He then compared his result with the mass evaluated from the light the galaxies shed. He realized that there was way more matter in the cluster than what was visible or baryonic matter. This matter of an unknown type generated a gravitational field without emitting light; hence its name, dark matter.

Further observations suggest the baryonic or visible forms of matter in the universe only comprise approximately 5 to 10% of the mass required to account for the total gravitational energy in the universe.

The search for this missing mass has focus on three different types of particles or objects that would be invisible or would not interact with electromagnetic energy while at the same-time influenced by the gravity forces of the visible mass component our universe.
The first or Axions are very light particles with a specific type of self-interaction that makes them a suitable CDM candidate.  Axions have the theoretical advantage that their existence solves the Strong CP problem in QCD, but have not been detected.

The second or MACHOs or Massive Compact Halo Objects are large, condensed objects such as black holes, neutron stars, white dwarfs, very faint stars, or non-luminous objects like planets. The search for these consists of using gravitational lensing to see the effect of these objects on background galaxies. Most experts believe that the constraints from those searches rule out MACHOs as a viable dark matter candidate.

Finally WIMPs or Dark matter which is composed of Weakly Interacting Massive Particles. There is no currently known particle with the required properties, but many extensions of the standard model of particle physics predict such particles. The search for WIMPs involves attempts at direct detection by highly sensitive detectors, as well as attempts at production by particle accelerators. WIMPs are generally regarded as the most promising dark matter candidates. The DAMA/NaI experiment and its successor DAMA/LIBRA have claimed to directly detect dark matter particles passing through the Earth, but many scientists remain skeptical, as null results from similar experiments seem incompatible with the DAMA results.

However Einstein suggested another possibility in the speech “Aether and the theory of Relativity” he made on May 5th 1920 at the University of Leyden Germany where he indicated that The General Theory of Relativity predicts, that “space is endowed with physical qualities”

“Recapitulating, we may say that according to the General Theory of Relativity space is endowed with physical qualities; in this sense, therefore, there exists Aether. According to the General Theory of Relativity space without Aether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time, nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense. But this Aether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts, which may be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it.”

However Einstein only endowed space with the field properties of a space-time dimension and not the physical qualities of mass.  Therefore if one accepts the validity of his theory the physical properties he was referring to must be a result of those field properties not those of mass in its particle form.  This suggests the missing mass found by Fritz Zwicky may be related to those field properties not those most associate with the mass of objects or particles.

Yet it is difficult to form a clear picture of how a field consisting of space-time can have the physical properties of Dark Matter because as was shown in the article “Defining what time is” Sept. 20, 2007 time is not perceived by most as matter or space but as an irreversible physical, chemical, and biological change in physical space.  Therefore it is difficult to understand how the physical properties Einstein associated with space or Dark Matter can interact with the non physical properties of a time or a space-time dimension to create a gravitational field.

But Einstein gave us the ability to solve this and develop more direct understand how and why the field properties of space-time can be responsible for Dark Matter when he used the equation E=mc^2 and the constant velocity of light to define the geometric properties of mass in a space-time universe.  This is because that provided a method of converting a unit of time associated with energy in a space-time dimension to unit of space associated with mass in four *spatial* dimensions.  Additionally because the velocity of light is constant he also defined a one to one quantitative correspondence between his space-time universe and one made up of four *spatial* dimensions.

This tells us that one can use Einstein’s theory to define gravitational potential in terms of the continuous field properties of four *spatial* dimensions which means if one is to accept his theory one must also assume that space contains a continuous field of mass.

However this contradicts the current world view shared by most physicists and cosmologists that mass only exists in its particle or quantized form.  This is true even though observations tell a different story.

For example Louis de Broglie was the first to predict space is made up of the field properties of mass when he theorized that all particles have a wave component.  His theories were confirmed by the discovery of electron diffraction by crystals in 1927 by Davisson and Germer.

In other words the mass we associate with the particles must be composed of the oscillation in the field properties of space because that is the only thing that could be responsible for their wave components.  Therefore those fields must also have the properties associated with mass.

If this is true why then do we only observe its particle properties?

One can understand why by extrapolating the laws of governing resonance in a three-dimensional environment, as was done in the article “Why is energy/mass quantized?” Oct. 4, 2007 to the field properties of the wave Davisson and Germer observed particle to be composed of to a fourth *spatial* dimension.

