11117121114

'l'he DaU.y Galaxy --Great Discoveries Channel: Sd, Spaee, Teeh

I'OLLOW IHE DAILY GALAX!'

iG

RSS

Felmw:yo8, 20l.4

"Dark Mlltlm' WsJrt Not Eldst" (Weelqmd Featlll"e)

This put 4lh of Jaly2013. a Europw1 team of amonomersled by BonphengZbao of!be SUPA 0mt1e ofGrpttyatthe
Ulliftnll1ofSt.AIIdrewB ~ted a radical newtheary al: !be RAS National AltJvllomy Meetill& Ill StADdrews. Ihdr
1heory ~A~gt~~ted that the MDq We,y and.Amameda plpiee collided 110111e 10 blllillll ,eara 'fP and that oar Ulldezltandlq
1112

9/7/2014

"Dark Matter Might Not Exisf' (Weekend Feature)

of gravity is fundamentally wrong. Remarkably, this would neatly explain the observed structure of the two galaxies and
their satellites.
In 2009, Zhao led An international team of astronomers that found an unexpected link between 'dark matter' and the
visible stars and gas in galaxies that could revolutionize our current understanding of gravity. Zhao suggested that an
unknown force is acting on dark matter.
The team believes that the interactions between dark and ordinary matter could be more important and more complex than
previously thought, and even speculate that dark matter might not exist and that the anomalous motions of stars in galaxies
are due to a modification of gravity on extragalactic scales.
"The dark matter seems to 'know' how the visible matter is distributed. They seem to conspire with each other such that the
gravity of the visible matter at the characteristic radius of the dark halo is always the same," said Dr. Benoit Famaey
(Universities of Bonn and Strasbourg). "This is extremely surprising since one would rather expect the balance between
visible and dark matter to strongly depend on the individual history of each galaxy.
"The pattern that the data reveal is extremely odd. It's like finding a zoo of animals of all ages and sizes miraculously having
identical, say, weight in their backbones or something. It is possible that a non-gravitational fifth force is ruling the dark
matter with an invisible hand, leaving the same fingerprints on all galaxies, irrespective of their ages, shapes and sizes."
Such a force might solve an even bigger mystery, known as 'dark energy', which is ruling the accelerated expansion of the
Universe. A more radical solution is a revision of the laws of gravity first developed by Isaac Newton in 1687 and refined by
Albert Einstein's theory of General Relativity in 1916. Einstein never fully decided whether his equation should add an
omnipresent constant source, now called dark energy. Astrophyisicts Neil Degrasse Tyson has stated that dark energy
soould in fact be renamed dark gravity.
In the image above above dark energy is represented by the purple grid above, and gravity by the green grid below. Gravity
emanates from all matter in the universe, but its effects are localized and drop off quickly over large distances.
Dr Famaey added, "If we account for our observations with a modified law of gravity, it makes perfect sense to replace the
effective action of hypothetical dark matter with a force closely related to the distribution of visible matter."
The implications of the new research could change some of the most widely held scientific theories about the history and
expansion of the universe.
Lead researcher Dr. Gianfranco Gentile at the University of Ghent concluded, "Understanding this puzzling conspiracy is
probably the key to uulock the formation of galaxies and their structures."
In January 2010, Erik Verlinde, professor ofl'heoretical Physics and world-renowoed string theorist, caused a worldwide
stir with the publication of On the Origin of Gravity and the Laws of Newton, in which he challenged commonly held
perceptions on gravity, going so far as to state 'for me gravity doesn't exist'. If he is proved correct, the consequences for our
understanding of the universe and its origins in a Big Bang will be far-reaching.
"Everyone who is working on theoretical physics is trying to improve on Einstein," says Robbert Dijkgraaf, UvA University
Professor and current director of the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton (where scientists including Turing,
Oppenheimer and Einstein have worked) In my opinion, Erik Verlinde has found an important key for the next step
forward."
Verlinde, who received the Spinoza prize (the Dutch Nobel Prize) from the Netherlands Organisation for Science, is famous
for developing this new theory, or idea, on gravity in which he says that gravity is an illusion. "Gravity is not an illusion in
the sense that we know that things fall," says Verline." Most people, certainly in physics, think we can describe gravity
perfectly adequately using Einstein's General Relativity. But it now seems that we can also start from a microscopic
formulation where there is no gravity to begin with, but you can derive it. This is called 'emergence'."
'We have other phenomena in Physics like this," Verlinde continued. "Take a concept like 'temperature', for instance. We
experience it every day. We can feel temperature. But, if you really think about the microscopic molecules, there's no notion
of temperature there. It's something that has to do with the property of all molecules together; it's like the average energy
per molecule."
To Verlinde, gravity is similar. It's something that only appears when you put many things together at a microscopic scale
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2014/02/dark.gravity-dark-matter-might-not-exist-todays-most-popular.htrnl

