Dark matter: Difference between revisions

From Slabscapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
mNo edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
Darkness = absence of light.
Due to recent results from experiments carried out by [Fencer Dean Twenty] the previous, long-held theory has been replaced.


Light = moving [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon photons].
==Previous theory==


Photons are very weird things (some might even say strange). Sometimes they act like particles, sometimes they act like waves. They have no mass when they are moving, even though they are deflected by gravity, but do have momentum which can be transferred to physical objects (like [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_sails solar sails]).
Darkness = absence of light and light = moving [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon photons].


At the start of the process, mass is converted into energy and emitted as sunlight. At the end of the process, photons lose their momentum by converting it back into mass as they slow down. The universe has been shining for around 14 billion years - that's a lot of photons and a lot of mass forming invisible spheres around the galaxies.
Photons were considered 'very weird things' (some might even say strange). Sometimes they act like particles, sometimes they act like waves. They have no mass when they are moving, even though they are deflected by gravity, but do have momentum which can be transferred to physical objects (like [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_sails solar sails]).


Dark matter = stationary photons.
It was thought that because mass is converted into energy and emitted as light (usually by stellar bodies), then, eventually photons would lose their momentum and convert their kinetic energy back into mass as they slowed down. The universe has been shining for around 14 billion years, so that's a lot of photons and a lot of mass forming invisible spheres around the galaxies.


Obvious really.
Therefore: dark matter = stationary photons<ref>Deemed to be obvious and self-evident</ref>.
 
==Current theory==
 
Dark matter is ordinary matter that is out of phase with the matter in the universe that we, as observers, exist within. It is, therefore, unobservable but can be detected by its gravitational influence on matter in 'our' observable universe. It is therefore possible for what we laughingly call 'normal' matter to pass through dark matter<ref>aor is it the other way around?</ref> without anyone noticing.
 
==Conclusion==
 
As usual, everyone is waiting for a better theory.
 
 
==Notes==
<references/>


<!-- http://slabsca.pe/dark_matter -->
<!-- http://slabsca.pe/dark_matter -->

Revision as of 10:57, 14 January 2023

Due to recent results from experiments carried out by [Fencer Dean Twenty] the previous, long-held theory has been replaced.

Previous theory

Darkness = absence of light and light = moving photons.

Photons were considered 'very weird things' (some might even say strange). Sometimes they act like particles, sometimes they act like waves. They have no mass when they are moving, even though they are deflected by gravity, but do have momentum which can be transferred to physical objects (like solar sails).

It was thought that because mass is converted into energy and emitted as light (usually by stellar bodies), then, eventually photons would lose their momentum and convert their kinetic energy back into mass as they slowed down. The universe has been shining for around 14 billion years, so that's a lot of photons and a lot of mass forming invisible spheres around the galaxies.

Therefore: dark matter = stationary photons[1].

Current theory

Dark matter is ordinary matter that is out of phase with the matter in the universe that we, as observers, exist within. It is, therefore, unobservable but can be detected by its gravitational influence on matter in 'our' observable universe. It is therefore possible for what we laughingly call 'normal' matter to pass through dark matter[2] without anyone noticing.

Conclusion

As usual, everyone is waiting for a better theory.


Notes

  1. Deemed to be obvious and self-evident
  2. aor is it the other way around?