Some questions I have about the universe...?

[Michael]

It's not so clear that dark energy is an exotic form of anything.

As I understand it, "dark energy" has to produce 'negative pressure' on all objects, unlike any other type of energy.

 

[lesliedellow]

As I understand it, "dark energy" has to produce 'negative pressure' on all objects, unlike any other type of energy.

If you bring two electrons together they will certainly possess potential energy, and, given the chance, they will manifest that potential energy by flying apart. That is negative pressure. Positive pressure compresses things.

 

[Radrook]

The definition of observable is kind of weird. At earlier stages things were closer. For very distant objects, light that we see now was emitted when the object was closer to us. So we can in principle detect objects that are now much further than 14 billions light-years because what we see now was emitted long ago when they were closer. Does that make sense?

It is all an illusion.

 

[Michael]

If you bring two electrons together they will certainly possess potential energy, and, given the chance, they will manifest that potential energy by flying apart. That is negative pressure. Positive pressure compresses things.

Don't tell me that you're embracing EU/PC theory now? Galaxies don't have a "charge" do they? What form of energy causes "negative pressure" on all objects regardless of charge?

 

[lesliedellow]

Don't tell me that you're embracing EU/PC theory now? Galaxies don't have a "charge" do they? What form of energy causes "negative pressure" on all objects regardless of charge?

Yes, you are quite right, I have not embraced the EU/PC nonsense. If there were huge numbers of free electrons flying around the universe, I think there is just chance somebody might have noticed them.

 

[Michael]

Yes, you are quite right, I have not embraced the EU/PC nonsense.

I just love how critics refer to empirical physics as 'nonsense' when LCDM is 95 percent placeholder terms for human ignorance. It's just so cute.

If there were huge numbers of free electrons flying around the universe, I think there is just chance somebody might have noticed them.

Not likely. They didn't notice the electrons flying around the aurora till 60 years of Birkeland first wrote about them. The mainstream *is still* in denial of the role of "flying electrons" in relationship to solar physics a hundred years after Birkeland wrote about them, let alone cosmology. Evidently the mainstream can't see flying electrons when they heat up plasma to millions of degrees.

If they notice them, they go right back to pure denial real fast.

 

[Michael]

So since you're not willing to embrace charged galaxies, what force of nature causes *uncharged objects* to experience "negative pressure"?

 

[lesliedellow]

I just love how critics refer to empirical physics as 'nonsense' when LCDM is 95 percent placeholder terms for human ignorance. It's just so cute.



Not likely. They didn't notice the electrons flying around the aurora till 60 years of Birkeland first wrote about them. The mainstream *is still* in denial of the role of "flying electrons" in relationship to solar physics a hundred years after Birkeland wrote about them, let alone cosmology. Evidently the mainstream can't see flying electrons when they heat up plasma to millions of degrees.

If they notice them, they go right back to pure denial real fast.

So the galaxies are supposed to be carrying enough charge to send them flying apart, even though they are separated by millions of light years, and nobody has noticed the chaotic magnetic and electric fields and radiation, all those electrons rushing around would be creating?

It seems to me there might be a slight problem with conservation of energy there.

 

[lesliedellow]

So since you're not willing to embrace charged galaxies, what force of nature causes *uncharged objects* to experience "negative pressure"?

I am sure the astrophysicists will let us know when they solve the problem.

 

[Michael]

So the galaxies are supposed to be carrying enough charge to send them flying apart,

Actually, I'm not suggesting that is actually the case, nor is it the case in EU/PC theory. I'm simply suggesting that's *your* only "empirical" explanations for "dark energy"/negative pressure.

even though they are separated by millions of light years, and nobody has noticed the random radiation and chaotic magnetic fields, all those electrons rushing around would be emitting?

Actually they do notice a lot of high energy emission from space. They typically chalk them up to "black holes" and all sorts of exotic stuff.

It seems to me there might be a slight problem with conservation of energy there.

Keep in mind that I believe that we live in a relatively static universe, and I'm not advocating galaxies with a charge. Sun's might have a net surface charge, but I suspect that whole galaxies act much like a homopolar generator as Alfven suggested.

I was simply noting that "dark energy" possesses "supernatural" features that don't have any direct parallels to other forms of energy.

 

[Michael]

I am sure the astrophysicists will let us know when they solve the problem.

I seriously doubt that will happen anytime soon (my lifetime). I'm definitely not holding my breath.

 

[lesliedellow]

I was simply noting that "dark energy" possesses "supernatural" features that don't have any direct parallels to other forms of energy.

If we were living in a time before Coulomb had put pen to paper, would you be coplaining because this "supernatural" force behaved nothing like gravitation - the only one of the four fundamental forces known about at the time?

 

[Michael]

If we were living in a time before Coulomb had put pen to paper, would you be coplaining because this "supernatural" force behaved nothing like gravitation - the only one of the four fundamental forces known about at the time?

Not at all, particularly if you demonstrated your claim in front of me. Even if it's not the same as gravity, you'd presumably have a source and a reason for suggesting such a thing.

In the case of 'dark energy' however, even a *tiny* amount of inelastic scattering would remove any need at all for "acceleration", even if it didn't fully explain expansion.

The whole concept of dark energy based on SN1A event was demoted to 3 -4 sigma last year, short of the 'discovery' category in the first place.

Honestly, the fact that astronomers *ignore* ordinary processes like inelastic scattering is the sole reason for their need for exotic stuff. They've consistently underestimated the brightness (and baryonic mass) of galaxies due to scattering, and they've consistently underestimated the amount of redshift due to scattering.

It's really as simple as that.

You can't even name a source of "dark energy", let alone devise an experiment to show me how it works.

 

[Neogaia777]

It is all an illusion.

I don't know if I should say this, but, "I told you so..."

But, it is a "thing" and were currently a part of that/those things right now, until were not one day...

Peace,

God Bless!

 

[Radrook]

I don't know if I should say this, but, "I told you so..."

But, it is a "thing" and were currently a part of that/those things right now, until were not one day...

Peace,

God Bless!

Well, science is now telling us that we might all be just a hologram projection-right?

 

[lesliedellow]

Well, science is now telling us that we might all be just a hologram projection-right?

Me, I'll believe anything.

I suppose that is after the string theorists have finished inventing heaven knows how many unobserved, and unobservable, spatial dimensions.

 

[Radrook]

Me, I'll believe anything.

I suppose that is after the string theorists have finished inventing heaven knows how many unobserved, and unobservable, spatial dimensions.

They actually pat one another on the back and celebrate when coming up with extra dimensions if adding dimension's suddenly solves some previously missing but crucial detail. For example, one concept is that gravity might be weak in our dimension because it is a leakage from another dimension where it is far strong. Unfortunately the Hadron Collider has as yet not produced evidence of any of these other dimensions. But guess that they will keep tweaking and calibrating until something gives one way or another.

 

[Neogaia777]

Well, science is now telling us that we might all be just a hologram projection-right?

Some of it, I guess, is...

God Bless!

 

[lesliedellow]

Some of it, I guess, is...

God Bless!

Because twentieth century physics was so far out (for want of a better expression), it seems to me that physicists have now forgotten how to draw the line under zaniness.

 

[Michael]

Because twentieth century physics was so far out (for want of a better expression), it seems to me that physicists have now forgotten how to draw the line under zaniness.

That's quite an understatement.