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.

 

Missing matter found in deep space

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2008 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Missing matter found in deep space


news.yahoo.com

Astronomers have found some matter that had been missing in deep space and say it is strung along web-like filaments that form the backbone of the universe.

The ethereal strands of hydrogen and oxygen atoms could account for up to half the matter that scientists knew must be there but simply could not see, the researchers reported on Tuesday.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on May, 20 2008 @ 10:49 PM
link   
Sounds amazing, I wonder what affect this will have on cosmology.



"It is kind of like a spider web. The gravity of the spider web is what produced what we see," Shull said in a telephone interview. "It's very thin. Some of it is very hot gas, almost a million degrees."

This is where the dark matter comes in. The dark matter is heating up the gas, Shull said.

"Dark matter has gravity. It pulls the gas in," Shull said. "This causes what I call sonic booms -- shock waves. This shock heats it to a million degrees. That makes it even harder to see."

The atoms of oxygen are in a stripped-down, ionized form. Five of the eight electrons are gone. It emits an ultraviolet spectrum of light that instruments aboard FUSE and Hubble can spot, Shull said.

These web-like filaments of matter are the structure upon which the galaxies form, he said.


news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on May, 20 2008 @ 11:25 PM
link   
Awesome. I don't really grasp a lot of this stuff, but I love reading about it.

Thanks for posting this.



posted on May, 20 2008 @ 11:35 PM
link   
I understand that scientists have very sophisticated ways of detecting things in our solar system and beyond. I find this fascinating but I am of course skeptical. How much can we really know? How are these conclusions reached?

The article does a poor job of explaining it, at least that's how I feel. How do they know that something billions and billions of light years away is 'a million degrees?' by looking at the space around it, you might say, but the limited amount of studies we have done in space might only pertain to our region of space, our gravity that we experience... there's so many variables and unknowns.

I have long held the belief that perhaps there are other wavelengths of light and sound, other ways that something can 'exsist'. How can we as humans apply our concept of 'temperature' to something that far away and that foreign? I've always thought that alien life is out there, but perhaps it is invisible to us since we are looking for something physical that leaves a trail of evidence. There are perhaps all sorts of forms of life not based on carbon and breathing oxygen but perhaps based on some other element, or based on something that is beyond what an 'element' is. what the heck do we know about anything?



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 08:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Sublime620
 


Ha yeah, and I'm probably only a step above you in terms of understanding. I just love the theoretical aspect to things like this, but the practical application and math go right by me.

It almost sounds like some sort of grid or matrix overlaying the universe. What would be even crazier is if it was created by an intelligent race. A literal web of communications or travel, who knows how it would work but imagine the possibilities.

The thing I wonder is how well this will integrate with current knowledge. Does it fill the gap or rock the boat?



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 08:09 AM
link   
Speaking of "web-like fillaments" you might be interested in this video:

Thunderbolts of the Gods is an amazing theory in which so many mysteries seem to be answered by allowing that our universe is electrical in nature. Fascinating stuff here...


Google Video Link



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 08:18 AM
link   
Related threads:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I'll reiterate that alternative (to the mainstream) theories in plasma cosmology have predicted these filaments long ago.

Notice how the article attributes it to gravity as usual... However it is most likely due to electromagnetic forces. Plasma on the large scale becomes inherently filamentary and cellular due to the interplay of electromagnetic forces. Much more info can be found in the threads I linked above, all of which are related in some manner to the power struggle between gravitationally based cosmology and plasma cosmology.

edited to add: Seriously, from the article "The dark matter is heating up the gas.." And people fall for this stuff? The gas is called Plasma, and dark matter has got NOTHING to do with it. It is amazing how mainstream shills continue to spin these discoveries as confirming their false view of reality. Yet another article that causes steam to come out from my skull... these mainstream shills need to wake up. Boy I wish I was paid to propagate disinformation like these alleged 'scientists'...

[edit on 21-5-2008 by Ionized]



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Ionized
 


I'm glad you further confirmed whoever wrote that article doesn't know much. I thought their explanations were odd, or just wrong, but with stuff like this you never know if how you think it works is actually wrong.



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 06:59 PM
link   
Parabol (good song,) I hope you didn't mistake my disdain for the alleged scientist in that article for anger towards your post. I just get a little angry sometimes at articles like this. What they are doing is confirming things that the plasma cosmologists already knew. However, while confirming the observational findings, they twist and distort the language so that it fits within their paradigmatic framework while ignoring the fact that non-mainstream cosmology had already predicted these findings many times over.

