The Big Bang time paradox

[KrazyHorse]

Ex is awesome.

[LordShiva]

Do you drink Canadian Club too?

[Odin]

Threadjacking:

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse

did someone get rid of Hubble's Constant??

Hell, even without dark energy or dark matter you require that.

So what is your take on dark matter considering they seem to have finally found some as of August this year.

And why is gravity such a weak ass force?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe


So what is your take on dark matter considering they seem to have finally found some as of August this year.

Huh?

What experiment are you talking about?

And why is gravity such a weak ass force?

I would be picking up my Nobel right now if I knew...

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Huh?

What experiment are you talking about?

Nasa Observation in August 2006

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Oh, and right now inflationary cosmology (what there is of it) doesn't even explain inflation.

Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon - Milton Friedman

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe



Nasa Observation in August 2006

Interesting.

Anyhow, most "normal" cosmologists operate under the assumption that DM exists. It shows up in so many places that alternative explanations tend to be a little bit awkward.

[Ned]

Except for the feuding, this thread had been quite interesting to the non expert. I remember learning much of what I know about the Theory of Relativity and such from such BS sessions as this one in college.

My congrats guys.

[Impaler[WrG]]

Now this dark matter that has been fairly well established to exist because of its gravitational influence but has never realy been nailed down as WHAT it is. Because its definition is based on what it is not (its not matter we can see with our telescopes) its almost certanly composed of more then one type of stuff. Some of it is likly regular matter that simply cold and dark but it dosn't seem possible for ALL of it to be that plain so their been speculation that a lot of the dark matter is composed of some kind of weird unkown particle or familiy of particles. Dose that about sum up the current theory? Do you have any incling of what all that Dark matter is KH?

[Lorizael]

Yes. He knows that you're wrong.

[Ari Rahikkala]

Well, let's see now. I've forgotten basically everything I knew about mathematics in lukio, but I do think that an infinite series of stacked massive turtles would exert finite gravity on any object? Right? Because, as the turtles are stacked on top of each other, as you go down in the turtle tower the distance between any specific turtle and an object placed anywhere will eventually approach infinity, and the reciprocals of square numbers produce a convergent series. So, if I'm going about this correctly, we could imagine an infinite stack of turtles supporting spacetime at certain points (or whatever's the closest concept to a point in physical discourse) - perhaps different areas would have different turtle densities - which would neatly explain dark matter. Besides, turtles swim (for heaven's sake, that's what turtles are for). Wouldn't an unbounded number of infinite stacks of swimming turtles cause a whole bunch of dark energy?

[Jon Miller]

I went to a number of talks about dark matter detection at the October DNP meeting.

A lot of the experiments were basically make a big detector and watch for something to happen that isn't an understood reaction. Also, Axions seemed popular, despite being a particle I know very little about. I am sorta glad I am not on one of those experiments... "Well, I looked at this region of parameter space for Dark Matter and didn't find anything, please give me my PhD"

A particle theorist friend also gave a talk about a dark matter candidate that would be detectable by experiments which will run in the coming year (should give preliminary results in a year). At the end, I asked him if he thought that it was the likely cause of dark matter. He said he didn't really think it existed, as it wasn't part of an interesting theory.

JM

[Lul Thyme]

Originally posted by Ari Rahikkala
Well, let's see now. I've forgotten basically everything I knew about mathematics in lukio, but I do think that an infinite series of stacked massive turtles would exert finite gravity on any object? Right? Because, as the turtles are stacked on top of each other, as you go down in the turtle tower the distance between any specific turtle and an object placed anywhere will eventually approach infinity, and the reciprocals of square numbers produce a convergent series. So, if I'm going about this correctly, we could imagine an infinite stack of turtles supporting spacetime at certain points (or whatever's the closest concept to a point in physical discourse) - perhaps different areas would have different turtle densities - which would neatly explain dark matter. Besides, turtles swim (for heaven's sake, that's what turtles are for). Wouldn't an unbounded number of infinite stacks of swimming turtles cause a whole bunch of dark energy?

You're assuming all the turtles have same mass.
I would expect them to get bigger as you go down which could make the series divergent....

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Impaler[WrG]
Some of it is likly regular matter that simply cold and dark

Not the important part. Most of the dark matter must have low interaction with light and regular matter. Otherwise the evolution of structure would have followed a different path. Dark matter collapses into clumps earlier than regular matter does because the dark matter is not in thermal equilibrium with the regular matter, and thus is not held from collapsing by radiation pressure.

As for what it actually is, we don't know. It's demonstrably not simply frozen out neutrinos. That accounts for less than 2% of it.

The bulk of it must be in an unknown field.