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.

 

dark matter and gray matter don't mix

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 23 2006 @ 03:09 PM
link   
I think that this idea of dark matter is bogus. Just because their equations don't work doesn't mean they have to invent another nebulous concept.

The galaxies behave more like plasma than stone. Planets are more like masses with charge than big neutral bodies.

Electro dynamics controls the motion of galaxies and planets.

Things they don't know:
1. space is not neutral.
2. the earth is an electrical charge.
3. the universe probably has as exess electrial charge
4. the mass of electron may be wrong.


I feel like I am living in the dark ages.
The earth does not have a molten iron core (molten iron is not magnetic)!

I say modern theory is prof of "garbage in garbage out."

Electricity has more to do with gravity than is presently acknowledged.



Dae

posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 05:47 AM
link   
Bogus is as bogus does or are or something. Yeah I agree Dark Matter is made up.

You know what cracked me up? Its the Tether Incident with NASA. Something as simple as electrical charge, they got it wrong. Why?! Because we are barking up the wrong tree as some scientists have led us astray.

I actually wonder if gravity actually exists! Its probably an electro magetic force and torque.

Shomaker Levy 9 and its impact with Jupiter:
Source

“You won’t see anything. The comet crash will probably amount to nothing more than a bunch of pebbles falling into an ocean 500 million miles from Earth.”

But thats not what happened (as usual).

The Hubble Space Telescope (HST) detected a flare-up of fragment “G” of Shoemaker-Levy long before impact at a distance of 2.3 million miles from Jupiter. For the electrical theorists this flash would occur as the fragment crossed Jupiter’s plasma sheath, or magnetosphere boundary. Thornhill comments: “A plasma sheath, or ‘double layer’, is a region of strong electric field, so the outburst there of an electrified comet nucleus is expected. The outburst was a surprise to astronomers.


I cant give this post the brain energy that I would want to give it (school holidays >.


Edn

posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 06:14 AM
link   
A big clame there angryScientist but you havent given me any evidence or even real theory to your clames.

The equasions are right theres nothing to say otherwise, just because we cant see 95% of the universe does not mean we got our equasions wrong that's like saying if a deaf man cant hear us we are obviously not speaking.

We cant see Dark matter however we can find it using indirect methods and very recently Sienticts have come across proof that dark matter does exist.

news.bbc.co.uk...
news.nationalgeographic.com...



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 09:49 AM
link   
I do not believe in Dark Energy - but I fully believe in Dark Matter. The only problem is that we don't know where or what it is right now.

I mean, it sounds silly to say that there are trillions of little pieces of mass flying through you right now - but there are. They're called neutrinos. They have mass, if only the tiniest amount, but they're everywhere, and can pass through the entire Earth like it wasn't even there. Neutrinos were a missing piece of Dark Matter.

That's the important bit of information to understand. Dark Matter is the catch-all phrase for a whole range of matter that doesn't act like how we would want.


And by the way, I thought it was science-fact that the earth's core is NOT liquid, but is in fact a solid iron core.

Also, I'd like to see what you base your conclusions of space not being neutral, and the mass of the electron being wrong. Also, when you said "the earth is an electric charge", did you mean instead to say "HAS" an electric charge? And why would the universe have an excess electric charge? I'd like to see some sense made out of your proposals.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by angryScientist

I feel like I am living in the dark ages.
The earth does not have a molten iron core (molten iron is not magnetic)!



Maybe you should look around and see if you are surrounded by knights in shining armor, as maybe time travel has been invented and the rest of us are unaware!!
As Yarium has stated, we have known the core was solid since at least 1936.


The Earth's solid iron inner core, which was discovered by seismological studies in 1936, is estimated to be roughly the size of the moon. It rotates because it is surrounded by a much larger liquid outer core, and together the two form a giant electrical motor."


www.valdostamuseum.org...

Although I agree you are 100% right that scientists are so far grasping at straws to explain the nature of the so called "dark matter". That part of your post is a good start. The claims you have to explain it are a bit more, shall we say... interesting...


I do hope they come to understand it within my lifetime, it's one of the great puzzles of science IMO.

TheMesh



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by angryScientist
I think that this idea of dark matter is bogus. Just because their equations don't work doesn't mean they have to invent another nebulous concept.

The galaxies behave more like plasma than stone. Planets are more like masses with charge than big neutral bodies.

Electro dynamics controls the motion of galaxies and planets.

Things they don't know:
1. space is not neutral.
2. the earth is an electrical charge.
3. the universe probably has as exess electrial charge
4. the mass of electron may be wrong.


I feel like I am living in the dark ages.
The earth does not have a molten iron core (molten iron is not magnetic)!

I say modern theory is prof of "garbage in garbage out."

Electricity has more to do with gravity than is presently acknowledged.





Think of dark matter as water and everything else as like planets as rocks in a lake.

For lack of a better term I would call "dark matter" the cosmic poop of the universe. Atoms that never formed to make anything exepept generate a relative distance used for mesurement between obtjects. An empty glass is always full of something(i hate that saying so much!) wheather it be air or whatever.

