Jump to content

Photo

Dark Matter: A Theorem

physics quantum mechanics astrophysics dark matter theory

  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 Timelord

Timelord

    The Timelord

  • Banned
  • Location:Prydon Academy

Posted 14 August 2015 - 10:34 AM

This is a skeleton work in progress, for a paper on dark matter, that I thought I'd run by a few of you. Anyone interested in astrophysics, quantum mechanics, particle physics, and general relativity, feel free to read on, and comment.

 

This is by no means a full thesis, or a completed paper, as I have yet to do the hard maths, or provide any proofs of any sort, or substantiation. At present, it represents an idea that I've had on the 'matter'--oi, the bad puns--for years.

 

Dark Matter, a Theorem.

Expectations

If 'Dark Matter', an observable phenomenon, is a universal material, why does it not exist within the bodies of planets?

In theory, if we can detect Dark Matter by its mass, or rather, the exertion of its mass in the form of gravity,  we should be able to search for it within planetary bodies, by examining any volume of substances, and comparing the mass of that volume, against the  expected mass of that volume.
    
If 'Dark Matter' however, is constructed of the same particles as ordinary matter, another possible situation arises, whereby Dark matter, is no different to any observable matter. If that is true, the question we must ask, is 'Why can we not observe it, other than by its interaction with visible matter?'
    
Theory and Conjecture

 

I postulate, that Dark Matter, is ordinary matter, but it is in motion, at near-relativistic speeds, increases its relative mass to such an extent, that it appears to be larger clouds of smaller collections of gravitational perturbation. If this is the case, then the particles may be simple hydrogen atoms, but their relative velocity is so great, that their mass increases to an unbelievable grand scale.

 

In this situation, such particles are likely set into motion by massive novae; where some part of the interior of a star, is ejected at near the speed of light. These particles would fly outward, and their motion would be affected by super-massive bodies, such as quasars, binding them into an orbit of those bodies.
    
If that is the case, it would potentially explain why we sense these particles between galaxies, as some particles likely leave galactic bounds if there is no sufficient super-massive force to cause them to orbit.
    
Dynamics and Interactions

 

In this hypothetical situation, a small portion of these hyper-particles would fall into orbits, some of those orbits would decay and the particles would slowly lose momentum and velocity due to tidal forces. When this happens, the particles may be trapped by less massive bodies, and over time, slow to an observable state.
    
They may in fact, collide with bodies, causing stellar impacts of such magnitude, that the fusion and mass balance of stars is disrupted, causing other stellar explosions as a consequence.
    
Further, I propose that these super-massive particles, or at least the path they take, may cause stellar dust to coagulate, creating the needed initial mass to form stars, planets, and other solid, or gaseous bodies; thus being an inevitable dynamic of the cycle of star birth, and death.
    
I would expect that for this model to work, the process would involve novae, causing the expulsion of particles. The gravity of these particles passes through other slow particle areas, and the gravitational field of the hyper-particles begins the process of creating a new star, or stellar nursery--in fact, a stellar nursery would be a prime target for any attempt to observe this phenomenon.
    

Examination

To test this theorem, initial expulsions of hyper-particles would need to be projected, and some idea of an interaction of these sorts calculated, and either proved, or disproved. I am not certain at this time, how one would attempt to determine if the mass of 'dark matter' in indeed generated by such hyper-particles, but if so, I would expect the matter to be primarily hydrogen, moving at ~99.999% C.
            
It is possibly that sub-atomic particles, with mass, moving at these velocities could also have a similar effect. My prime concern, is that any explosion potent enough to cause matter to accelerate to such speeds, would also break the atomic bonds of that matter.
        
If this is the case, then it may be the heavier elements in the hear to very massive stars, that generate these particles. If a super-massive star nova, then some of the heavy elements may be ejected at intense velocities. In the process, atomic fission takes place, in which protons, and electrons break apart in photonic discharges, but some of the subatomic particles remain bonded, due to the sheer mass of the particle now in motion.
        
If a heavy element was to do this, the result may be a micro-singularity, or a gravitic effect of a similar nature, but lighter elements, may exhibit properties at near-relativistic speeds that could also account for the phenomenon of dark matter. A crucial test, would also involve trying to determine if the density of dark matter is in any way uniform, or distributed in a uniform way.
                
I would project that if dark matter exhibits both partially uniform distribution, and erratic distribution, that this supports the hypothesis of hyper-particles, as the erratic distribution is a display of hyper-particles not bound into orbits; whereas the uniform distribution consists of particles that are in an orbit of some kind.
          

Considerations

Would the collision of a photon with a hyper-particle cause the photon to be absorbed? This is a further proof, that needs consideration, however, even if single photons are absorbed, the size of a hyper-particle versus its mass, could mean that a relatively small number of hyper-particles need exist to create a gravitic field that we observe as 'dark matter', and the blocking of single photons on chance collisions, would be too minimal to easily detect.
 