2/12

11117121114

IIIII then )'OU ,snddai!J see that ceftldD equatlou ulle. ".As llcleatiBII, he obia ,..., "we'lllllt'WIIlt to llDilenW1d.aatue 8Jid
our uniftrle.ln doing 10, ._have o'bserftd t1liDp that are cleeplypnszling, ll!lda u ~ relatrd to cluk matw. We
see tbil!p lutpplmiDg that WI! chm't UDdmBtand.. 'l'hmll111118t be mam malblrout1hentthat._ clall't-. 'l'hmll'll aim
IICIIDBihiDs cded 'clarlr. enfliJ.Y. ADd !hen d11na the whole puzzle of the beginning ol1he mi-. We now haft w!urt is
cded the 'Big Ban&' lheo!y.
Vedlna bel!.es hll ideM wiD shed. newlight on the eoncspt ol'dailtmatll!l:' lllll'darl:.~ IIIII wb,y they're Important in
rdatlon to gml!J.
"We1hlnk we 'llndersbmd g~alty in IIKIIt: 11Hnattona, he .says "but when we IDokat plm.. and, on mucllluger llcale~~, at
p!QydUJtezt, we tee tblDp llappeulqthat we cloD't 1llldemmd 1lllq ourfamDiar equatioDB,Ilh NewlVII'1 equat1oD af
B;J'IMlyorCMD Eill!tein'a pavib. So we~ to - e there'e thie iii)81etiooe fonn of matter, 'Which we call dark matter,
'Which we cannot eee. N- dirk ene"J.Vi.&- ~.in the eenee that- don't -lmowwbatit oonsists of. It's
IICIIDdUnswe an put in our equation&1D mab'lhinp work, bmthere' rally a his puzzlem be IIOhM in tl!!rmll of why it'a
1hent tmd w'hat it'a nwlB of. At ~t, WI! haft n.atreallyfamullhB ri&ht eqndicm to ch!lm"'be it. 11Kmia deulypn:tp1D be made in tmma offindinj a bel:till:lhiooi) oiB;J'IMty, 8Jid ~ what.'alutpplmiDg in cmr am-
For ewnple, the Big llaDg theory ia lhB idea that at a parliA:ular moment tblDp audtleD]y started aploding IDd growin&
IIIII that ourlllllYerse got~. 'Which Vtzllnde fiDda lllogk to ddDklt c:ame &om 'IIIIa one moment.

