Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Earth Might Have Hairy Dark Matter

nasa.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–118 of 118 posts

Re: Earth Might Have Hairy Dark Matter

#111

Post by anigbrowl »

jahnu wrote: post #38
deanCommie wrote: post #3

The edge of human understanding of the universe is a vague and scary place. When we dug deep below the atom level everything we took for granted fell apart. We had to invent an entirely new model of physics to make sense of our observations, which is complex and counter-intuitive (quantum mechanics) Would it be reasonable to assume that the same applies at the opposite end of the spectrum: from the sub-atomic to the…

Perhaps we don't have the capacity to understand how the universe works? I can't remember where I read it but someone made the point that no matter how hard you try you can never teach a mouse to understand French.

Individually, probably not, but as a eusocial organismwe quite likely do.

Re: Earth Might Have Hairy Dark Matter

#112

Post by Florin_Andrei »

jacquesm wrote: post #6
deanCommie wrote: post #3

The edge of human understanding of the universe is a vague and scary place. When we dug deep below the atom level everything we took for granted fell apart. We had to invent an entirely new model of physics to make sense of our observations, which is complex and counter-intuitive (quantum mechanics) Would it be reasonable to assume that the same applies at the opposite end of the spectrum: from the sub-atomic to the…

In a way relativity theory was such a new model, classical theory (Newton) worked well at all Earth scale observations of the time, it took quite few years after the theory was formulated before the first experimental evidence came in and relativistic effects are far more visible to us on a larger scale (but they're there on a smaller scale too, just harder to quantify). Who knows, there may be yet another theory tha…

That's right. Things in this Universe are not scale-invariant. We are so enmeshed in the human-scale models, that anything beyond (above, below, far away from) this scale look alien.

Growing up and bumping your head, as a toddler, into the kitchen table, you learn about a Universe that follows newtonian physics, euclidean geometry, and boolean logic. But then you look at vastly different scales and you learn that all these are human-scale approximations. The universe is post-newtonian and non-euclidean; and deep in the science of complexity boolean models are challenged by fuzzy logic.

The newtonian/euclidean/boolean model we carry in our heads is just our little insular view of the universe.

Re: Earth Might Have Hairy Dark Matter

#113

Post by _kst_ »

Ygg2 wrote: post #50
trhway wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>a mouse simply does not have the capacity to understand French. we don't really know what capacity is required to do it. 1PFlops? 1P neuron synapse transfers/minute? What capacity and in what units mouse brain is? Our human brain evolution has abused low efficiency size increase approach. As result we're using only like 10% of capacity of our brain. This dog knows 1000 words in human language. That's more than i kno…

> As result we're using only like 10% of capacity of our brain. This myth needs to die in a fire. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_percent_of_the_brain_myth

It's been said (I don't know how accurately) that some people do use 100% of their brains. They just happen to be in the midst of a grand mal epileptic seizure.

Re: Earth Might Have Hairy Dark Matter

#114

Post by adrianbg »

idlewords wrote: post #66
CBABIES wrote: post #17

Dark matter seems like a misunderstood component of gravity. The current explanations just seem ridiculous.

You're not the first, second, or ten thousandth person to have this thought. But dark matter fits the phenomena better than any proposed modification of gravity. See the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullet_Cluster for a textbook example.

Could it be that dark matter is stretched out along an axis that's invisible to us and gravity? Maybe the particles don't interact with each other or anything else because they're not actually that close to each other except when projected onto the dimensions familiar to us, and on which gravity acts.

Re: Earth Might Have Hairy Dark Matter

#115

Post by poelzi »

semi-extrinsic wrote: post #94
poelzi wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Search for Basic Structures of Matter - Supergravitation Unified Theory then, its by Dr. Stoyan Sarg QM is a theory. There are facts and theories and they should not be confused. Who we think the universe is governed is based on theories that are derived from facts. But for nearly all facts, you can find different explanations. It is not that the BSM-SG theory will not provide you with equations that are similar to Q…

> Compare the Atlas of BSM-SG model with what QM provides and you will see, that the angles of the BSM-SG model are much more precise what complex chemical structures look like. So I looked at all those pictures in the viXra paper, and there is not a single chemical bond or molecule anywhere. Care to explain?

There is a more detailed paper about it:

http://goo.gl/U2BHBL

I don't expect you to understand, took me month before it clicked and started to make sense. In fact, at some point I had to take a week off because I was so into the theory, I could not think about my dayjob ;)

Currently the main book is the only way to understand the theory more deeply, but one of our projects is, to do a video series explaining the model in a simple way. As a scientists, you will need the book until somebody writes a comprehensive one as well.

http://www.amazon.com/Basic-Structures-Matter-Supergravitati...

The papers helped me to get into the theory, but real deep understanding is not possible from them.

http://vixra.org/pdf/1107.0031v1.pdf

What you see in the atlas are the proton and their geometric structure as they grow. These are not electrons ! There are some electrons drawn in on the H atom to show some of the different energy states.

You seem to be acquainted in physics, so, whats your explanation for our well tuned universe. The number of basic constants in the standard model is so high and simulations have shown, that small changes cause an unstable universe. In the BSM-SG model, all those constants and relations are derived. In fact, after some month you understand this: the fundamental growth principle and the geometric configuration nearly always lead to stable atomic structures and galaxies as we know them.

(There are some open questions and there is the possibility that when a matter - antimatter galaxies collide, some unstable galaxy could result. Maybe ill-formed galaxies are an result of such mergers).

Anyway, if somebody gives me a theory that is self stabilizing, derives all constants with very high rescission, fits so well to observed data and uses only 3 dimensional euclidean space. 1 fundamental force and 2 fundamental particles. Sorry, this is just the better theory.

Many people are not firm with logic and only know mathematical logic. Every logic is based on different fundamental assumptions, this is something you have to believe in for a logic to have a truth value for you. Classical logic is simply stricter then mathematical logic and has therefor a higher truth value.

In classical logic this you can't do: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q43sqytcdLE

Re: Earth Might Have Hairy Dark Matter

#116

Post by lmm »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #76
lmm wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say the opposite; we've come to realise that accurate predictions are the truest benchmark and notions of understanding can often be misleading. But supposing you're right, so what? Unless you'd prefer a more understandable but inaccurate model, there's still no better alternative to dark matter or dark energy.

You need deep understanding to develop the next set of accurate models and - perhaps - turn them into useful technology.

Agreed, but I don't think going back to theories that don't explain all current observations is a fruitful path there.

Re: Earth Might Have Hairy Dark Matter

#117

Post by poelzi »

scentoni wrote: post #99
poelzi wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The universe does not expand: www.cosmology.info/newsletter/2014.05.pdf I follow the BSM-SG model in which dark matter/dark energy is absolutely clear what it is and how it functions. The illustration is even a bit similar to the BSM-SG model, if you see it as the CL dimensions. Larger astronomical bodies have their own CL space, which means they carry a bubble with them those geometry is dependent on the body itself…

In case this isn't immediately clear, BSM-SG is crackpottery akin to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Cube

explain: I take logic errors or math errors seriously, everything else is just crackpot talk.

Re: Earth Might Have Hairy Dark Matter

#118

Post by kazinator »

poelzi wrote: post #117
scentoni wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In case this isn't immediately clear, BSM-SG is crackpottery akin to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Cube

explain: I take logic errors or math errors seriously, everything else is just crackpot talk.

Do not forget errors of fact (which are not logic errors).

A statement can be logically deductive, and contain no arithmetic errors; yet be based on propositions which do not have true interpretations in this universe.

Post reply on HN