![]() |
|
|
#1 |
|
Oct 2007
3410 Posts |
Dark matter=Gravitational potential energy mass equivalency
The logic goes as follows- Just after the big bang particles of the universe would have to posses a velocity approaching a high percentage of light speed, necessary to escape the enormous gravitational pull of the early universe,which would likely approach that of a black hole. The early universe with its very high energy particles would have a much greater mass than the universe of today with its much lower energy particles. I contend that the mass loss doesn't happen from the early universe, to today's universe.The kinetic energy or mass of the high seed particles is converted to gravitational potential energy, and according to Einstein's mass energy equivalency,I would suggest that potential energy should have mass equivalency. This would explain the missing mass or dark matter of the universe. Therefore the energy of the universe remains constant and the mass remains constant as well. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 | ||
|
"Richard B. Woods"
Aug 2002
Wisconsin USA
22×3×641 Posts |
Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang Particularly during the inflationary period, space was expanding far faster than light-speed. Motions due to gravitational attraction were insignificant in comparison. Quote:
What it is, is matter that exerts gravitational force, but does not seem to interact with electromagnetic force. (Some think it could also be ordinary matter that simply isn't emitting detectable radiation in its particular circumstances, but is capable of doing so in other circumstances.) We can't see it directly, and so until recently didn't know it was there, but it was never "missing" -- it was there all the time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter Last fiddled with by cheesehead on 2010-11-15 at 15:13 |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Oct 2007
2·17 Posts |
That maybe true, but simple mechanics still hold as far as this is concerned, the universe the universe's intial maximum outward expansion
velocity is due to the force of the explosion. Since gravity is the only known brake on the expansion speed of the universe,the maximum expansion velocity of the universe is when the force of gravity equals the force of the explosion,then gravity takes over to slow the expansion speed.Scientific measurements indicate that the expansion of the universe has been slowing for billions of years and only recently has it's speed of expansion been increasing.I believe that the universe is now in a compression mode collasping to another big bang due to properties of the universe that are not understood now.What I am saying is the mass of the universe has to be measured at its maximum expansion velocity, this mass remains essentially constant forever. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | ||
|
"Richard B. Woods"
Aug 2002
Wisconsin USA
22×3×641 Posts |
Quote:
(1) It was not an explosion within space-time, where "force of the explosion" would be relevant, but an expansion of space-time itself, where "simple mechanics" do not hold! (2) The initial outward expansion was _not_ the maximum outward expansion. The maximum outward expansion occurred later, during the inflation phase. Seriously, read some Big Bang theory description that explains the difference between an explosion of the type we're familiar with -- within space-time -- and the "Big Bang" expansion of space-time. The physics that apply within space-time don't work for expansion of space-time. The terminology of a physical explosion that imparts outward momentum to matter that subsequently proceeds outward with declining velocity (due to gravitational attraction back toward the "center") is not appropriate to the Big Bang situation. (It has often been lamented that the name "Big Bang" tends to give the misleading physical-explosion idea about its nature, but no one's come up with a widely-accepted better short name yet.) Quote:
Last fiddled with by cheesehead on 2010-11-15 at 20:47 |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Oct 2007
2·17 Posts |
All of Einstein's formulas were based on the conservation of linear
momentum, before the collaspe of the previous universe the you had a net maximum inward momentum after the beginnings of the new universe would have an equal and opposite outward momentum. Space time has no bearing on the total energy or mass of the universe at its maximum momentum with respect to a stationary observer, therefore the correct mass of the universe should be calculated at its maximum momentum, with respect to a stationary observer. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
"Richard B. Woods"
Aug 2002
Wisconsin USA
22×3×641 Posts |
Quote:
Anyone else want to try? Last fiddled with by cheesehead on 2010-11-16 at 04:41 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
"Lucan"
Dec 2006
England
2×3×13×83 Posts |
Nope
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Aug 2006
175B16 Posts |
Carl, I truly believe that you should understand SR and GR before attempting to replace them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Bamboozled!
"πΊππ·π·π"
May 2003
Down not across
10,753 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
"Richard B. Woods"
Aug 2002
Wisconsin USA
11110000011002 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Bamboozled!
"πΊππ·π·π"
May 2003
Down not across
10,753 Posts |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| What if dark matter is actually light?(emitted light) | jasong | jasong | 32 | 2014-01-04 07:50 |
| Does processor temperature really matter? | RickC | Hardware | 11 | 2010-06-18 18:38 |
| Dark Matter. | mfgoode | Science & Technology | 3 | 2007-02-15 20:40 |
| Dark Energy. | mfgoode | Science & Technology | 3 | 2006-11-29 07:46 |
| A matter of PS | ET_ | Hardware | 23 | 2003-03-18 16:16 |