"lfa lllogkl to1hlnk the!e was II.OthiDg 8Jid8lm it aplocleil We D!I!!ICOneep!B Ubtlme 8Jid rpu.e." he adU, "but we chm\
really'lllldentmd. what thiiJ m - ~. ThatmJshlehuge. The Bls llaDg 'hall to do with our1111clerltancliDs of
'What time ahould be. udi'IbiDk we will~ a much better~ oftbiaill the fatale. IthiDk'IW will {isarewt
that what we tllousht wu the Big llaDg wu aetually a ditferelltllmd of eftllt. Or maybe that we tihou1d not'lbiDk that the
uni1ll!l'lll!! ft!8Jly 'bl!pn at 11. put:imlarmomst and that thm!'a JmOtlimo'Wilyto clmcribe that.
Vmlinde beli8Yt!8 that the infomudioD W8 haft today 8Jid theequdiou WBDIJWU. cmly ch!acn"'be a WJY.....U put of what
ia lll:tually pills on. "'fyou think that IIQIII4!Ihing; g,rowa. J.i.kB cmr unmne, than IIOIDBihins II!. mUBI: b-mn ....al!er, he
o'ba.wL"I think tlun'a IJIIlll8lhin&we haven'tflnmd ~ IIDil thia will help WI m-lhe ari&ina of cmr uniwne.Jn abort,
1he llllivenle orlgiDated from IOID8I:hiDg, n.atfrom notbhlg. There wu _..,hlngthtze 8Jid we haTe to ilDd the eqnatlan It
has sometbiDg to do with dark energy IIIII how that Is zdatrd to da1k mattu.lfwe undenland the equatlou for those
o lllplllenta at ou UDin:ne,l thiDk we'D IIIIo haft a better1111clemaDdlng ofhowthe 1W11aae begall.l thlDt It's an about
the lntaplay between tileee dlfltzwtfarma of aleliY and matter.
The Bls Bani thecnywoltal well iD the -thatit giYell 11111110me ur.deiaiJ.Miq of howpcticular deJDeDht in ourUDiYel8e

came about II.Dd thae are otb.er'lhinp that._ can observe, like the radiation that Cllllefrom the BiB Bans. But the whole
idea ofan upandiquniveraethatolblrtrd "With ahill!!lqllolioD will~ "You med to think about the eqoatiOilll in 11.
bigt!r lll!!ltinr. V.mnd!! ~>baeuu. "Yw llll!ed to ch!acn'be IIIOft! than jut the llllll:ll!rparticlm. Yan Dl!!l!!d to know IIIOft! about
'What apaCI!jtime ia.. All th... tbiDp haw to c:om11 tagelhBrin orderm be ilbiB to ap'lain the Bi& Bans.
Qaaatum mecb!!Jiice tooltapprnchn ...V" 26 ,_.a to dm!lop, Verlinde candada!. 'Wflve bad ~~:~'in& 1heoty fur 40 ~ IIDil
IIOihiDg~haa come out ofthat whieh can be diNcdy l8lllld with w-v&tllw oraperimezds. I thinkm, idea lw a
greater rbanc:e ofbelnctat.ed with obltzvatfans, wbich Is an adtiDg tbiDg. I thiDklt wiD~ 110 more than 10 or l5 years.
The wd.ftSIIlt be bel1vea

wm lead to a paradlpl shift inhow people thlDt thatthe111i1Yersewas C2ated.

Joumalltderellce: Glmfranco Gentile, .Balolt Pamaey, HoiJJSbml Zbao, Paolo Salw:cl.l1Dmnalityaf plctic 81IJface
denojtjea within one dirk halo ~len&th. Ndu!e, 2009; 461 (7264): 627 DOl: I0,1QS8/natuJd437

The .Dailyo.Juy'l'ia UnivtmrityofSt. Alidrewl, UnkisiL) of.Amlterdun aDd Erik Verlinde

Imap credit: NASA /.JPL.Oi.ltecb..

IWab!d lll1ic:lea

3112

9/7/2014

"Dark Matter Might Not Exist'' (Weekend Feature)

The Next
Einstein?-"Radical New
Theory Answers
Unsolved

"Gravity is an
illusion"
(Today's Most
Popular)

"Gravity Doesn't

Why Einstein

Exist" -Is this

Will Never Be

Fundamental
Phenomenon of
the Universe an

Wrong

"Gravity is an
illusion"

Posted at 11:33 AM I Pennalink

Like

~ 438 1 8+1

52

[.

