Is Dark Matter The Key To FTL

Robert Zwilling

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Joined
Jun 12, 2018
Messages
1,245
Dark matter is used to answer the question of why stars in galaxies don't slow down as they get farther away from the center of their galaxy, the same way planets slow down as they get farther from the star they orbit.

Supposedly 77 percent of the universe is dark matter or dark energy. Only around 5 percent is the material we can see or sense. either the dark energy dark matter world is very stable or there is a lot going on in it. It could be the framework that connects everything, providing a path to everywhere.

Dark matter is invisible to light and other electromagnetic radiation.
It doesn't interact with baryonic matter in the classic sense.
Dark matter is only detectable through its gravitational effects on visible matter.

Dark matter does interact indirectly with baryonic matter because it effects how regular matter moves through space.

There are 19 galaxies where the stars travel slower in them compared to the rest of the galaxies, in line with visible mass gravity equations. This is explained by their earlier interaction with considerably larger galaxies that ripped the dark matter out of them.
Supposedly dark matter is not in the first four dimensions where ordinary matter is visible. The fourth dimension is time.
Since dark matter can be pulled out of one area and put in another it probably exists/travels in a dimension that is invisible to us. A dimension that could connect the entire universe without the interaction of time, if time is constrained to only one dimension.
Perhaps speed of light is restricted to electromagnetic spectrum and baryonic matter. Dark matter could have a different type of structure with a different maximum velocity.

Black holes might connect to the dimension dark matter is in.
The part of the universe we can see uses time. There might be a part of the universe, such as the dark matter part or some other part, that doesn't use time. The idea that the entire universe stops and restarts could be based on the idea that time exists in all facets of the universe. If the structure that houses the universe is immune from time, it would not need a story to explain its creation, it would be constant in existence. The parts of the universe that are subject to time, would be the parts that undergo a creation, destruction, creation cycle, such as the Big Bang. This could happen in particular areas, not to the whole structure.

Space is never empty. Dark matter could be a uniform material, or a mixture of different things like the visible universe collection of atomic and sub atomic particles. The sigle material solution might be better for intergalatic space travel. It could connect everything without time being involved if the dark matter never broke down into something else. That wouldn't need time to function, there would be no time.
 

paranoid marvin

Run VT Erroll!
Supporter
Joined
Mar 9, 2007
Messages
5,746
Short answer is 'yes'. When we better understand what 'Dark matter' is (or are - it might be several things) we will far better understand the universe.

I compare it to travel on the sea. Until we better and recorded understood tides and trade winds, travel on the sea was slow and perilous. After discovering how winds and tides affected sailing ships, we were able to travel away from land and navigate far more quickly and safely.

At the moment it feels like we are swimming against the tide with space travel. Everything is fraught with danger, and even short distance travel to our own moon and neighbouring planet's is a slow and time consuming task. Perhaps once we understand Dark Matter it will provide us with a method of propelling ourselves through space.

One thing we have learnt about nature is that everything is there for a purpose. Either we were never meant to travel ro the stars, or there is some hidden secret that needs to be discovered before we can. Let's hope that it's the latter
 

Serendipity

A Traditional Eccentric!
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
1,333
Location
In Existence Somewhere
As I understand it...

Dark matter acts like gravity, only we can't otherwise sense what is causing the gravity. If it acts like gravity, then as gravity is constrained by the speed of light, so must dark matter be. This is true if we're looking at dark matter as a slot-in into our current understanding of physics. The alternative is a massive change in our view on how the laws of physics work with the constraint that they must act like current understanding of the laws of physics in our observable universe.

Basically it's either a massive rethink on the laws of physics or dark matter is constrained by the speed of light.

Onto Paranoid Marvin's point about space travel feeling like swimming against the tide... yes there are many practical obstacles to overcome e.g. drop in bone density, space radiation,. However, what I feel keenly is missing is an awareness of progress in science and technology outside of the known technologies used for space travel. For instance, the latest news about weak measurement letting quantum physicists being able to reset entangled particles has massive implications for being able to travel faster than speed of light - it's a step in the right direction. (See {Peter F Hamilton's novel Salvation as to where it might help.) Yet nobody seems to connected the dots on this... baffling that is.
 