Edited by ZoriaRPG, 14 August 2015 - 10:36 AM.

  • Eddy, Matthew and Dark Ice Dragon like this

#2 Matthew

Matthew

  • Administrators
  • Real Name:See above.
  • Pronouns:He / Him
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 14 August 2015 - 10:58 AM

When you win the Nobel Prize, can I have some of the grant money you're awarded?

Also, just to make it clear, you're saying that dark matter isn't necessarily one element but can be made of multiple elements moving and very high speeds?
  • Dark Ice Dragon likes this

#3 Eddy

Eddy

    ringle

  • Moderators
  • Real Name:Edward
  • Pronouns:He / Him
  • Location:London, United Kingdom

Posted 14 August 2015 - 11:40 AM

That's a really interesting theory. I've never really looked into Dark Matter or anything like that so this was definitely really cool.



#4 Timelord

Timelord

    The Timelord

  • Banned
  • Location:Prydon Academy

Posted 14 August 2015 - 11:45 AM

When you win the Nobel Prize, can I have some of the grant money you're awarded?

Also, just to make it clear, you're saying that dark matter isn't necessarily one element but can be made of multiple elements moving and very high speeds?

 

Indeed, but I postulate that hydrogen is the most likely. I also don;t believe that the Nobel prize would work here, as there is no way to prove the hypothesis that I could feasibly do, on my own. Not that I wouldn't love the honour.

 

I need to do an analysis on patterns of 'dark matter', the maths for what velocities, and particle densities would be needed to account for the mass discrepancy, and how orbital trajectories would work. None of that would guarantee this theory to be true, but it's still a start.

 

You may note, that I question my own conjecture, which is very important here.

 

If I could show one single instance of matter ejected from a star at near relativistic speeds, I'd have more solid ground, but in my model, only super-massive stars would be likely to generate what I named a hyper-particle, because they would have the required kinetic discharge. Luckily, they are the most likely to nova, too, and they seem to be the most common forms in early star formations. As they nova, they create smaller stars, which would be less likely to explode with enough kinetic fore to drive matter to anywhere near C.

 

What I'd be looking to find, are larger areas of dark matter, near more recent massive novae.


Edited by ZoriaRPG, 14 August 2015 - 11:51 AM.


#5 Cjc

Cjc

    Cor Blimey!

  • Members

Posted 14 August 2015 - 02:24 PM

Your hypothesis is very well formed and it has the advantage of depending on very few assumptions.  It is impressive.

 

Still, I can't help but wonder why these near-light particles wouldn't eventually lose speed and thereby release their trapped photons.  Despite the vast vacuum of space any collision (including the incidence collision with photon wave-particles) would generate friction and slow the particle.  While your hyperparticles have the advantage of being small (collision is very unlikely), they are also very massive and would thereby insight collision with their gravitation.

This counterpoint is not a contradiction of your conjecture (yay alliteration!), though, it is simply a matter which you should consider.  It is possible that your hyper-particles are causing a vortex effect, meaning that (like most things travelling near the speed of light) by the time it collides with something it has already passed it.  While I would say that you would therefore need to look for hyper-particle trails (evidence that an object acting with large mass passed through a cluster of objects with smaller mass), these collisions are likely so infrequent that the trail collapses before it can be observed (you made mention of star nurseries; they would be the place to look).

 

EDIT: My point is, if the dark matter phenomenon is caused by hyper particles (created by relatively rare events) and these particles can lose speed by collisions (relatively common events), then we would witness a general increase in the amount of visible matter over time, right?

 

 

My own hypotheses on the matter are incongruous with yours (I subscribe to ideas of fractal symmetry in the universe and my explanation of dark matter depends on a double-layer plasma and obstructed antibaryonization) but your proposal has merit and as I said it depends on very few assumptions (which is fantastic as far as cosmological science goes).  It sounds like the sort of think that could be tested at the Hadron.

Best of luck with your paper.


Edited by Cjc, 14 August 2015 - 02:41 PM.

  • Dark Ice Dragon likes this

#6 Fabbrizio

Fabbrizio

    Legend

  • Members
  • Real Name:Mark

Posted 14 August 2015 - 04:58 PM

This is a very well-constructed theorem and a very good read. While it's definitely a topic I adore and find unflinchingly fascinating, I'm not nearly as well-read on it as I ought to be. I initially had a counterargument to the points made here, but as a rare decision of wisdom I decided to google it first. The result I found was that my idea had been thought of and debunked a thousand times over. But I have a better understanding of the topic now than I did an hour ago, and your essay prompted it, so I thank you for that.


Edited by Fabbrizio, 14 August 2015 - 04:58 PM.




Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: physics, quantum, mechanics, astrophysics, dark, matter, theory

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users