Briefly it showed the four conditions required for resonance to occur in a classical environment, an object, or substance with a natural frequency, a forcing function at the same frequency as the natural frequency, the lack of a damping frequency and the ability for the substance to oscillate spatial would occur in one consisting of four spatial dimensions.

The existence of four *spatial* dimensions would give the continuous field properties of mass the ability to oscillate spatially on a “surface” between a third and fourth *spatial* dimensions thereby fulfilling one of the requirements for classical resonance to occur.

These oscillations would be caused by an event such as the decay of a subatomic particle or the shifting of an electron in an atomic orbital.  This would force the “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold to oscillate spatially with the frequency associated with the energy of that event.

The oscillations caused by such an event would serve as forcing function allowing a resonant system or “structure” to be established space.

Therefore, these oscillations in a “surface” of a three-dimensional space manifold would meet the requirements mentioned above for the formation of a resonant system or “structure” in four-dimensional space if one extrapolated them to that environment. 

Classical mechanics tells us the energy of a resonant system can only take on the discrete or quantized values associated with its fundamental or a harmonic of its fundamental frequency.

Hence, these resonant systems in the field properties of space would be responsible for it particles properties.

Yet one can also define its boundary conditions in terms of the classical laws space and time.

For example in classical physics, a point on the two-dimensional surface of paper is confined to that surface.  However, that surface can oscillate up or down with respect to three-dimensional space. 

Similarly an object occupying a volume of three-dimensional space would be confined to it however, it could, similar to the surface of the paper oscillate “up” or “down” with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension.

The confinement of the “upward” and “downward” oscillations of the field properties of mass with respect to a fourth *spatial* dimension is what defines the spatial boundaries associated with a particle in the article “Why is energy/mass quantized?“

However there are at least two reasons why we are unable to directly observe the field properties of the mass component of space. The first is because all observations require an exchange of energy between what is being observed and the observer.  However the most effective and efficient way for nature to transfer information to our instruments is, as was shown in the article “Why is energy/mass quantized?“ in a resonate system made up of the field properties of mass.  Therefore in all measurements the particle properties associated with its resonant system will always be predominant over its field ones.

This is why as mentioned earlier its field properties are only observable in terms of the interference of the wave properties particles as was demonstrated by the discovery of electron diffraction by crystals in 1927 by Davisson and Germer.

The second is that to measure a quantity there must be a physical difference between what is being measured and what is doing the measuring.

For example one cannot measure the changing level of water in a ship lock from a ship in it by measure how high it is above the surface of the water ship is floating on because it is changing at the same rate.

Similarly one cannot measure the field properties of the mass component of space because the field properties in the measuring instrument would be changing at the same rate.

However as mentioned earlier we can indirectly measure how the field properties of mass interact with particles as was shown by in 1927 by Davisson and Germer observation of electron diffraction by crystals

The above discussion not only defines why we cannot directly observer Dark Matter but also how it creates gravitational potential in terms of the field properties of four dimensional space-time or four *spatial* dimensions.

Unfortunately for those who disagree the above conclusion is based purely on observations and the validly of Einstein theories.  Therefore to deny the existence of a continuous field of Dark Matter and it gravitational influence one would have to deny the validity of Einstein theories.

It should be remember Einsteinâ€s genius allows us to choose to define all environments in either space-time or one consisting of four *spatial* dimension when he defined their geometry in terms of the constant velocity of light. This interchangeability broadens the environment encompassed by his theories by making them applicable to both the quantum and field properties of space thereby giving us a new perspective on their interactions.

Later Jeff

Copy right Jeffrey O’Callaghan 2015

The post Dark Matter as a field property of space-time appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.

However, they have had considerable difficulty explaining why different regions of the universe have nearly the same temperature and other physical properties. This is a problem because information can only be exchanged at the speed of light and the Big Bang model indicates the separation between different regions of space would have been too large to allow enough time for information to be exchanged between them.  Therefore, because they evolved independently from each other they should have different properties.  This inconsistency between theory and observations is what cosmologists call the Horizon Problem.
In 1980 Alan Guth, Andrei Linde, Paul Steinhardt, and Andy Albrecht proposed a modification to the big bang theory which appeared to provide a solution by postulating a short 10 ^{− 32} second period of exponential expansion (dubbed “inflation”) within the first minute or so of the universe’s existence.  During inflation, the universe would have increased in size by an enormous factor.