Stephen Palmer

author of books
Supporter
Joined
Dec 22, 2009
Messages
6,226
Location
Shropshire
One thing we have learnt about nature is that everything is there for a purpose. Either we were never meant to travel ro the stars, or there is some hidden secret that needs to be discovered before we can. Let's hope that it's the latter
Are you counting me and other scientists in that "we"? Because I, and the overwhelming majority of them, have learned nothing of the sort. It's not been put there "for a purpose."
 

Astro Pen

Write now.
Supporter
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
1,936
Location
Wales UK
Be very wary of anything used as a mathematical "fiddle factor" to make an old theory work.
Supposed ftl cosmic inflation is one such and I strongly suspect dark matter/ energy will be another.
So I don't think dark matter exists. What does exist are old theories that don't fit reality.
People like Penrose are beginning to rattle the big bang cage.
I feel a paradigm shift on the scale of relativity is imminent but will struggle for a decade or so to gain traction against the establishment and a billion textbooks.
 

Robert Zwilling

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Joined
Jun 12, 2018
Messages
1,245
Dark matter is not an exact term, it doesn't even have to be "matter", it could just as easily be unknown factor X. Something is causing the stars to move faster than expected based on what we can see. The galaxies that have slower moving stars could be indicating that whatever it is, it is not distributed evenly. As time goes on and we measure the movement of more stars we could find that there is a range of speed for stars or that the speed isn't fixed but can vary, like some kind of wind effect. Our time span of observations is extremely short so we could be looking at what amounts to snap shots and not live motion.

It could also be that comparing the motion of planets to stars could be like comparing apples to oranges. They are completely different kinds of situations, almost like electrons and nucleuses.

What people mean by purpose has a variety of meanings. I think it can be said that intelligent design is at the bottom of the list of what is driving things to happen. That is not to say the life is completely random, but could be a property of what happens when certain substances are mixed together, like fire happens under reproducible circumstances. The laws of conservation of matter, charge, spin, etc., cause certain things to be predictable even though we can't see them yet. What results by predictability could be seen as some sort of purpose of why what is happening.
 

paranoid marvin

Run VT Erroll!
Supporter
Joined
Mar 9, 2007
Messages
5,746
Are you counting me and other scientists in that "we"? Because I, and the overwhelming majority of them, have learned nothing of the sort. It's not been put there "for a purpose."


I'm not saying that it was purposely put there (although who knows?) , but that it will have a reason for being there.

Most things in nature I think have a purpose, and are networked/integrated in innumerable ways with many other things.
 

paranoid marvin

Run VT Erroll!
Supporter
Joined
Mar 9, 2007
Messages
5,746
Dark matter is not an exact term, it doesn't even have to be "matter", it could just as easily be unknown factor X. Something is causing the stars to move faster than expected based on what we can see. The galaxies that have slower moving stars could be indicating that whatever it is, it is not distributed evenly. As time goes on and we measure the movement of more stars we could find that there is a range of speed for stars or that the speed isn't fixed but can vary, like some kind of wind effect. Our time span of observations is extremely short so we could be looking at what amounts to snap shots and not live motion.

It could also be that comparing the motion of planets to stars could be like comparing apples to oranges. They are completely different kinds of situations, almost like electrons and nucleuses.

What people mean by purpose has a variety of meanings. I think it can be said that intelligent design is at the bottom of the list of what is driving things to happen. That is not to say the life is completely random, but could be a property of what happens when certain substances are mixed together, like fire happens under reproducible circumstances. The laws of conservation of matter, charge, spin, etc., cause certain things to be predictable even though we can't see them yet. What results by predictability could be seen as some sort of purpose of why what is happening.

My (admittedly limited) knowledge of dark matter is that it is the answer used to cover many unanswered questions about space.

It may well be a combination of different factors - physical and non physical - that are the reason for unexplained things happening.

100 years ago there was no such thing as 'Dark matter. In 100 years time this may again be the case.
 

