed. This is the wave-particle duality postulated by Louis de Broglie, which was the starting point of quantum mechanics.
Tullio
____________

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 8489
Credit: 4,188,948
RAC: 1,727
United Kingdom
Message 1437806 - Posted: 4 Nov 2013, 15:34:58 UTC - in response to Message 1437687.
Last modified: 4 Nov 2013, 15:35:25 UTC

Einstein said: it is theory that determines what can be observed. ...

I agree.

We can all "see" an image with our eyes. However, there is also a lot of understanding and 'world knowledge' needed to then be able to interpret and appreciate what that image is showing.

Likewise, for designing and understanding real-world experiments. The verification between our understanding and a real-world experiment is a two-way process that lets our understanding converge ever more closely to the reality we experience.


Keep searchin',
Martin
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32051
Credit: 13,723,964
RAC: 26,031
United Kingdom
Message 1437812 - Posted: 4 Nov 2013, 16:05:09 UTC
Last modified: 4 Nov 2013, 16:06:04 UTC

Agreed. I think it would help Chris S. and others to actually understand how and why theoretical physicists and other scientists arrive at their hypotheses, which in turn explains why they go looking for X. Yes, it may be that X doesn't exist, but even if it doesn't exist, it still tells us something.

Yes it would, because I freely admit that I struggle with this subject. But I can clearly see that eliminating another unknown narrows down the search for other unknowns, that is fairly obvious.

But I guess it's easier just to believe they're blowing millions of dollars on equipment to chase wild geese when most people haven't a clue about such things.

I think I'm one of the few around here who think they should have built the LHC many years ago. I also think that they should also be planning and building an even bigger and better one. When the current one doubles its power we will be finding even more about the universe, and no I don't think we will be creating black holes and blowing ourselves up!

I cant grasp the notion that a particle that is known to exist, dosent have some kind of mass

Because we live on a planet that has gravity therefore "things" have "weight", We have density which is mass per unit of volume. It is alien to us to think of something with no mass. In the same way that it is alien to think of something in-finite, when we live on a finite world. But I know what you mean.

Profile Zapped "Sixth Sense" Sparky
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 30 Aug 08
Posts: 8353
Credit: 1,294,814
RAC: 982
United Kingdom
Message 1437888 - Posted: 4 Nov 2013, 18:35:01 UTC

Look, and you just may find it.
____________
In an alternate universe, it was a ZX81 that asked for clothes, boots and motorcycle.

Client error 418: I'm a teapot

Tropical Goldfish Fish 15: Squeaky bras 'R us

Illusions of normality sufferer

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32051
Credit: 13,723,964
RAC: 26,031
United Kingdom
Message 1437942 - Posted: 4 Nov 2013, 20:40:04 UTC

Gravitational lensing is not necessarily proof of dark matter or energy.

Gravitational lensing

Profile LynnProject donor
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 20 Nov 00
Posts: 4742
Credit: 767,897
RAC: 3,627
United States
Message 1438063 - Posted: 5 Nov 2013, 0:29:23 UTC - in response to Message 1437942.

It's there they just need to find it.


____________

Profile James Sotherden
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 16 May 99
Posts: 8907
Credit: 35,838,460
RAC: 43,800
United States
Message 1438217 - Posted: 5 Nov 2013, 5:50:01 UTC

If a photon has no rest mass. Then how can a black hole prevent a photon from escaping its gravity.
And can dark matter be sucked in to a black hole? I just cant think in the abstract on some of these quantum physics ideas.
____________

Old James

Profile Wiggo
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 24 Jan 00
Posts: 7323
Credit: 96,696,207
RAC: 65,676
Australia
Message 1438257 - Posted: 5 Nov 2013, 8:07:53 UTC

I guess that is what the better minds than ours' is trying to work out James.

Their papers sort of make sense but they always leave me with a headache while trying to read them (just like some politicians). :-(

Sorry but for some of us, we prefer smaller more understandable words being used.

Cheers.

Profile tullioProject donor
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 3754
Credit: 387,845
RAC: 112
Italy
Message 1438279 - Posted: 5 Nov 2013, 9:36:37 UTC

A photon is simply following the curvature of space-time created by massive objects such as stars, galaxies and black holes. I saw on Italian RAI3 TV a talk by an Italian astronomer woman who had discovered the first double pulsar in the records of the Parkes radiotelescope in Australia. There was a delay in the reception of the radio impulse emitted by the pulsars because the wave had to follow the curvature of space-time created by the companion pulsar.
Tullio
____________

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32051
Credit: 13,723,964
RAC: 26,031
United Kingdom
Message 1438291 - Posted: 5 Nov 2013, 10:48:29 UTC

It's there they just need to find it.

They think it's there, and they think they may or may not find it. That's a lot of unknowns Lynn! I tend to think that it isn't there, but I'd be more than happy to be proved wrong, it can only increase my own knowledge, which is a good thing.

Profile JulieProject donor
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 21917
Credit: 3,913,610
RAC: 6,228
Belgium
Message 1438338 - Posted: 5 Nov 2013, 13:05:42 UTC - in response to Message 1438291.

It's there they just need to find it.

They think it's there, and they think they may or may not find it. That's a lot of unknowns Lynn! I tend to think that it isn't there, but I'd be more than happy to be proved wrong, it can only increase my own knowledge, which is a good thing.



It is there, they just have troubles naming it, that's why they call it 'dark'
____________


rOZZ

297902
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 31 Dec 99
Posts: 1105
Credit: 5,600,239
RAC: 6,490
Uruguay
Message 1438553 - Posted: 5 Nov 2013, 23:45:17 UTC

through.the.wormhole.s01e08.beyond.the.darkness

The above link, to a ~40 min video on YouTube, is a pretty good primer on Dark Energy/Matter.

Profile LynnProject donor
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 20 Nov 00
Posts: 4742
Credit: 767,897
RAC: 3,627
United States
Message 1438555 - Posted: 5 Nov 2013, 23:48:12 UTC - in response to Message 1438553.
Last modified: 6 Nov 2013, 0:14:46 UTC

through.the.wormhole.s01e08.beyond.the.darkness

The above link, to a ~40 min video on YouTube, is a pretty good primer on Dark Energy/Matter.



Thanks for the link, it's not working for me.

[edit]

This video contains content from Discovery Communications, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds.
____________

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 . . . 11 · Next
Post to thread

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Dark matter/Dark Energy

Copyright © 2014 University of California