Mainstream adherents often call plasma 'hot gas' instead. Notice how he even explains part of what plasma is when he talks about ionized matter, yet then makes the jump that it is the 'gravity' from 'dark matter' causing the filaments to form. It is like they rub it in the faces of those who know, those who have been ostracized for speaking the truth. There is no 'dark matter', but rather electromagnetic forces acting on the interstellar and intergalactic plasma.

It is true that the majority of mainstream cosmologists know very little about plasma. Most are likely not even aware of the paradigmatic nature of their enterprise, and have been trained as mere technicians propagating the status quo. But many censors know, many heads of peer review boards know, many heads of institutes founded upon gravitational based cosmology know, many heads of physics departments and Deans of Science at various universities know.

Physics has relied far too long on reduction, simplification, mathematical ease. It is far more simple to dismiss an entire force based on an assumption, than it is to model reality and include the possible contribution from all known forces. Is reductionism an excuse to continue ignoring all the evidence for the alternate paradigm, and all the history of the mainstream cosmology which is indeed filled with deception and power struggle? When will enough REAL physicists step forward and admit that we are at the beginning of our understanding of the universe, not the end?

Damn this world. I could write a treatise but the social oppression we live under is enough to drive a man silent. Some of you have noticed that I don't expound much, though I could. I believe Newton said it best when he said nothing at all, for the minds of his alleged superiors where infantile and unprepared.

Anyhow, there is plenty of info shared by Squiz, Zeuzz and others in the threads I linked to in my above post. I hope people take the time to read things with an open mind, accepting of the fact that the status quo is nothing more than an outdated, debunked paradigm that is held in place by a thick veil of secrecy and oppression.



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Parabol
 

Does this possibly mean that the universe is doomed?



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by tpeele
 


While your post wasn't directed at me, I'd like to attempt an answer, assuming that your question was not sarcasm.

Within the paradigm of plasma cosmology, Eschatology (the study of the end of the universe) is not a focus. Rather, since the universe is viewed as an eternal process of renewal, doom is not really a concern. Yes, systems evolve and change, and this could mean death for many parts of the universe, but that death brings birth of something else. The organism of the universe as a whole is assumed infinite and eternal. Even if this is not the case, within our perceptual time scale, it can be assumed as valid within working constraints.

The intergalactic filaments are responsible for transfer of matter and energy, and from a computational point of view, information. What that information represents is open to interpretation of course. Assuming the fractal nature of the universe holds validity, with an understanding of consciousness among differing scales, it can be said that the universe is self-aware. Ideas in quantum physics even hint at this, as can be derived from an understanding of the work of David Bohm, who was both a plasma physicist and quantum physicist. Ok this may seem like a side track but my point is that 'doom' is a very subjective, scale and process dependent categorization for a misinterpretation of the regenerative nature of the universe. On a universal scale there is no doom, only change of form and process.

Now, with that said, a mainstream cosmologist might disagree completely, claiming that indeed the universe IS doomed and will see its end in the theorized 'Big Crunch'. Well, whatever.

edit: to add 'reply to' tag, though I thought I hit that button initially...

[edit on 21-5-2008 by Ionized]



posted on May, 22 2008 @ 11:18 AM
link   
Didn't mean to kill your thread...

By all means people, feel free to discuss the implications in the article, such as how dark matter allegedly heats up gas, and how dark matter causes the filaments to form. I promise not to snap any necks, I swear!



posted on May, 22 2008 @ 11:44 AM
link   
heres my theory on the universe and how it looks the way it is.....the dark matter everyone is looking for is really the stuff that this universe was filled with before the big bang forced all its matter into it..imagine trying to mix oil and washing up liquid....they wont mix and neither will the original matter and the new matter created after the big bang..they will both repel each other and that is why stars and planets are round as its being squeezed equally on all sides...if you where to mix the oil and washing up liqui with your hand you would get round blobs as well as strung out lines just like galaxy's...



posted on May, 22 2008 @ 11:52 AM
link   
can i also add that black holes do not as people think end in a singularity , a single point ... think of a blackhole as a balloon , it has a narrow mouth leading to a large stomach that swells the more matter it consumes...this matter is in constant spin just like the mouth where all matter though reduced to its elements is still not compressed to one small point...



posted on May, 22 2008 @ 11:53 AM
link   
reply to post by SystemiK
 


I am glad i am not the only one to see the plasma cosmology implications in this recent discovery of what appear to be the much anticipated Birkeland Strands.

we spent two or three days discussing this among the Pegasus Group after Zorgon forwarded it to us. it is very promising indeed.



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join