Astro Pen

Write now.
Supporter
Joined
Jan 24, 2020
Messages
1,936
Location
Wales UK
Getting DNA at all, never mind for a viable lifeform by bumping primitive molecules together is a tough ask.
If we think about intelligent design I don't think of that as an 'anthropic' intelligence. In fact the whole enchilada of starting a universe that can create BMWs out of rarified Hydrogen and Helium by waiting a few billion years for a couple of generations of stars is pretty stunning when you think about it.
But I honestly find it it harder to believe that this universe, in it's pin sharp detail and opportunity, was just accident. That it works at all in incredible, that it works the way it does is beyond all possible good fortune.
 

paranoid marvin

Run VT Erroll!
Supporter
Joined
Mar 9, 2007
Messages
5,746
Getting DNA at all, never mind for a viable lifeform by bumping primitive molecules together is a tough ask.
If we think about intelligent design I don't think of that as an 'anthropic' intelligence. In fact the whole enchilada of starting a universe that can create BMWs out of rarified Hydrogen and Helium by waiting a few billion years for a couple of generations of stars is pretty stunning when you think about it.
But I honestly find it it harder to believe that this universe, in it's pin sharp detail and opportunity, was just accident. That it works at all in incredible, that it works the way it does is beyond all possible good fortune.


The Universe is also utterly beautiful and stunning to look at. We all have different things that we find appealing to look at, but the beauty of the Universe is err... universal. Seemingky that feeling is built in to the human DNA.

I believe that this is no coincidence. It is almost as though the Universe, nature or something else is calling out to us to travel and explore its hidden wonders.

Although we are an insignificant speck of dust in comparison to the size of the Universe, we are still an integral part of its make up. We are made up of bits of the Universe, and conversely  it is made up of bits of us.

Which is a long way round saying that there are many things about the Universe that are a mystery to us, but they are more like a puzzle that needs to be solved than insurmountable barriers.
 

Stephen Palmer

author of books
Supporter
Joined
Dec 22, 2009
Messages
6,226
Location
Shropshire
I'm not saying that it was purposely put there (although who knows?) , but that it will have a reason for being there.

Most things in nature I think have a purpose, and are networked/integrated in innumerable ways with many other things.
I do think we have to be incredibly careful about our choice of words here. Being networked or integrated - which I agree with, eg. fundamental constants - isn't the same as purpose. 99.9% of people will consider the use of the word purpose to mean deliberate intent.
 

paranoid marvin

Run VT Erroll!
Supporter
Joined
Mar 9, 2007
Messages
5,746
I do think we have to be incredibly careful about our choice of words here. Being networked or integrated - which I agree with, eg. fundamental constants - isn't the same as purpose. 99.9% of people will consider the use of the word purpose to mean deliberate intent.

Personally I believe that there is some driving force, or guiding 'hand'; whether that is God or nature or something else. For so many things in our Universe to be as they are, from each unique snowflake to the intricate design of a butterfly, so the creation of planets, stars, solar systems and galaxies, its a real stretch to say that it all came about randomly or by mere chance.
 

Mon0Zer0

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Joined
May 24, 2021
Messages
994
its a real stretch to say that it all came about randomly or by mere chance.

It doesn't necessarily follow that because something is not random, that some form of consciousness, intelligence or a supernatural entity is the cause. Positing the existence of a creator doesn't resolve the reason for the universe's existence, just kicks the can down the road. Who made the creator? First cause is not something we'll ever know, so probably best to set the default to 42 and try and make the journey as pleasant for everyone as possible.
 

Swank

and debonair
Joined
Feb 25, 2022
Messages
1,847
There is unlikely to be "dark matter", as it is currently just a stand-in that makes physics models work with observations of red shift.

Light speed isn't a barrier, it is a description of the shape of the universe. If there is a way to violate it, it will likely come in the form of some sort of wormhole/entanglement kind of thing and not anything to do with velocity.
 

Robert Zwilling

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Joined
Jun 12, 2018
Messages
1,245
Wormholes or similar type distortions would solve the distance problem. Maybe electromagnetic radiation isn't the best way to observe the universe. It seems like the visual map of the universe could be very distorted, a picture of something that doesn't exist. There are galaxies much younger whose light hasn't reached us yet right next to older galaxies whose light has reached us that may not exist anymore. You couldn't use light to map a course without making a lot of stops to correct the course. Can entanglemet be used to remotely view something to bypass time?