Dark matter has an effect on our universes movements simply becuse it allows every ombject in the universe to take up "space" on a plane. Weather our univers is invisable, flat, or three demensial dark matter is there. We know its there simpy becuase its "black" to our eyes. If it wasnt "black" to our eyes then that would mean there was no light or matter in which to distinguise itself from.

Everything has a counter point in our universe weather you can see it or mesure really means nothing. Its a perceptual thing but for their to be something in space nothing has to exist and nothing cant cant(not a typo there) not exist. If nothing didnt exist then existance would be impossible.

This is just my theory please dont beat me with the stupid stick.


[edit on 24-8-2006 by Sonata]

[edit on 24-8-2006 by Sonata]



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 05:47 PM
link   
Isn't Gray matter the stuff between both your ears?

Some people have more of it then others.



posted on Aug, 24 2006 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by angryScientist
I think that this idea of dark matter is bogus. Just because their equations don't work doesn't mean they have to invent another nebulous concept.

Erm... your handle is "scientist." This means you understand the concept of theoretical equations, tests, proofs, and the whole scientific process whereby you revise things that don't work.

So far, you haven't given us any details on what makes it bogus.


The galaxies behave more like plasma than stone.

This statement of yours is puzzling. Surely any scientist worth the title recognizes that the bulk of the matter in galaxies is comprised of stars and stars, of course, are plasma.


Planets are more like masses with charge than big neutral bodies.

I hope you have some good models that prove your claim here?


Electro dynamics controls the motion of galaxies and planets.

And here. And then you should explain why you think this is superior to the gravitational space-time models and explain where their models are weak and then be prepared to explain the alternative model to the observed gravitational lensing of quasars.

And any scientist worthy of the handle should be able to explain where Saslaw went wrong (because most of us think he got it right... but you should be prepared to defend the better model with good math.) www.aip.org...


Things they don't know:
1. space is not neutral.
2. the earth is an electrical charge.
3. the universe probably has as exess electrial charge
4. the mass of electron may be wrong.

How do you know this is right? What's your model for it? What alterations are you proposing in astrophysics?


I feel like I am living in the dark ages.
The earth does not have a molten iron core (molten iron is not magnetic)!

It does, indeed, have a molten core.


I say modern theory is prof of "garbage in garbage out."

Electricity has more to do with gravity than is presently acknowledged.


Okay... grab your calculus and topology books and give us some hard data. Don't just give us a rant that sounds like a high school student who slept through math and science -- discuss the direct problems you have with the issue and why the models you propose (and what you're proposing) are a better fit to the observed data.



posted on Sep, 2 2006 @ 07:15 PM
link   
Sorry I haven’t replied sooner. I’ve been away.

Let me preface my response by saying that my theories are a work in progress. I have nothing fit for publication. I hope you understand that I put my thoughts forward for discussion only.

Starting with the electron mass;
The earth is rotating. With the electrons experiencing an angular force in the presence of the earth’s magnetic field they will be deflected in one direction. This will add energy to it and will affect the perceived mass. To get the true mass we would have to remove our self from the planetary, solar, galactic, and any larger systems.

All the electrons will be deflected by the magnetic field toward the center of the earth. Because of this the core of the earth is saturated with electrons. As you move away from the center you encounter a positive sheath of protons that is deflected outward by the magnetic field. The electrical attraction between core and outer sheath will keep the sheath in place.

Sorry, I’m not finished but I have to go.



posted on Sep, 3 2006 @ 02:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by angryScientist
To get the true mass we would have to remove our self from the planetary, solar, galactic, and any larger systems.


Which is nearly impossible and definitely impossible using today's technology. =/

I don't know, the problem with many people today is that they take modern physics and believe in it religiously. They believe in a theory because they're told to. Sure, (commonly accepted idea goes here) is probably right, but there's always the chance that it isn't.

We are humans, and should never see ourselves as anything more.

But then, what does it mean to be human exactly? Hmm....

[edit on 3-9-2006 by Johnmike]



posted on Sep, 4 2006 @ 03:09 AM
link   
Drak matter is a name to the space between planets, stars, etc. As these bodys travil further in to space the dark matter increases. So dark matter is as real as the air u breath. So its not bogus



posted on Sep, 4 2006 @ 03:18 AM
link   
Dude the inner core rotates ver fast in a large scalle about 20+ RPM with that energy it creats a magnetic feild that expanes, the faster it rotatis the wider the feild. for example, take pizza dough the faster u spin it the bigger it gets.

Also Every 200,000 years the magnetic feild shuts for >1 year, then it switches places like north will be south and south would be north. this is due the inner and outer core changing directions in its rotation. take a rotating disc and spin it twords u in a circular patter right to left then spin it up and down. so it like a spining sphere in all directions and soon or later the sping that was going twords u is now away from you and its going left to right and down to up,this is what causes the poles to switch places. Sorry if you cant picture it i tryed to word it so you can imagin it.

The cores due cause magnetic feilds and who ever says anywise deserves to shoot from this planet.


