What is Dark Matter? Theorists say its undetectable energy that's neither mass or atomic. In essence we simply cant see it or its effects unlike Gravity or Electromagentics. My theory for Dark Matter is that its "TIME" itself, Time in the universe is a form of mass.

Well don't forget, there is both dark matter AND dark energy, so if dark matter is time, then what is dark energy?

And light energy, light matter, dark matter, and dark energy all exist in the same plane, so it would be mind boggling to just take dark matter out of the mix and claim dark matter to be time.

Alright, now that I have refuted your theory, it's time for my theory which is probably even more ridiculous, but here it is...

I think dark matter is light matter going backwards in time. Our senses are not able to see matter going in the reverse direction in time, so that is why the matter is "dark" to us, but if we were all seeing all sensing beings we would be able to see all matter, and we would be able to see that some matter is going forwards in time and some matter is going backwards in time.

Interesting topic though, there is a lot of room for creative speculation for this type of thing.

Responding to the OP:

Dark Matter can only be detected by it's gravitational effects on that which surrounds it. It has no electro-magnetic effects. At the same time, cosmologists and astronomers have inferred that it makes up a vast majority of the known, phenomenal/noumenal, universe.

Responding to OP and Wang Tang

Time, as we know and recognize it, is a purely human concept.

There is no actual force of time; it doesn't matter if we count hours, minutes, days, weeks, months, years, et cetera; the truth is time is a concept invented by humans.

Take a survey of cultures around the world and you will find that:

A. many measure time differently from "Americans"
B. several don't even know what "time" is

Dark Matter therefore, cannot be any measure of time. Neither forward, nor backwards time.

Time does not exist. We calculate time as a purely metaphysical reference point for ourselves to judge our actions and events by. But if you did not measure time, everything would still occur just as it does when you attach it to an arbitrary moment in existence.

and now for something completely different...

I think 'dark matter' is simply some kind of "reflection" of any/all spiritual universes. Heaven, Hell, the Summer-lands, the Elysian fields, et cetera. Dark Matter is not visible in our universe, but it is present, and woven into our universes fabric.

So, why shouldn't an "invisible" presence that is everywhere be just that - the afterlife poking through.

My theory is probably just as retarded, but, there you go.

Originally posted by Wandering Scribe

First off, you say that "before the Big Bang there was a perfectly ordered Universe..." I'm curious where this view comes from. Astronomy and Cosmology both agree that no one knows what existed before the Big Bang. In fact, it's mostly because of the rapid expansion of the Universe outwardly that Astronomers and Cosmologists are able to arrive at the theory that a "big bang" ever occurred. So, I'm curious to learn about this "pre-big-bang" Universe. Care to elaborate?

You caught me there. It was not a perfectly ordered universe, it was as close to perfectly ordered that the universe has ever gotten in known history, but you are right, it was never perfectly ordered. Here is what my source says:

"As the clock is turned back to ever earlier times, the whole of the cosmos is compressed to the size of an orange, a lemon, a pea, a grain of sand, and to yet tinier size still. Extrapolating all the way back to "the beginning," the universe would appear to have begun as a point in which all matter and energy is squeezed together to unimaginable density and temperature. It is believed that a cosmic fireball, the big bang, erupted from this volatile mixture spewing forth the seeds from which the universe as we know it evolved." -p. 83 Brian Greene in The Elegant Universe

Secondly, the chaos theory is still something I agree with, though not in the same sense as you I think. You state that the Universes eventual tilt towards entropy is based on stars being born, super-novae, and black hole creation. This isn't entirely true though. A living star, which goes into supernovae does not automatically become a black hole; several are reborn, thus creating new stars and or solar systems.

You got me again, it is true only the biggest stars have the possibility of turning into a black hole. However, it is also believed that at the center of every galaxy is a super massive black hole, so regardless of whether the star turns into a black hole or not, I'm assuming the entire galaxy is eventually going to be sucked into the super massive black hole anyways. I don't know if that is a safe assumption to make, but I would think a super massive black hole in the center of a galaxy would have the power to suck in the entire galaxy, but again I don't have any evidence for this.

"A supermassive black hole is the largest type of black hole in a galaxy, on the order of hundreds of thousands to billions of solar masses. Most, if not all galaxies, including the Milky Way, are believed to contain supermassive black holes at their centers." -Wikipedia "super massive black hole"

Thirdly, I'd love to accept your Garden of Eden reference as grounds for your theory. In the hopes of keeping this from becoming a theological debate (another of my strong suits) I will just accept it, and ask you then what evidence there is for this "perfect time" existing in the Garden of Eden.

I'm not so sure what you mean by "perfect time." I'm going to assume you are referring to humans before they ate from the Tree of Knowledge; what were they like before they ate the Forbidden Fruit? They were just like any other animal, they were the product of Evolution. Without the power to reason, these humans were pretty much like apes and monkeys, they lived and died without knowing or worrying about what death was.

Now this is all speculation on my part, there is no hard evidence for my argument, only the words of Genesis and the theory of Evolution to support my speculation.