The Earth does seem to be very remarkable in terms of what was created out of a dust ball. With all that water that seemed to come out of nowhere. But perhaps the water was present in the dust ball zone that the Earth got its stuffings from. The water gets trapped in the molten rock in mineral form, eventually forming minerals such as ringwoodite. There is probably several oceans worth of water under in the crust trapped in minerals. The trapped water could get squeezed out of the cooling crust and collects on the surface, forming oceans. This is strictly a mechanical process, no higher orders needed. Since it is mechanical it can happen on any suitable newly formed planet that has the right substances in it when it solidifies out of the dust. No miracle there.

The atmosphere is protected by a magnetic field generated by a molten ball of metal spinning around in the Earth's core. The molten metal ball stays that way because of the presence of radioactive substances that came from the dust ball. No radioactive core and without any means of generating heat, a planet's atmosphere probably isn't going to last.

The right materials from a blown up star or two orbiting around in the dust cloud in the same zone, seems more like a slot machine. How often does the stuff that makes water and radioactive elements hang out in the same orbit where it can be crunched into a ball. Maybe its not that uncommon.

The Earth has all these wonderful features, and life that exists for billions of years regardless of what happens to the planet. Seems like it must be more than a miracle. But there are all these legions of monkeys, banging away on typewriters, after countless failures, eventually typing a masterpiece. How many planets had to form out of dust balls before an Earth type is created? Trillions perhaps. At any rate it seems like it is more the result of an extremely poorly designed system than anything with some sort of purpose. Once particles obtain existence, they way they fit interact together does appear to have a purpose.

To make the bonfire complete, might as well dwell upon the idea that life is a chemical reaction that happens when the right substances come together. The same way certain parameters that are strictly regulated and constant allow sub atomic entities to form with perpetual regularity, perhaps life also comes awake when certain physical parameters exist which automatically creates simple life which can then go on to create any sort of plant, animal, whatever.
 

Robert Zwilling

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Joined
Jun 12, 2018
Messages
1,245
Recently spotted stream of stars running between galaxies which is unusual because streams of stars are normally seen within galaxy clusters.

The star stream was discovered by looking at upgraded images captured by the Hubble Telescope in 2010. Conventional thinking would suppose that the stream running between multiple galaxies would be torn apart, but in this case the stream structure is intact. One possibility is that a "formation" of dark matter is in the area or its influence is being felt there and that is overcoming the pull of the galaxies the star stream flows by.
The star stream was found by accident while searching for signs of dark matter.

While there are still not a lot of observations of areas without dark matter, it could be possible that there are two universes intertwined, one that is naturally formed, and one that is shaped by another force, whatever it is that is dark matter, that is distorting it, possibly by slowing down the rate at which the universe should be slowing down.

Vernor Vinge wrote a novel, A Fire Upon The Deep, where different areas of the universe had different compositions that caused the maximum speed of spaceships to vary from very slow to very fast.
 

Swank

and debonair
Joined
Feb 25, 2022
Messages
1,847
While there are still not a lot of observations of areas without dark matter, it could be possible that there are two universes intertwined, one that is naturally formed, and one that is shaped by another force, whatever it is that is dark matter, that is distorting it, possibly by slowing down the rate at which the universe should be slowing down.
It is equally possible that the Easter Bunny is responsible.
 

Cthulhu.Science

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2023
Messages
505
That is the wonder of science fiction. Anything can be anything. Just ask Douglas Adams.

but Dark Matter - I don't think it exists. I've never seen it. And as I understand it, nobody else has either.
 

Logan Selmes

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2023
Messages
66
It doesn't necessarily follow that because something is not random, that some form of consciousness, intelligence or a supernatural entity is the cause. Positing the existence of a creator doesn't resolve the reason for the universe's existence, just kicks the can down the road. Who made the creator? First cause is not something we'll ever know, so probably best to set the default to 42 and try and make the journey as pleasant for everyone as possible.

I think it's equally viable to reject the premise that the question of first cause is even a pressing concern when it comes to defining the meaning of existence.

I'm not one of them, but lots of proponents of simulation theory think that evidence from nature suggests intelligent design rather than merely non-random phenomena.

At a deep level, simulation theory isn't very functionally different from more traditional ideas about purposeful creation. And in terms of defaults, simulation theory, for example, seems to serve equally as well as 42.
 

Similar threads


Top