Dark Matter
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-03-2012, 12:00 PM
Dark Matter
Please explain the difference between dark matter and dark energy to me in layman's terms. I just don't understand it. I know dark matter holds everything together and how can dark energy pull everything apart. Sounds like a counter diction in terms. what am i missing? Then their is phantom energy? I love this stuff but get lost so quick.

please be kind and don't be mean about my lack of understanding.

History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a
free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their
political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their
own purpose. ~ Thomas Jefferson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-03-2012, 12:52 PM
RE: Dark Matter
For what scientist know you could call it Bob and Jane and it would mean the same. They call it Dark matter because it's something they can't see but has gravity, so dark matter. And dark energy because again, they can't see it, but it's making things accelerate away from eachother, making it look like an energy.
That's all they know, there are hypothesis on what those things could be made of and there are some measurements on the amount but that's pretty much it, they don't know much more than that, the problem is that stuff makes almost everything in the universe and we can only see a small percentage.

[Image: sigvacachica.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes nach_in's post
23-03-2012, 01:08 PM
RE: Dark Matter
(23-03-2012 12:52 PM)nach_in Wrote:  For what scientist know you could call it Bob and Jane and it would mean the same. They call it Dark matter because it's something they can't see but has gravity, so dark matter. And dark energy because again, they can't see it, but it's making things accelerate away from eachother, making it look like an energy.
That's all they know, there are hypothesis on what those things could be made of and there are some measurements on the amount but that's pretty much it, they don't know much more than that, the problem is that stuff makes almost everything in the universe and we can only see a small percentage.

IIRC the Higgs Boson will be a key to unlocking both. Correct?

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-03-2012, 01:31 PM
RE: Dark Matter
Dark Energy came about because of the expansion of the universe. They at first thought that one of the constants in the formulas they used where wrong. There were a few things, but in the end, they really didn't know anything except that it was accelerating the universe. They called this force that seemed to do this "dark energy". "Dark" because they were in the dark about it (basically not anything known yet), and "energy" because something was pushing the universe outward faster.

They know approximately how much because of the current acceleration compared to how it was long ago (from observations and calculations). Like they say in the article, it's possible that dark energy is simply a property of space. That's how much they don't know about it.

Dark matter on the other hand is from calculations of galaxy speeds. There is a lot of mass that should be there to affect the speed at which the galaxies spin. It's called matter as opposed to mass, because according to calculations it should have mass of some sort like a type of matter.

These are all a work in progress and they try hard to figure this stuff out, but it's difficult, because the data is so far away from us. We are getting better and better equipment to study. However, we are only at the tip of the iceberg. I'm guessing before this is done, they will probably find that there is a physical property they are missing, because it hardly shows up on small scale (well, our solar system's scale), much like gravity in the quantum range. It's also possible that it's that quantum stuff that might be what they are looking for, but how do you test for that up in space? It's a long road for science, but makes things interesting.

That's what I can gather anyway.

http://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/foc...rk-energy/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy

Defy gravity... stand up. Drinking Beverage
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like craniumonempty's post
23-03-2012, 01:36 PM
RE: Dark Matter
(23-03-2012 01:08 PM)germanyt Wrote:  
(23-03-2012 12:52 PM)nach_in Wrote:  For what scientist know you could call it Bob and Jane and it would mean the same. They call it Dark matter because it's something they can't see but has gravity, so dark matter. And dark energy because again, they can't see it, but it's making things accelerate away from eachother, making it look like an energy.
That's all they know, there are hypothesis on what those things could be made of and there are some measurements on the amount but that's pretty much it, they don't know much more than that, the problem is that stuff makes almost everything in the universe and we can only see a small percentage.

IIRC the Higgs Boson will be a key to unlocking both. Correct?

not quite, but the higgs is key to understand what gives mass to particles, hence it would be useful to explain gravity. I don't know if the higgs would explain dark energy though :/

[Image: sigvacachica.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes nach_in's post
26-03-2012, 01:28 PM
RE: Dark Matter
Thanks to all for your help. I do so much enjoy to learn about new things. I cant just sit and watch a TV all day and waist my life away. I think reading has become a lost art. Maybe not with the people on here but in general. So sad but true. I ask allot of people what they have read lately and never get a good response. That may be who I am asking too. I find the older the person the more they read, unless their in school. It could be people just don't have time for it. This could be a good topic.

History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a
free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their
political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their
own purpose. ~ Thomas Jefferson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-03-2012, 01:36 PM
RE: Dark Matter
I find myself on wiki sometimes reading something on say, quantum mechanics. Then I'll just click the blue links to other pages related to it. I do that for hours some days when I don't have many people to call or appointments to see at work.

“Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect.”

-Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes germanyt's post
26-03-2012, 02:34 PM (This post was last modified: 26-03-2012 03:13 PM by Luminon.)
RE: Dark Matter
Here's what I learned over the years.
Dark matter is a cathegory of matter. It could be equivalent to our matter, counterpart to our univere, but made of Weakly Interacting Massive Particles, or supersymmetric particles. But most probably it's particles because it makes noise.

Another interesting and probably true thing about dark matter is, that it's not dark, it radiates EM radiation, microwave, radio or both. That is, if you look at the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation, it's not blank, it's pocked with marks of stronger and weaker heat remnants of the Big Bang. These slight (0.1%) differences in "temperature" allowed the early formation of galaxies after Big Bang and thus our existence.
[Image: 300px-WMAP_2010.png]
However, I believe this might be the effect of dark matter. Scientists discovered that dark matter probably forms scaffolds for galaxies, which is a very convenient explanation why these differences in CMBR ever occured in the early universe.
Another thing to note is, that there is too much "noise" in the universe, six times more than expected, the noise being a strong radio signal. So dark matter might be our culprit behind this all, behind the formation of galaxies, shining and radiating abundantly, but not in visible spectrum.



