PDA

View Full Version : What is Dark Energy?



Christianbookworm
12-12-2016, 01:23 PM
From a theistic perspective, what is dark energy? Is it the expansion of the universe that God preprogrammed into creation? And anyone know about dark matter? What other science questions would you love to theoretically ask God for the answer? No debating please! And I reserve the right to keep the thread from getting too weird.

37818
12-12-2016, 01:57 PM
Dark energy is the name given the energy to explain the local expansion of the universe being faster than the predicted Hubble expansion.

Christianbookworm
12-12-2016, 02:09 PM
So, how much do we still not know about the universe?

Sparko
12-12-2016, 06:10 PM
basically dark matter and energy are "fudge factors" used to explain holes in our current understanding and math regarding the universe. Neither has ever been detected. It will probably end up with new math and concepts that explain things like the expansion speed of the universe without dark matter or energy.

Christianbookworm
12-12-2016, 06:20 PM
basically dark matter and energy are "fudge factors" used to explain holes in our current understanding and math regarding the universe. Neither has ever been detected. It will probably end up with new math and concepts that explain things like the expansion speed of the universe without dark matter or energy.

Makes sense. There is so much we still do not know. We may know a bit more than Job did, but God could still give us the "you don't know what you are talking about and there are things you still can't control or comprehend" lecture.

37818
12-13-2016, 06:11 AM
Dark matter is what is called the needed and unseen mass in the universe. Dark matter has been imaged and given location by means its observed gravity. The gravitational lensing is measured and made into an image.
20006
The blue in the image is the imaged dark matter.

Sparko
12-13-2016, 06:40 AM
Dark matter is what is called the needed and unseen mass in the universe. Dark matter has been imaged and given location by means its observed gravity. The gravitational lensing is measured and made into an image.
20006
The blue in the image is the imaged dark matter.

no, it is, as you said, gravitational lensing effect, shown via computer graphics.

They THEORIZE it is caused by Dark Matter. It still has not been observed or proven.

Basically what you are saying is like astronomers using the charts of the retrograde orbits of the planets to prove that epicycles were real. Dark matter may or may not be real. But as of now it is just the explanation for there seeming to be more mass in the universe than we can directly see.


Now as to CBW's question about how does it affect Christianity? I have no idea. Maybe it is the mass of the spirit world? Yeah that sounds crackpot.

37818
12-13-2016, 09:05 AM
no, it is, as you said, gravitational lensing effect, shown via computer graphics.

They THEORIZE it is caused by Dark Matter. It still has not been observed or proven.

Basically what you are saying is like astronomers using the charts of the retrograde orbits of the planets to prove that epicycles were real. Dark matter may or may not be real. But as of now it is just the explanation for there seeming to be more mass in the universe than we can directly see.


Now as to CBW's question about how does it affect Christianity? I have no idea. Maybe it is the mass of the spirit world? Yeah that sounds crackpot.

Spiral galaxies rotated like sold wheels instead of what was expected by law of gravity. Only by the addition of mass did the law of gravity as understood work as expected, the needed added mass was called dark matter.

http://www.darkmatterphysics.com/Galactic-rotation-curves-of-spiral-galaxies.htm

Sparko
12-13-2016, 09:17 AM
Spiral galaxies rotated like sold wheels instead of what was expected by law of gravity. Only by the addition of mass did the law of gravity as understood work as expected, the needed added mass was called dark matter.The extra mass could be caused by some other phenomena that we have not discovered yet, or some change in our calculation regarding gravity, or any other number of other things. Sure adding "dark matter" fixes the problem, but that is because it is a "fudge factor" and that is what fudge factors do. They provide a solution to a problem until the ACTUAL solution comes along. When astronomers believed in epicycles, they had to explain why planets seemed to go backwards in their orbits every so often. Well epicycles explained it perfectly and the math worked out exactly! Did that mean that epicycles were real? No. Because once they realize that the Earth went around the sun and so did the planets, then the retrograde problem went away because Earth was orbiting faster than the outer planets so they appeared to go backwards when we overtook them in our orbit.

Nobody knows what dark matter is. It is just a label for unknown mass needed to explain certain observations. I personally think it makes more sense to believe that it is a flaw in our science and formulas, than there is some mysterious matter out there that we can't see or detect in any way but it has mass and yet no other physicality.

Cerebrum123
12-13-2016, 09:28 AM
It's a lot like Vulcan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulcan_(hypothetical_planet)), made up to make their models "work".

Sparko
12-13-2016, 09:40 AM
It's a lot like Vulcan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulcan_(hypothetical_planet)), made up to make their models "work".They are doing the same thing now with a search for a planet beyond Pluto to explain abberations in it's orbit. Could be real, could be fudge.

I was watching a show on the Science channel regarding Dark Matter and the scientists interviewed even said they had no idea what it was, and it could turn out to be nonexistent if a better theory came along. It is a fudge factor. It could be real or it could not be. I am leaning toward not, because it is too weird. Invisible mass? all around us, but we can't see it or measure it?

One Bad Pig
12-13-2016, 10:16 AM
They are doing the same thing now with a search for a planet beyond Pluto to explain abberations in it's orbit. Could be real, could be fudge.

I was watching a show on the Science channel regarding Dark Matter and the scientists interviewed even said they had no idea what it was, and it could turn out to be nonexistent if a better theory came along. It is a fudge factor. It could be real or it could not be. I am leaning toward not, because it is too weird. Invisible mass? all around us, but we can't see it or measure it?
We can generally only see matter because it radiates or reflects energy. Dark matter is only dark because it does not do so at detectable levels. We can infer its presence where it partially blocks light (interstellar dust clouds) or causes gravitational lensing (presumably something massive like a black hole). The fudge factor is whether or not there is enough of it to cause, e.g., the galactic rotational effects we observe.

Sparko
12-13-2016, 10:21 AM
We can generally only see matter because it radiates or reflects energy. Dark matter is only dark because it does not do so at detectable levels. We can infer its presence where it partially blocks light (interstellar dust clouds) or causes gravitational lensing (presumably something massive like a black hole). The fudge factor is whether or not there is enough of it to cause, e.g., the galactic rotational effects we observe.

It supposedly makes up the majority of the universe. Yet we can't see it. It also means that it should be right here among us. So why can't we find it on Earth? or in our Solar System? Why does it only exist "out there?" Why are we so special that it doesn't exist right here?


also "dark" in Dark matter and energy doesn't refer to it being dark, but being "unknown"

One Bad Pig
12-13-2016, 10:49 AM
It supposedly makes up the majority of the universe. Yet we can't see it. It also means that it should be right here among us. So why can't we find it on Earth? or in our Solar System? Why does it only exist "out there?" Why are we so special that it doesn't exist right here?
Matter in the solar system is generally close enough to the sun and reflective enough that it can eventually be spotted, and thus is not "dark."


also "dark" in Dark matter and energy doesn't refer to it being dark, but being "unknown"
Well, it's unknown because we can't see it - i.o.w., it's dark.

Sparko
12-13-2016, 11:06 AM
Matter in the solar system is generally close enough to the sun and reflective enough that it can eventually be spotted, and thus is not "dark."

Well, it's unknown because we can't see it - i.o.w., it's dark.The problem is that scientists don't think it is "normal" matter that we just can't see. It takes up most of the universe I believe. So that means that we should see things that mass 2 to 3 times normal here in our own solar system (and on Earth!) and we don't.


Roughly 80 percent of the mass of the universe is made up of material that scientists cannot directly observe. Known as dark matter, this bizarre ingredient does not emit light or energy.

...Most scientists think that dark matter is composed of non-baryonic matter. The lead candidate, WIMPS (weakly interacting massive particles), have ten to a hundred times the mass of a proton, but their weak interactions with "normal" matter make them difficult to detect. Neutralinos, massive hypothetical particles heavier and slower than neutrinos, are the foremost candidate, though they have yet to be spotted. The smaller neutral axion and the uncharched photinos are also potential placeholders for dark matter.

