posted on Jul, 5 2003 @ 02:07 PM
"The existence of antiprotons might help explain "dark matter," some invisible matter that makes up most of the universe."
This is true.. that is something I thought of, but we need to narrow down the possibilities before we can know for sure. Some of the dark matter is
made up of neutrinos, which we now know (pretty much) for sure.
"Most scientists have recently accepted the existence of this phenomenon, but have no real means to explain it. if we crack the anit-proton problem,
we may well have the answer."
Even if antiphotons do add to dark matter... it will actually add to dark energy, most likely. There are two separate "dark" categories. Since
light is an energy, despite the so-called particle qualities, it would fall under the dark energy category. Then we'd be famous for such a discovery
and they'd give us a year supply of cookies for our efforts. Wow.
"Read up on it in some more places than CERN though, some of the people there can think pretty close-mindedly."
Professional physicists lose their jobs if they don't have a mainstream viewpoint. It has to do with intolerance, incompetance, and tradition. Even
Stephen Hawking claims to be a traditionalist now-a-days, even though he became famous by proving the (then outrageous) claim of blackholes.
"(did I just make that word up?)"
No, I don't believe so... I've heard it before.
"I think that Valhall is on the right track, in terms of the frequency of the energies. Just as light is broken up into different frequencies...(oh,
this next part is going to be long.)"
You might want to take a look at one of my arguments against frequencies on the other topics. Light is an energy and does have frequencies, which are
just different wavelengths for the most part.
"A few years ago, they realized that you can make lasers in different frequencies, and if stored on a device(ie DVD, CD) you could burn multiple
paths over each other, but on different frequencies."
Frequencies for CDs and DVDs relate to how thin the information can be added to the surface of the disk. At a lower frequencies (such as the new blue
lasers that will be coming out), the information can be more tightly packed. As far as digitizing information on a wave, that is supposedly a fairly
complex process that I'm not even sure of. Yes, it is suppose to be possible, but I do not know what is involved.
"A special laser eye would then scan one frequency at a time, keep the data in a buffer of sorts, and you could hold hundreds of CDs on one
You are talking about overwriting information on different frequencies. I have not heard of that being possible thus far. It is a good idea, but
hardly the key to a Grand Unified Theory, if you ask me.
"But they only recently began really trying to make this work. The same thing is happening in the world of particle physics right now. We have been
looking at one, and only one energy level, where the most and largest energy particles exist. what about the extreme edge of the spectrum?"
We use larger particles because they are easier to collide and have more pronounced effects. This benefits us. I believe the larger particles
explain how the smaller ones interact as well. Of course, things like antimatter are done at low energy levels because they are so hard to create.
That is a technicality. Either way, we are still collecting the information, which is what is important.