[edit on 4-9-2006 by The Parasite]

[edit on 4-9-2006 by The Parasite]



posted on Oct, 29 2006 @ 10:07 AM
link   


Present day astronomy/cosmology seems to be on the horns of a very painful dilemma. This dilemma is caused by the fact that Newton's Law of Gravity does not give the correct (observed) results in most cases involving galaxy rotation. The "missing matter" proposal attempts to balance the equation by increasing one of the variables (one of the mass terms). The second proposal (MOND) is to change Newton's equation itself. (If you are losing the game, change the rules.)

But, the ultimate resolution of the dilemma lies in realizing that Newton's Law of Gravity is simply not applicable in these situations. Maxwell’s equations are! Why do astrophysicists grope wildly for solutions in every possible direction except the right one?


www.electric-cosmos.org...


Sorry The Parasite, dark matter is not the space between matter. It is said to be matter. The problem is that it is a fiction and therefore not "as real as the air u breath."



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 12:03 AM
link   


The point needs to be made again and again: In our Electric Universe there is no need for weird "dark matter."

Source

Interstellar space is alive with electric currents.



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 09:20 AM
link   
I agree.
I see little reason to believe dark matter exists.

It's as if someone didn't quite understand how gravity and other effects in space worked... then made up some form of imaginary matter that explains it easier. Thats not science.

Yes, space is brimming with electrical charges passing here and there, but they are only stray electrons, there's no matter to bond with.

Space is the neutral area, the zero. There's nothing more to it.
It's whats beyond all the nothingness thats worth persuing. Other solar systems etc.



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 09:51 AM
link   
People, please.

There is plenty of mathematical evidence to support the existence of both dark matter and dark energy.

When enough dark matter is gathered into a huge "halo", it attracts ordinary gas to form stars, and so becomes a galaxy.

The following clip, is an animation based upon a mathematically accurate model of how dark matter is distributed and galaxies are formed.

Milky Way's dark matter modelled in best detail yet

You may also take interest in the following: -

A DIRECT EMPIRICAL PROOF OF THE EXISTENCE OF DARK MATTER

My studies on the origins of mass have drawn me to the conclusion that dark matter is in fact just space density.

In other words the total surface area at the Planck level of space is far greater than in normal void space.

To understand this you must first look towards understanding what mass is and where it comes from.

Further information can be found within the following thread.

Finally an answer to EVERYTHING - Quantum Field Gravity - BRAIDS

I am currently constructing a study of what happens to Black holes as they evaporate due to hawkings radiation.

If Black holes do in fact evaporate then there must be plenty of so called holes in an advanced stage of decay. The mass from these decaying black holes could act very much like dark matter.

Though in LQG Loop Quantum Gravity, simply put a black hole is just an area of space with a massive braid density (huge spatial surface area)

Any Questions?

NeoN HaZe.


[edit on 11-12-2006 by Neon Haze]



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 10:37 AM
link   
No questions, just let us know how that study goes. I'm intrigued.



posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 06:07 PM
link   
it is known that iron loses all magnetivity beyond 6200 degrees celsius, yet we also "know" that the earths core is hotter than that.

so what is it with the aspect of human ego, to gain supposed facts that refute eachother, and then chose the one we think is correct, even through evidence to the contrary.

I think a new modal is needed, i agree that the Electrogravitic princible explains a MULTIUDE of problems with our current modals. And yes, just like 600yrs ago, the new theories will have to battle through the "Dogma" tribe untill someone with credibility is brave enough to sail off the edge.

Bruce Cathie touches on ALOT of these areas....
A MUST READ for anyone interested...... a well informed skeptic is better than a skeptic who only sees one side of the arguement.



posted on Dec, 12 2006 @ 04:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Anomic of Nihilism
it is known that iron loses all magnetivity beyond 6200 degrees celsius, yet we also "know" that the earths core is hotter than that.


Incorrect.

The molten outer core of the Earth is a mixture of Iron and Nickel and has a temp of about 4300 degrees Celsius



The earths core actually creates a magnetic field because it's molten core is spinning around a solid core.

A good place to learn the basics about the geodynamo effects our core produces go here: -

Magnetic Field of the Earth


so what is it with the aspect of human ego, to gain supposed facts that refute each other, and then chose the one we think is correct, even through evidence to the contrary.


The facts don't refute each other... maybe you just misinterpreted the data.


I think a new modal is needed, i agree that the Electrogravitic princible explains a MULTIUDE of problems with our current modals. And yes, just like 600yrs ago, the new theories will have to battle through the "Dogma" tribe untill someone with credibility is brave enough to sail off the edge.


Why do we need a new model, when the one we have has scientific proof?
Can you come up with scientific proof that the current model is incorrect?


Bruce Cathie touches on ALOT of these areas....
A MUST READ for anyone interested...... a well informed skeptic is better than a skeptic who only sees one side of the arguement.


A Sceptic has evidence to back up their claims or at least give a reason to disbelieve current accepted theory or proof.

Angryscientist has this on his avatar, a little too small to see in any detail. Take a closer look.



As I don't see any evidence to support a claim against current models, I see no reason anyone should be sceptical about our magnetosphere.

All the best,

NeoN HaZe


[edit on 12-12-2006 by Neon Haze]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join