A third possibility exists that the laws of gravity that have thus far successfully described the motion of objects within the solar system require revision.
http://www.space.com/20930-dark-matter.html



More is unknown than is known. We know how much dark energy there is because we know how it affects the universe's expansion. Other than that, it is a complete mystery. But it is an important mystery. It turns out that roughly 68% of the universe is dark energy. Dark matter makes up about 27%. The rest - everything on Earth, everything ever observed with all of our instruments, all normal matter - adds up to less than 5% of the universe. Come to think of it, maybe it shouldn't be called "normal" matter at all, since it is such a small fraction of the universe.
https://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/focus-areas/what-is-dark-energy

Christianbookworm
12-13-2016, 11:30 AM
So, we still are that youngster that thinks he has a handle on a subject, but doesn't fully realize the amount of knowledge he still lacks?

Sparko
12-13-2016, 11:49 AM
So, we still are that youngster that thinks he has a handle on a subject, but doesn't fully realize the amount of knowledge he still lacks?no. scientists are aware that they have no real idea what dark matter and energy are and that they might just be fudge factors.

37818
12-13-2016, 11:58 AM
The extra mass could be caused by some other phenomena that we have not discovered yet, or some change in our calculation regarding gravity, or any other number of other things. Sure adding "dark matter" fixes the problem, but that is because it is a "fudge factor" and that is what fudge factors do. They provide a solution to a problem until the ACTUAL solution comes along. When astronomers believed in epicycles, they had to explain why planets seemed to go backwards in their orbits every so often. Well epicycles explained it perfectly and the math worked out exactly! Did that mean that epicycles were real? No. Because once they realize that the Earth went around the sun and so did the planets, then the retrograde problem went away because Earth was orbiting faster than the outer planets so they appeared to go backwards when we overtook them in our orbit.

Nobody knows what dark matter is. It is just a label for unknown mass needed to explain certain observations. I personally think it makes more sense to believe that it is a flaw in our science and formulas, than there is some mysterious matter out there that we can't see or detect in any way but it has mass and yet no other physicality.

Actually there is a theory that the gravitational effect of relativity is the cause of the extra mass.

Christianbookworm
12-13-2016, 12:01 PM
no. scientists are aware that they have no real idea what dark matter and energy are and that they might just be fudge factors.

Was that the Enlightenment period? AKA the time period where Europe got Sophomore Syndrome! At least we now admit when we don't know something. Or am I exaggerating early modern European arrogance?

Sparko
12-13-2016, 12:05 PM
Actually there is a theory that the gravitational effect of relativity is the cause of the extra mass.I am not a scientist but I am leaning toward "There is something fundamental that we don't understand about how the universe expands yet" Than that there is actually extra mass and energy at all. Occam's Razor and all that. It is far more likely that we just don't understand something crucial yet, than 80% of the universe is made up of undetectable mass and energy that magically expands the universe.

Kbertsche
12-16-2016, 03:37 PM
It supposedly makes up the majority of the universe. Yet we can't see it. It also means that it should be right here among us. So why can't we find it on Earth? or in our Solar System? Why does it only exist "out there?" Why are we so special that it doesn't exist right here?


also "dark" in Dark matter and energy doesn't refer to it being dark, but being "unknown"

If dark matter exists, then it DOES exist "right here". But since we don't know what it is, we don't know how to detect it.

I lean toward "dark matter" being real; I think it is the simplest explanation of the data that has already been mentioned in this thread. The main alternative to dark matter is MOND (modified Newtonian dynamics), but it is hard for the various MOND theories to explain everything that dark matter does (e.g. the bullet cluster).

Sparko
12-19-2016, 07:35 AM
If dark matter exists, then it DOES exist "right here". But since we don't know what it is, we don't know how to detect it.