If correct, inflation solves the horizon problem by suggesting that prior to the inflationary period the entire universe was extremely small and therefore each point was causally connected.  It was during this period, according to its proponents the physical properties of the universe evened out.  Inflation then caused its volume to increase to the point where different parts were too far apart to allow their properties to interact.  This essentially froze any irregularities and prevented them from being “smoothed out” which according to this theoretical model explains why the universe appears to be almost, but not perfectly homogeneous.  In other words they assume the solution to the horizon problem is the fact that in the modern era distant areas in the sky appear to be unconnected causally, but they were in the past because they were much closer together.

However, there is no observational basis for defining what caused this rapid inflation to begin or end.  Therefore, some say it is an “ADHOC” or contrived explanation of a flaw in original the Big Bang Theory.

Another problem with the inflationary concept is made evident by the fact that our universe is not homogenous because observations tell us it contains large-scale structures such as galactic clusters. 

This presents another problem for its proponents because, as mentioned earlier the reason Alan Guth proposed it was to explain why the universe was homogeneous.

This is why they had to add the passage “This essentially froze any irregularities and prevented them from being “smoothed out” ” to its description to “force” it to agree with the observation that it is not.

The only problem with this is that they have been unable to define what caused these initial irregularities to occur.

Some have theorized that quantum fluctuations or a temporary change in the amount of energy in space, arising from Werner Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle may be responsible.  But here again there is no observational evidence to support this claim.

In other words an “ADHOC” theory was created to explain why the universe is homogeneous must be modified by another “ADHOC” or abstract theoretical construct to explain why it is not.  (ADHOC in the sense that neither have a foundation in experimental or observational science.)

Physics as the name implies is the science that deals with physical properties matter, energy, motion, and force. Therefore the primary vehicle to guide our understanding of our universe should be the “reality” of the observable properties of matter energy, motion and force to develop theories of its origin and not the unobservable properties of an inflation field.

For example observations tell us our universe is expanding.

As mentioned earlier proponents of the Big bang explain this by assuming the energy driving its expansion was created in a tremendously hot dense environment.  Yet they are unable to tell us where the energy came from to create that environment.  Therefore they must assume that it was created out nothing which would be a violation of the law of conservation of energy/mass.

However, there is another explanation for the origin of our expanding universe which is not, as was shown in the article “The Return of the Big Bang” Jan. 15, 2008 based on the unobservable properties of an inflation field , does not violate any of the accepted physical laws of physics, and can be derived from direct observations of our environment.

We know from observations the equation E=mc^2 defines the equivalence between mass and energy in an environment and since mass is associated with the attractive properties of gravity it also tells us, because of this equivalence, the kinetic energy associated with the universeâ€s expansion also possess those attractive properties.  However the law of conservation of energy/mass tells us that in a closed system the creation of kinetic energy cannot exceed the gravitational energy associated with the total energy/mass in the universe and that a reduction in one must be compensated for by an increase in the other

Therefore the total gravitation potential of the universe must increase as it expands and cools approaching a maximum value at absolute “0” while at the same time the kinetic energy of its expansive components must decrease.  Therefore, at some point in time, the universe it will enter a contractive phase because the total gravitational potential must eventually exceed the kinetic energy of its expansion.  This is would be true even though the gravitational potential of its Kinetic energy components would be disturbed or “diluted” by a factor of c^2.

(Many physicists would disagree because recent observations suggest that a force called Dark energy is causing the expansion of the universe accelerate. Therefore they believe that its expansion will continue forever.  However, as was shown in the article “Dark Energy and the evolution of the universe” Oct. 1, 2012 if one assumes the law of conservation of mass/energy is valid, as we have done here than the gravitational contractive properties of its mass equivalent will eventually have to exceed its expansive energy because as mentioned earlier kinetic energy also possess gravitational potential therefore there will be constant force opposing this accelerated expansion. Therefore the gravitational potential of Dark Energy must slow the rate of the acceleration and eventually allow gravity to take over and cause the universe to enter a contractive phase.  There can be no other conclusion if one accepts the validity of the laws of thermodynamics and Einstein General Theory of Relativity.)

The rate of contraction will increase until the momentum of the galaxies, planets, components of the universe equals the radiation pressure generated by the heat of that contraction.