This video above shows dark matter halos of two clusters unscathed by the collisions their more solid counterparts just underwent. This doesn't necessarily mean dark matter is something extremely exotic. The answer might lie in terms of plasma or magnetic plasma physics. Plasma holds its structure by electric charges. It may also appear in filaments of particles, instead of clouds. It may behave a little counter-intuitively, like not colliding when it should. I'm not really sure on this one.
If there are dark matter scaffolds for galaxies, then there can be also "empty scaffolds" of dark matter
Jay Alfred, Between Moon and Earth Wrote:A deep optical image, from the telescope at Kitt Peak, showed the cluster of galaxies — abell 2218, along with many faint blue galaxies in
the distant background which had been distorted into arcs in the images
constructed . according to astronomers, these distortions were the re-
sult of ‘gravitational lensing’ caused by a high density of dark matter near
the centre of the cluster . Gravity bends light in a similar way that a lens
does — in a phenomenon that astronomers call ‘gravitational lensing .’ In
this case, while gravitational lensing was evident, the matter which caused
this lensing could not be found! The astronomers were forced to conclude
that invisible galaxies were causing the lensing phenomenon . a team of
european astronomers noticed similar distortions in light from distant
bright galaxies they were imaging . But there was no visible object that
could account for the distortions . ‘It was a true mass detection but difficult
to confirm,’ said Peter Schneider of the University of Bonn, a member of
the team . In other words, mass was detected but there was nothing there
that they could see or image.
and maybe there are whole dark matter galaxies.
Jay Alfred, Between Moon and Earth Wrote:In 2000 robert Minchin and his team at Cardiff University in Wales no-
ticed two apparently isolated hydrogen clouds in a radio telescope survey of
the Virgo Cluster of galaxies . follow-up observations with visible-light tel-
escopes showed that one of these clouds was associated with a faintly glow-
ing galaxy . However, the second cloud had no partner galaxy . according to
Minchin, its motion suggests that it’s a small part of a massive object weigh-
ing as much as a galaxy of 100 billion suns . and yet this object remains
invisible . If Minchin and his team are right, they would have found the first
member of a population of galaxies that theorists have proposed but observ-
ers had never seen.
That would mean some really mind-blowing possibilities.


These are some of my thoughts on dark matter. Beyond that I have extensive theories, based around the fact, that dark matter concentrates itself around and within gravitational objects, like galaxies, solar systems and planets. In some my posts here I explore the possibility that it interacts with living organisms, atmospheric phenomena and so on. I think there is some evidence for that, but everywhere I go people aren't yet convinced that DM is material, though there is some evidence for that too. I think dark matter might be an alter-ego underlying our universe, even down to the structure of our bodies, which opens some thought-provoking lines of thought. We might be mistaken when thinking of it as the stuff out there far away in the space that does not concern us.


As for dark energy, this one is a mystery, unless craniumonempty is right. We know that space expands with increasing speed. By space I mean the space itself, it's like stretching a rug under galaxies and stars. Dark energy can not be an energy as we know it, because this speed of expansion adds together with speed at which the stars are moving and it might even surpass the speed of light! (I might be wrong here, it might "relatively" surpass the speed of light) Which is not the case, an added energy to relativistic speed would make the stars extremely massive and they'd probably collapse into black holes or time would slow down for them, as Einstein teaches us. So if the "dark energy" is simply a property of space and not a real thing, that would again be a very convenient explanation
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Luminon's post
26-03-2012, 02:52 PM
RE: Dark Matter
Here's a great video that helped me understand the dark matter/energy quandary :
http://www.ted.com/talks/patricia_burcha...nergy.html

On the subject of books, I highly suggest 'The Adventurers Guide to the Universe' by Milo Wolff. That book is really good at explaining why we know what we know about the universe and the history of current theories. Starts off simple and gets a little complicated towards the end with his new idea of space resonance theory. I enjoyed it.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Grassy Knoll's post
26-03-2012, 03:01 PM
RE: Dark Matter
(23-03-2012 01:31 PM)craniumonempty Wrote:  Dark Energy came about because of the expansion of the universe. They at first thought that one of the constants in the formulas they used where wrong. There were a few things, but in the end, they really didn't know anything except that it was accelerating the universe. They called this force that seemed to do this "dark energy". "Dark" because they were in the dark about it (basically not anything known yet), and "energy" because something was pushing the universe outward faster.

They know approximately how much because of the current acceleration compared to how it was long ago (from observations and calculations). Like they say in the article, it's possible that dark energy is simply a property of space. That's how much they don't know about it.

Dark matter on the other hand is from calculations of galaxy speeds. There is a lot of mass that should be there to affect the speed at which the galaxies spin. It's called matter as opposed to mass, because according to calculations it should have mass of some sort like a type of matter.

These are all a work in progress and they try hard to figure this stuff out, but it's difficult, because the data is so far away from us. We are getting better and better equipment to study. However, we are only at the tip of the iceberg. I'm guessing before this is done, they will probably find that there is a physical property they are missing, because it hardly shows up on small scale (well, our solar system's scale), much like gravity in the quantum range. It's also possible that it's that quantum stuff that might be what they are looking for, but how do you test for that up in space? It's a long road for science, but makes things interesting.

That's what I can gather anyway.

http://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/foc...rk-energy/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy
I agree with this. Personally, I think there is something just fundamentally wrong with our current understanding.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: