Musings on Fundamental Forces


#1

And now for a topic a little outside of our norm here. Our host posted a link to this article in another thread…

It discussed a hypothesis which said that "dark matter’ really didn’t exist but was an artifact of cosmic expansion. The details of the hypothesis had an explanation for the most common effect attributed to dark matter- that stars in spiral galaxies are going around them so fast that they should be flung out of the galaxy unless there is more matter there than we can see. But while it explained that phenomenon it did not explain other aspects of the universe attributed to dark matter.

I am not an astrophysicist. I don’t even know any personally. If I did, I’d run by them what I am about to share with you now. Then if on the astronomically (pun intended) low chance I was on to something they could split the Nobel Prize money with me.

Here are my musings about gravity, the force driving the expansion of the universe, and dark matter. These musings unify gravity and dark energy with electromagnetism. So here it is in the form of pithy sayings (like Newton’s “Laws”). If you don’t care much about physics, please disregard this post…

  • In a universe containing only two monopole particles of opposite charge, the force of gravity and the EM force are one and the same.

  • When an EM wave of high enough frequency to be resonant with the spin of a particle passes that particle, the particle’s motion is altered so as to maximize the EM force of attraction and minimize the EM force of repulsion during the interaction. I call this EM Wave-Particle Optimization.

  • During EM Wave-Particle Optimization the particle moves so that attractive forces increase while repulsive forces decrease. This results in a net attractive force for the event, which we call gravity.

  • Particles generate tiny EM waves as they spin, and the waves they generate are most ideal in form to maximize EM wave-particle optimization, unlike waves of longer wavelength, such as visible light. Scientists should be looking at incredibly high frequencies for gravity waves, not just super low ones from black hole collisions. I am not convinced that the shock waves that they occasionally detect from colliding black holes is even a gravity wave.

  • In macro-scale objects, the gravity waves of their constituent atoms can resonate with one another to produce waves of increased (but still low) average amplitude (still at incredibly high frequency).

  • When a photon strikes a particle it produces a repulsive force. If the wavelength associated with the photon is too large for EM wave-particle optimization to work efficiently then the repulsive force of light pressure is stronger than gravity within that EM-wave/photon system. This is known as radiation pressure.

  • Virtual matter pops in and out of existence, sometimes sending gravity waves out into the cosmos before they disappear. This helps makes some regions seem “heavier” than their regular matter can account for and makes up a component of “dark matter”.


What force is driving the expansion of the universe, sometimes called “dark energy”?

Ironically, dark energy is light, and other forms of EM radiation. The universe is full of stars which convert matter (with gravity), into light (with radiation pressure). As the universe converts matter into em-radiation the universe has less gravity and more radiation pressure. This drives expansion. Thus sources of gravity are constantly being subtracted from the universe, while pressure which expands it is constantly being added.

The density of both matter and radiation decrease per unit of space when the universe expands.The radiation is additionally weakened in density by its waves being stretched into a longer (thus weaker) wavelengths by the expansion of space. At first glance it might seem that this would balance out, ending the expansion. That effect is more than compensated for by the uneven effect such stretching has on gravity-scale em waves versus larger em-waves. Once gravity-scale waves are stretched the ceiling for EM-wave particle optimization is lower. Thus the force of gravity weakens over very great distances of expanding space at a greater rate than longer wave-length em waves lose radiation pressure.


I know we are heavy on the life sciences around here. Are there any astrophysicists out there that can set me straight here? It is just something which occurred to me, not something I am committed to…


#2

I guarantee you that no Nobel Prizes will be awarded for posts on Peaceful Science =).

One thing you will find out from following the conversation in physics is that just about everything under the sun has been proposed as a candidate for dark energy and/or dark matter. Turns out, on this one, you have been scooped:

Of course, no Nobel for that one either, because it has not been proven. Also in the “light” category are massive photons:

Though, keep in mind, dark matter and dark energy are different things!

Though you will not likely win a Nobel for your musings, that is part of what is so fun about science. It is not the closed solutions that draw us in sometimes, but the large intractable open problems. If you like this stuff, I’d encourage you to look at Ethan Seigel’s blog. He is one of my “most read” authors in science:


#3

Actually I am pumped that someone in the field came up with this idea- even if my hypothesis is wrong its not so crazy wrong that the experts know its wrong right away. I was saying this before 2013 BTW.

I am also pleased because if what I said about that makes sense to an expert then it increases the odds that the rest of it makes sense - so I am all the way down to quasi-astronomical odds! The dark energy being light is just one consequence of the hypothesis. I mean, this is basically a unified field theory for gravity and electromagnetism.

Think I will drop by E. Seigel’s blog as you suggest.


#4

In honesty though, that reference is very sketch.

It is a news article, pointing to a non-peer reviewed book by a post-doctoral fellow. It is very odd that it is not on arxiv, like everything is now. That means, most likely, many people have thought of it but the math does not work out, but this post-doc couldn’t self-correct his math error. I’m referencing just because we can know that someone else thought of the idea.

Physicists are very creative when suck up a tree without a solution. =). Without evidence, they can get very opinionated too. So don’t over interpret that link.

Nonetheless, keep dreaming. But read more…


#5

On further review, it is almost certainly junk. That is no expert!

Though someone has thought of this before…


#6

Dang, And I was going to give Peaceful Science a plug at my acceptance speech!


#7

Maybe the best route is to concentrate on philosophy where there is no way to tell for sure if you are wrong!