At some point in time the total kinetic energy of the universe would be equal to the total mass equivalent of that energy or E=mc^2, where “E” equals the total Kinetic energy content of the universe and “m” equals the total mass content of the universe.  From this point on the velocity of the contraction will slow due to the radiation pressure generated by the heat of its contraction and be maintained by the momentum associated with the remaining mass component of the universe.

However, after a certain point in time the radiation pressure generated by it will become great enough to ionize its mass component and to cause it to reexpand.

Yet at some point in future the contraction phase will begin again because as mentioned earlier its kinetic energy cannot exceed the gravitational energy associated with its mass/energy equivalent.

Since the universe is a closed system, the amplitude of the expansions and contractions will remain constant because the law of conservation of mass/energy dictates that in a closed system it remains constant.

This results in the universe experiencing in a never-ending cycle of expansions and contractions of equal magnitudes.

This would solve the horizon problem because the repeated cycles would allow different regions of the universe to mix and equalize thereby explaining why their temperature and other physical properties are almost identical.

This would be analogous to mixing the content of two cans of paint by pouring one into the other.  The evenness of the mixture would increase in proportion to the number of times one pored one can into the other.

Similarly the evenness of the temperature distribution and physical properties of the universe would increase in proportion to the number of cycles it had gone through.

However it also explains why there are small temperature and other physical irregularities in the large-scale structure of the universe.

One cannot completely mix two different colors of paint no matter how many times they pour one can into another because the random motion of the different colored paint molecules means that some regions will have more of one color that the other.

Similarly the random motion of the baryonic matter in the universe means that some regions will have more matter or be denser that others no matter how many cycles of expansion or contraction it has undergone.

This explains why the large-scale structures such as galactic clusters exist.

Many cosmologists do not accept the cyclical scenario of expansion and contractions because they believe a collapsing universe would end in the formation of a singularity similar to the ones found in a black hole and therefore, it could not re-expand.

However, according to the first law of thermodynamic the universe would have to begin expanding before it reached a singularity because that law states that energy in an isolated system can neither be created nor destroyed

Therefore, because the universe is by definition an isolated system; the energy generated by its gravitational collapse cannot be radiated to another volume but must remain within it.  This means the radiation pressure exerted by its collapse must eventually exceed momentum of its contraction and the universe would have to enter an expansion phase.  The mass/energy of the universe will oscillate around a point in space because its momentum will carry it beyond the equilibrium point were the radiation pressure was equal to its gravitational contractive component. 

This would be analogous to the how momentum of a mass on a spring causes it spring to stretch beyond its equilibrium point resulting it osculating around it. 

There can be no other interoperation if one assumes the validity of the first law of thermodynamics which states that the total energy of the universe is defined by the mass and the momentum of its components.  Therefore, when one decreases the other must increase which means the universe must oscillate around a point in three-dimensional space.

The reason a singularity can form in black hole is because it is not an isolate system therefore the thermal radiation associated with its collapse can be radiated into the surrounding space.  Therefore, its collapse can continue because momentum of its mass can exceed the radiation pressure cause by its collapse in the volume surrounding a black hole.

As mentioned earlier the heat generated by the collapse of the universe would raise the temperature to a point where electrons would be strip off all matter and it would become ionized, making it opaque to radiation.  It would remain that way until it entered the expansion phase and cooled enough to allow matter to recapture and hold on to them.  This Age of Recombination, as cosmologists like to call it is when the Cosmic Background Radiation was emitted.

One could quantify this scenario by using the first law of thermodynamics to calculate the how long it would take for the radiation pressure generated by the gravitational collapse of the universe to become large enough to cause it to expand and determine if it would allow enough time for different regions to be causally connected to the point where it could explain Horizon Problem and why there are small variations homogeneous structure.  Additionally one could determine if the heat generate by that collapse would be great enough to ionize its mass component enough to explain the properties of the cosmic background radiation. 

It should be noted that this derivation of the universe’s origin, its temperature and matter distribution does provide an observational method for verification or falsification because it relies exclusively the accepted laws of physics and on interoperation of physical observations and not as is the case with the inflation model on abstract creations of human intellect.

Later Jeff

Copyright Jeffrey O’Callaghan 2011

The post A sensible solution to the Horizon Problem appeared first on Unifying Quantum and Relativistic Theories.