I lean toward "dark matter" being real; I think it is the simplest explanation of the data that has already been mentioned in this thread. The main alternative to dark matter is MOND (modified Newtonian dynamics), but it is hard for the various MOND theories to explain everything that dark matter does (e.g. the bullet cluster).

I lean toward it being a mistaken idea about the expansion of the universe, or some unknown flaw in our math on the topic. Much simpler explanation that some invisible mass that we can't measure in any way.

hansgeorg
12-19-2016, 07:39 AM
basically dark matter and energy are "fudge factors" used to explain holes in our current understanding and math regarding the universe. Neither has ever been detected. It will probably end up with new math and concepts that explain things like the expansion speed of the universe without dark matter or energy.

Also one of the arguments for Geocentrism against Modern World View.

Sparko
12-19-2016, 07:57 AM
Also one of the arguments for Geocentrism against Modern World View.no.

hansgeorg
12-19-2016, 08:03 AM
no.

I wasn't saying it was a conclusive one.

I am saying it is used as one. Whether it is conclusive, can be actually debated.

Has JohnMartin brought this one up in a non-locked thread? What was the answer?

But as to its being used, I do frequent other Geocentrics sufficiently to know about what arguments they use.

Sparko
12-19-2016, 08:09 AM
I wasn't saying it was a conclusive one.

I am saying it is used as one. Whether it is conclusive, can be actually debated.

Has JohnMartin brought this one up in a non-locked thread? What was the answer?

But as to its being used, I do frequent other Geocentrics sufficiently to know about what arguments they use.

This thread is not about Geocentrism, so don't derail it.

Cerebrum123
12-20-2016, 03:14 PM
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2116446-first-test-of-rival-to-einsteins-gravity-kills-off-dark-matter/

Looks like "modified gravity" may make "dark matter" unnecessary.

Jedidiah
12-20-2016, 05:40 PM
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2116446-first-test-of-rival-to-einsteins-gravity-kills-off-dark-matter/

Looks like "modified gravity" may make "dark matter" unnecessary.

Very interesting. I look forward to learning more about this.

Kbertsche
12-21-2016, 08:23 AM
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2116446-first-test-of-rival-to-einsteins-gravity-kills-off-dark-matter/

Looks like "modified gravity" may make "dark matter" unnecessary.
This is basically another version of MOND. I am skeptical that it can explain gravitational lensing as well as dark matter does. And it would require a new theory to explain why the force of gravity does not fall off as 1/r^2, or the gravitational potential as 1/r. This is a very tall order.

Sparko
12-21-2016, 09:23 AM
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2116446-first-test-of-rival-to-einsteins-gravity-kills-off-dark-matter/

Looks like "modified gravity" may make "dark matter" unnecessary. and it looks like the mainstream fuddy duddies are agin' it! That is usually a clue that they are on the right track. Upending the status quo. Everyone mocks and say no, and then eats crow. Happens with every new revolution in science. Doesn't mean that this guy is correct, but whatever IS correct will be sure to upset the entrenched scientists with a stake in the old ideas.

Kbertsche
12-21-2016, 06:18 PM
and it looks like the mainstream fuddy duddies are agin' it! That is usually a clue that they are on the right track. Upending the status quo. Everyone mocks and say no, and then eats crow. Happens with every new revolution in science. Doesn't mean that this guy is correct, but whatever IS correct will be sure to upset the entrenched scientists with a stake in the old ideas.
We'll see. Overthrowing a paradigm in physics takes more than just a new idea; the new idea must be mathematically defensible and derivable from first principles. I don't believe any MOND theory fits these requirements at present.

Sparko
12-21-2016, 06:27 PM
explain what MOND is, please.

Chrawnus
12-21-2016, 07:34 PM
explain what MOND is, please.

It's what's left of Monday after you remove the "ay" from it.








:outtie:

Kbertsche
12-23-2016, 02:27 PM
explain what MOND is, please.
See post #21.
MOND=MOdified Newtonian Dynamics (essentially the same as non-Newtonian gravity, i.e., a gravitational force which does not fall off as 1/r^2).