Third Point:

I call "perfect time" the belief that before the Fall man was somehow "perfect" because knowledge of good and evil had not yet been introduced into mankind's world. Anything from this blissful utopia I characterize as "perfect," like: perfect diets, perfect aging, perfect time, perfect knowledge, perfect health, etc. Man was seemingly perfect until the Fruit and inevitable exile from the Garden.

I don't generally consider Genesis to be an adequate historical document, but I'm not unfamiliar with those who do see it as the inerrant word of God. Which is why I do my best to keep theology out of the equation. You and I most likely have different views on the importance of Yahweh on mankind's existence. And it has been my experience that when debating over religion people's civility often tends to diminish rather quickly.

~ Wandering Scribe

First of all regarding your second point, I read in another book by Brian Greene The Fabric of the Cosmos that matter in a black hole is in the highest state of entropy known in the universe, so that is where I say time "ends" at least in our understanding.

As for your third point, I consider my theological knowledge erratic at best, it definitely is not one of my strong points, so I would actually appreciate it if you enlightened me on your theological arguments, our combined knowledge could lead to a better understanding of time and dark energy.

As for your experience that debates over religion become chaotic, I would agree, but I assure you that our viewpoints on God will not clash because I am completely open minded and tolerant when it comes to religious views, partly because I myself don't have any fixed religious views at the moment.

What I'm trying to say is if we get into theology I guarantee you it will stay a civilized discussion.

Sorry guys/gals - looking at time is a red herring when examining “dark matter”. The scientists have correctly identified some of its characteristics, but they still do not have a clue what they’ve got.

I think I have a good guess what it is out there. Here’s a description that goes a little beyond what the literature has to say. And by the way, the phenomena has another description called “Hawking Radiation”. You might Google it for a description from his point of view.

The dark matter can be described as follows:

While it is a given that all matter in our universe is electronic; that is, it is made up of different charges and polarities that are balanced within a discrete atomic organization, not all radiation that is detected should be assumed to be in an electronic state. Black matter (as erroneously named) is the case in point not to make such an assumption.

The so-called “minimum energy” detected in our universe background is a radiation which emanates from energy that is pre-electronic. Consequently, it will not behave according to the rules of materialization, or matter’s reaction to the effects of gravity on it, but it does react to extremes in temperature. Consequently, it will often be detected around areas of near absolute zero. Black bodies are usually burned out stars which have collapsed and compressed their electronic constituent parts to the point that even x-rays can not penetrate them. The lack of electronic activity plunges temperatures to near a fraction above absolute zero around them. However, absolute zero can not be found precisely because of the activity of Hawking radiation or black energy as called here. The slightest motion in space creates heat.

This radiation has no debt to gravity. It has anti-gravity effects which it can turn on and off depending upon its axial velocity. It’s axial velocity is directly affected by temperature. Now, this is not a particle. It is not antimatter. All of those things are related to the electronic organization of materialized energy. In this case, however, the radiation is not materialized but an energy which is just above the spectrum of universe energy (electronic) and below force (cosmic energy). Its correct spectrum description should be called “emergent” energy - a most unusual state to be found no where else in the universe. It is unique.

It exists as pre-matter having emerged from cosmic energy which is not measurable as anything but as degrees of force. A good example of force is the science fiction use of the idea of a force field - an invisible energy expanding outwardly and, if strong enough, a wall that can not be penetrated. When this field is broken down this radiation appears, and it appears in 100 distinct versions of itself, each version having a different axial spin in three dimensions. Only like axial spins attract each other as this radiation “clumps” together in discrete packets when temperature affects its neutrality to move it into discrete particles. The electron is composed of this radiation in exact numbers of self-organization requiring 100 same-type radiation entities to form the electron.

The electron has mass. It is affected by gravity. But that which composes an electron is reactive to pre-material force only because it has no mass and no central organization. Here you are seeing why it is true that matter can not be destroyed. It is composed of radiation that is eternal. These radiation pieces can react to particles as a catalyst to cause disruption of certain atomic elements requiring immense power to overcome by man. It forms neutrons, protons, quarks, and even photons, and passes right through the empty space in the atom with enough approximate scale as the room earth has between Jupiter and our sun.

Now there are particles in our universe that have no mass (e.g. photons belonging to the boson group), but the boson particles do react to gravity even if it requires x-rays to trigger such reactions. These black radiation entities are unique and non-reactive and can be mistaken for electronic background radiation until someone like Hawking found them out in the 1970's. I see no further development of the theory much beyond his original thesis about evaporation of black bodies even today. So we must wait for science to catch up to verify what is shown to you above. Then the real fun begins to invent ways to capture these pre-material radiational entities to put them to work.

My sources are discretely hidden so I prefer to keep them that way. You are welcome to question me, but I will not provide source material unless it can be found in published literature and then full acknowledgment will be made.

Oh, and as regard to the subject of time: this radiation, the black matter as it is sometimes called, avoids taking time to do its thing. It has a “flash” presence– it’s only tip of the hat to time and that flash is the radiation being discovered and has science scratching its head.

I hope this provides some reason for creative debate. The subject badly needs new ideas to bring the concept into greater maturity and understanding.

Aronolac