Home / SN Bookshelf / July 4th, 2009; Vol.176 #1 / Book Reviews / Book review
Einstein’s Telescope: The Hunt for Dark Matter and Dark Energy in the Universe
By Evalyn Gates
July 4th, 2009; Vol.176 #1 (p. 31)
font_down font_up Text Size
access
Enlargemagnify
Einstein’s Telescope: The Hunt for Dark Matter and Dark Energy in the Universe by Evalyn Gates

Scientists attempt to track down the invisible ingredients of the cosmos.

W.W. Norton, 2009, 305 p., $25.95


Share & Save
Comments 2
  • On Energy, Mass, Gravity And Galaxies Clusters,
    A Commonsensible Epilogue, And A Prologue To Life Evolution
    Origin Of Gravity And Formation Of Life


    http://www.sciencenews.org/index/generic/activity/view/id/42988/title/Blob_may_signal_monster_galaxy_feeding

    **The onset of big-bang's inflation started gravity, followed by formation of galactic clusters that behave "classically" as Newtonian bodies while continuously reconverting their shares of pre-inflation masses back to energy, and of endless intertwined evolutions WITHIN the clusters in attempts to resist this reconversion.

    Astronomically there are two "physics", a "classical physics" behaviour of and between galactic clusters, and a "quantum physics" behaviour within galactic clusters.**


    A. "Heavyweight galaxies in the young universe", at

    http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/42419/title/Heavyweight_galaxies_in_the_young_universe
    New observations of full-grown galaxies in the young universe may force astrophysicists to revise their leading theory of galaxy formation, at least as it applies to regions where galaxies congregate into clusters.


    B. Some brief notes in "Light On Dark Matter?", at

    http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=22994&st=0&#entry373127

    - "Galaxy Clusters Evolved By Dispersion, Not By Conglomeration"
    - Introduction of E=Total[m(1 + D)]
    - "Dark Energy And Matter And The Emperor's New Clothes"
    - "Evolutionary Cosmology: Ordained Or Random"
    - "“Movie” Of Microwave Pulse Transitioning From Quantum To Classical Physics"
    - "Broken Symmetry" Is Physics' Term Of Biology's "Evolution"
    - "A Glimpse Of Forces-Matter-Life Unified Theory"


    C. Commonsensible conception of gravity

    1. According to the standard model, which describes all the forces in nature except gravity, all elementary particles were born massless. Interactions with the proposed Higgs field would slow down some of the particles and endow them with mass. Finding the Higgs — or proving it does not exist — has therefore become one of the most important quests in particle physics.

    However, for a commonsensible primitive mind with a commonsensible universe represented by
    E=Total[m(1 + D)], this conceptual equation describes gravity. It does not explain gravity. It describes it. It applies to the whole universe and to every and all specific cases, regardless of size.

    2. Thus gravity is simply another face of the total cosmic energy. Thus gravity is THE cosmic parent of phenomena such as black holes and life. It is the display of THE all-pervasive-embracive strained space texture, laid down by the expanding galactic clusters, also noticed within the galactic clusters in the energy backlashes into various constructs of temporary constrained energy packages.


    3. "Extrapolation of the expansion of the universe backwards in time to the early hot dense "Big Bang" phase, using general relativity, yields an infinite density and temperature at a finite time in the past. At age 10^-35 seconds the Universe begins with a cataclysm that generates space and time, as well as all the matter and energy the Universe will ever hold."

    At D=0, E was = m and both E and m were, together, all the energy and matter the Universe will ever hold. Since the onset of the cataclysm, E remains constant and m diminishes as D increases.
    The increase of D is the inflation, followed by expansion, of what became the galactic clusters.

    At 10^-35 seconds, D in E=Total[m(1 + D)] was already a fraction of a second above zero. This is when gravity started. This is what started gravity. At this instance starts the space texture, starts the straining of the space texture, and starts the "space texture memory", gravity, that may eventually overcome expansion and initiate re-impansion back to singularity.


    D. Commonsensible conception of the forces other than gravity

    The forces other than gravity are, commonsensibly, forces involved in conjunction with evolution within the galactic clusters:

    http://royalsociety.org/downloaddoc.asp?id=4770

    The farthest we go in reductionism in Everything, including in Life, we shall still end up with wholism, until we arrive at energy. Energy is the base element of everything and of all in the universe. At the beginning was the energy singularity, at the end will be near zero mass and an infinite dispersion of the beginning energy, and in-between, the universe undergoes continuous evolution consisting of myriad energy-to-energy and energy-to-mass-to-energy transformations.

    The universe, and everything in it, are continuously evolving, and all the evolutions are intertwined.


    E. PS to "On Cosmic Energy And Mass Evolutions"

    As mass is just another face of energy it is commonsensible to regard not only life, but mass in general, as a format of temporarily constrained energy.

    It therefore ensues that whereas the expanding cosmic constructs, the galaxies clusters, are - overall - continuously converting "their" original pre-inflation mass back to energy, the overall evolution WITHIN them, within the clusters, is in the opposite direction, temporarily constrained
    energy packages such as black holes and biospheres and other energy-storing mass-formats are precariuosly forming and "doing best" to survive as long as "possible"...


    F. From "Strings Link the Ultracold with the Superhot"

    http://www.sciencenews.org/view/feature/id/42632/title/Strings_Link_the_Ultracold_with_the_Superhot

    "Perfect liquids suggest theory’s math mirrors something real.

    When the universe was very young, and still superhot from the aftermath of the Big Bang, plasma should have been the only state of matter around. And that’s what scientists at Brookhaven expected to see when they smashed gold ions together at 99.99 percent of the speed of light using a machine called RHIC (for Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider). RHIC physicists thought the ion collisions would melt the gold’s protons and neutrons into a hot plasma of quarks and gluons at a temperature of a trillion kelvins, replicating conditions similar to those a microsecond after the birth of the universe. But instead of a gaslike plasma, the physicists reported in 2005, RHIC served up a hot quark soup, behaving more like a liquid than a plasma or gas."


    G. The expectation of Brookhaven scientists was a bit unrealistic

    The "aftermath of the Big Bang" lasted much less than 10^-35 seconds. This is evidenced by the fact that "Gravity Is THE Manifestation Of The Onset Of Cosmic Inflation Cataclysm":

    http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/184.page#1950
    and
    http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/184.page#1982

    With all respect due to the scientists at Brookhaven it is unrealistic to expect that they can recreate the state of pre big-bang energy-mass singularity. Commonsense is still the best scientific approach.


    H. PS To "Gravity Limits Link Ultracold And Superhot": Our Inability To Create Singularity

    a. From "Strings Link the Ultracold with the Superhot"

    A new truth always has to contend with many difficulties,” the German physicist Max Planck said decades ago. “If it were not so, it would have been discovered much sooner.”

    b. IMO gravity is attempted reversal of inflation

    To me, a simple uninformed one, E=mc^2 is a derived formula, whereas E=Total[m(1 + D)] is a commonsensical descriptive concept.

    I intuitively regard both the ultracold and superhot liquids as being in a confined space and "striving but unable" to overcome D, to render D=0.

    I also intuitively regard our accelerated collisions smashups as attempted "reverse inflations" in the sense that Newton's law of universal gravitation seems to me as "reverse inflation".


    I. An epilogue and a prologue

    Here ends the basic story of Energy, Mass, Gravity and Galaxies Clusters. For us, humans, this is the prologue to the story of Life's Evolution, briefly presented in "Updated Life's Manifest May 2009".


    Dov Henis
    (Comments from 22nd century)
    http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-P81pQcU1dLBbHgtjQjxG_Q--?cq=1
    Updated Life's Manifest May 2009
    http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=14988&st=480&#entry412704
    http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/140/122.page#2321
    EVOLUTION Beyond Darwin 200
    http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=14988&st=405&#entry396201
    http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/100/122.page#1407
    Dov Henis Dov Henis
    Jun. 26, 2009 at 10:59am
  • #2-Membrane and Dark Matter Theories as I see it.
    I guess I'll start by saying that some nomenclature may be slightly differant then the brains that thought up the brane theory. The way I see the brane theories, parellel univeres also cancells out any dark matter problem. A matter of fact the dark matter solution seems to be quite a silly solution for why the universe is still expanding, and accellerating at that.
     OK, here I go. When I heard of the brane theory my mind went BAM that's it! I thought of two giant "branes" (masses) with slightly differant properties and both having enourmous gravitational pull, colliding and causing our universe and other "parellel universes" to form. But I don't understand why the branes are being called the "parellel universes". The branes create the infinate number of parellel universes. Everytime a brane touches or comes close enough to another brane... BAM! there's another universe created. I also see a mulitude of branes (All this I've stated so far was pretty much theorized by other theorists. NOT ME!) all of which are floating in a sea of parellel universes. Or the other way around. I also see some of these universes possilby being swallowed up as the branes closes in on that universe. This particular universe would expand toward that brane at a ridiculous speed until all it's matter has been absorbed back into that brane. It doesn't nesseceraly have to be this same brane that created it. Now if two branes approache eachother (even though they would tend to repulse each other) and encounters a universe between them, the universe might be compressed or squeezed out of the way. Scarry to think about but this could be the fate of our universe if and when we notice our universe starting to collapse. If you can follow this, great! I see every brane and universe they create all have slightly differant properties weather it be charge or polarity or dimension etc. to them. Of course there are exceptions and these are the universes and branes that can cause kaos. Where two or more can merge into one or can sandwich another causing it to split in to etc etc.  I can also imagine some universes not encountering anything and expands to be giants and for such a vast period of time that all the stars in all the galaxies burn out. But still its matter trying to reach  and be absorbed back to the closest brane. Some universes may expand though other universes next to them too. It would be interesting to see if we could find a galaxy from an adjacent universe relatively close to one of our galaxies in our universe that is actually traveling in opposite directions from the galaxy from our own universe. 
     So this brings me to the "dark matter" topic. As I see it, as the branes separate (ripple) after each creation of a universe (the big bangs), taking into account action reaction principle, then I think it would only be natural for all the matter in each universe to "fall back" to the closest brane to it. Thinking that the branes have the ultimate gravitational pull do to thier masses, the universes would also appear to accelerate the further they expand from thier creation point towards the brane. There isn't any need to try to discover "dark matter" because ther isn't any.
     Also, this is the reason we think gravity as being a 'weak force' in nature.
     this theory of mine (i think) could be proven if we could some how find a way to measure minute differances in speed and direction of the furthest galaxies. IF our universe is offset from the center of the two branes (or more) that created "us" ( due to one brane moving or rippling faster then the other) then one side of our univrse will be expanding faster then the other. Of course there could be a multitude of branes surrounding us so our universe could have an almost even expansion rate. But IF it could be measured and we could figure out how many branes suround our universe. WOW!
     This is my theory as I see it. I've watched alot of shows on tv and permutated everyone elses theory. If I stepped on other peoples toes please let me know. I will not take credit for someone elses theories and I apoligies for the toes I may have steped on.
     David C. Stout
    Deputydaves@gmail.com
    Dave Stout Dave Stout
    Oct. 8, 2009 at 4:20pm
Post a comment

Please login or register to participate.


Advertisement