Names for the Dark

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by Javier, May 28, 2001.

  1. Javier Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    56
    Maybe another name for the hidden most famous, as a group of different factors, could be "dark mass",for the black holes are not material,but massive...
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. wet1 Wanderer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,616
    Dark matter vs black holes

    I’m thinking that black holes are indeed matter. So much matter, all squeezed by it’s own gravity down to a mere smidgen of its original form. There is no space between the atoms or atom components (normally atoms are mostly all space). It is all smashed together.
    Dark matter on the other hand is still matter (more or less as we know it), only we can’t detect it. By detect it I mean that we can not see it directly. We can see it’s results in the speeding up of mass and therefore deduce that something is there to cause such a force to react on what we can see.
    It is estimated that we can observe roughly 30% of the calculated mass of the universe. It’s the other 70% that is believed to be dark matter. You see something happened to the speed of the universe. It was actually slowing down and then at some point the speed started picking up. It is at present getting faster. That increase in speed is attributed to dark matter that we at present can not see.

    In the diagram you will see a point marked the farthest supernova, this marks at present how far back we can see towards the Big Bang with present capabilities.


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: May 29, 2001
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. rde Eukaryotic specimen Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    278
    Re: Dark matter vs black holes

    Yes and no. Dark matter has been supplanted by the latest hypothetical buzzphrase; dark energy. It's this that makes up most of the universe, and is supposed to be causing the perceived acceleration of the universe's expansion. Typing 'dark energy' into google will reveal all. Well, most.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Javier Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    56
    I ve been in the sites,rde,this is very interesting...

    We have three concepts,IMO,here,and two opposite forces:

    The visible,"bright matter"that curves spacetime and we measure as the attractive force of gravity;the "dark mass/matter"composed by dead stars,brown dwarfs,black holes(the core of a black hole is what theoric physicists call a singularity,an infinitely intense gravitational tunnel or breakage in spacetime:although not passable for a material object, is not material,wet1),which we can not see,(in a different percentage of the total now,but these objects still exist) but exerts the same attractive/curving influence;

    And now this "dark energy",which countermeasures and surpasses the effect of the others by expanding the universe...

    This gets crazier ever more...

    About the graphic ,if we see the past while looking,(away or close the light takes time to travel any distance)then what we call the present is just a composition of different moments of the past
    depending on the distance from each object of the "picture",simultaneous only in the sense that it gets to the senses at the same moment,and as every one is located differently from the objects and between each other,then the "real" present is not observable...
     
    Last edited: May 30, 2001
  8. wet1 Wanderer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,616
    By George, I think he's got it! Actually Javier, you're right! The only true "present" is in your immeadate grasp. All else is relative.

    I have indeed heard of dark energy but just have not spent the time to study it. I'll have to make the effort to do so. Thanx rde
     
  9. dos2winmaclinx Registered Member

    Messages:
    11
    The newest interest in Einsteins discarded theory, "Universal Constant" is now being apply to "Dark Matter" and "Dark Energy". This would account for the stabilization of "Inflationary Universe", now widely being accepted by Cosmologist. The "Dark Matter" is the missing mass, would contribute to Omega 1, the big crunch, and "Dark Energy" would hold the Universe together from flying off into infinity. Would recommend reading "Paul Davies, God and The New Physics", Adam and Laughlins, Five Ages of the Universe and Martin Reese, "Before, the Beginning. Excellent insights on au-current theories, and some String Theory, too.
     
  10. Javier Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    56
    dos2winmaclinx,thanks for the references and welcome¡

    wet1,you don t need to be ironic,I knew about the Michelson-Morley experiment and Einstein s conclusions,just wanted to notice that applied to everyday s life you can be watching tv with a person just beside you and not seeing the same at the same time...
     
  11. wet1 Wanderer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,616
    Javier it was not meant to be ironic but I can see how it would read as such. For those who have already heard my prattle and rattle will understand. Most of the time I will add something to connect the message to something else. It was not meant to be a put down in any nature.
     
  12. Javier Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    56
    All right,then¡
     
  13. Dark Quasar Registered Member

    Messages:
    14
    Percent

    I have no more things to add, but i heard and want to say that there are 90% of hidden mass.
     
  14. Javier Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    56
  15. wet1 Wanderer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,616
    Missing mass

    Actually you are correct.

    If this can go for nearly two weeks without the answer popping up something is wrong here.

    While the actual amount of missing mass is debated, depending upon who you site as the source, pretty much all are in agreement that it ranges from 89-95%.

    You were the first to spot it Dark Quasar and it should have popped out almost immeadately.

    Javier
    I will add a note of caution. I really like Space.com but sometimes they really get out there on the edge. What I'm saying is that they will interview folks at the extreme edge of mainstream thought. Sometimes they have to print retractions. However, they do have nice pictures and some of the cutting edge ideas.
     

Share This Page