It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Black holes can not explain dark matter

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 11:11 AM
link   
Personally I quite liked the black holes as dark matter idea because of its simplicity.

Now there is a new study which looked for gravitational lensing in supernovae, and they did not find any. This allowed to estimate an upper limit for black holes. And that limit is about 40% of the dark matter mass.

journals.aps.org...


So it must be something else, some new physics, new particles.




posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 11:43 AM
link   
a reply to: moebius


Perhaps it takes too much energy to create the complete and fully operating physics in areas that we are currently not in.

When we measure these from a distance using our various observation devices, perhaps we just see the "animation" and that animation is just rendering the visual graphics and not the complete and fully operating physics app.
It might just be too draining on the Master CPU, who knows.


Gravity is set to somepoint below our "universe plane" and dark matter is like bundled up and used terrabytes of dead gravity scripts.

In essense, I guess I'm trying to say that dark matter creates a lot of lag so they only run the full physics package where they need to.



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: moebius

Considering that any photo we have seen of a dark mass warping spacetime is just an illustration down to the fact that trying to see a black hole, even the supermassive ones, with masses millions of times heavier than our sun, is almost impossible given there relatively tiny size comparatively speaking.

There may even be as many of 20,000 smaller black holes surrounding the massive black hole at the center of our galaxy as recently a team of researchers found evidence of a dozen black holes within three light-years of the galactic center.

As to the physics to support the notion of singularities, well we still have a lot to learn really regarding how our universe functions in its entirety. Chances are we will never have a complete understanding of such just down to the limitations of our species nevermind the scale of the place in question.
edit on 7-10-2018 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: moebius
Previous studies have reached similar conclusions, but what this study adds is improved constraints based on a larger data set. Quote from the paper:

"Our analysis improves substantially on previous SNe lensing studies [20], reflecting the evolution of the quality and quantity of data. Larger SNe catalogues (e.g. [46–48]) will significantly increase the constraining power of this technique [49]."

So as more data are collected on supernovae, future papers should refine the constraints even more.



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 02:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: moebius
Personally I quite liked the black holes as dark matter idea because of its simplicity.

So it must be something else, some new physics, new particles.


The missing matter is mostly composed of the particles that are the (1, 248) state of E8xE8 heterotic superstrings. They interact with the (248,1) state of the latter only gravitationally. The halos of galaxies is made up mostly of this invisible matter.

Just thought some of you might like to know.
As to how I know, well, that's a thirty-year old story......



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: moebius

This link is about a possible new particle discovery.

www.livescience.com... =20180927-ls

And. This link is about primeval black holes.

https: //www.livescience.com/63676-finding-the-oldest-black-holes.html?utm_source=lst-newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20180926-lst



posted on Oct, 7 2018 @ 11:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: EmmanuelGoldstein
a reply to: moebius


Perhaps it takes too much energy to create the complete and fully operating physics in areas that we are currently not in.

When we measure these from a distance using our various observation devices, perhaps we just see the "animation" and that animation is just rendering the visual graphics and not the complete and fully operating physics app.
It might just be too draining on the Master CPU, who knows.


Gravity is set to somepoint below our "universe plane" and dark matter is like bundled up and used terrabytes of dead gravity scripts.

In essense, I guess I'm trying to say that dark matter creates a lot of lag so they only run the full physics package where they need to.


This makes sense if we're in a simulation. It would explain what we don't understand. Lol




new topics

top topics



 
6

log in

join