Tweet ~

39

Comments
bingo!
Posted by: Randy from Cincy Obs I February o8. 2014 at 12:45 PM
Good stuff! I think we're getting closer! Of course it's all much deeper than we've yet to imagine... Light is the truest connection with
cosmic symmetry...
Posted by: common sense I February o8. 2014 at 02:26 PM
I can respond to most of the point in above topic
1. "This past 4th of July 2013, a European team of astronomers led by Hongsheng Zhao of the SUPA Centre of Gravity at the University of
St Andrews presented a radical new theory at the RAS National Astronomy Meeting in St Andrews.
my comment in http:/Jwww.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2013/07/is-an-unknown-force-of-the-universe-acting-on-dark-matter.html
2. "our understanding of gravity is fundamentally wrong"
3. "It is possible that a non-gravitational fifth force is ruling the dark matter with an invisible hand"
4. "Such a force might solve an even bigger mystery, known as 'dark energy', which is ruling the accelerated expansion of the Universe. A
more radical solution is a revision of the laws of gravity first developed by Isaac Newton in 1687 and refined by Albert Einstein's theory of
General Relativity in 1916. Einstein never fully decided whether his equation should add an omnipresent constant source, now called dark
energy. Astrophyisicts Neil Degrasse Tyson has stated that dark energy soould in fact be renamed dark gravity."
5. ''Verline belives his ideas will shed new light on the concept of 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' and why they're important in relation to
gravity."
my comment in
http:/jswarajgroups.blogspot.in/2013/10/gravity-pushing-force-arising-due-to.html
http:/jswarajgroups.blogspot.in/2013/06/out-of-box-thinking-is-essential-in.html
6. "The team believes that the interactions between dark and ordinary matter could be more important and more complex than
previously thought"
my comment in
http:/jwww.quantumdiaries.orgj2013/ 07jot/getting-our-hands-on-dark-matterJ#comment-168173
http:/Jwww.pbs.orgfwgbh/novajblogs/physics/2014/01/joumey-into-the-dark-realm/
http://swarajgroups.blogspot.in/2014/02/new-space-telescope-to-map-dark-matter.html
7. '"'We've had string theory for 40 years and nothing yet has come out of that which can be directly tested with observations or
experiments. I think my idea has a greater chance of being tested with observations, which is an exciting thing. I think it will take no more
than 10 or 15 years."
My work is important because I am thinking out of box, I am looking the Universe from another window (of Dark Matter & Dark Energy)
while our scientific window is different but on many topic we are drawing the same picture of universe.
swarajgroups.blogspot.in
Posted by: SHREEKANT I February o8. 2014 at 02:33 PM
You are so rigbt...how can mankind remotely understand things when we have not the faintest clue as to what is space, time, gravity and
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2014/02/dar1<-gravity-<lar1<-matter-might-not-exist-todays-most-popular.html

4/12

9/7/2014

"Dark Matter Might Not Exisf' (Weekend Feature)

electrical charge? Think about it...we can measure these four things alright and experiment with them and document them just fine but
we haven't the slightest idea of really WHAT they are. Period.
An interesting observance... matter seems to be approaching the speed of light itself at the horizon of the universe ..it is expanding at an
ever increasing rate at that. This high speed matter at the horizon of the universe... does it keep going faster and breaks the speed limit as
it does at the event horizon of a black hole ..then turns into pure energy at the horizon (of the universe)just as it does in a black hole's
horizon? I can't disagree with this hypothesis. So the universe's matter eventually will ALL speed up since space/time is expanding with
the expansion of the universe's horizon and cross over to energyville. If you think about it, it's true. So on the "other side" of the universe's
event horizon is like the horizon in reverse of a black hole. Are we then existing in a massive black hole outside the universe and we are a
bubble of matter inside it? Seems so. If this is the case, you betcha, we've got to rethink everything.
That leads me to say that the universe could have been created by this huge energy well which is now outside the universe's horizon.
Something perturbed it and energy was converted into the building blocks of matter JUST AS current theory suggests a short time after
the so called Big Bang. When the bang occurred there was only space/time and energy. As things expanded, the energy formed packages
which formed what we can call "pre matter" then the building blocks themselves (quarks etc) then sub atomic particles then atoms. As to
how this formation of the universe from energy happened or how this horizon we now call our universe came to be, I don't know. But I
have a strong feeling this form of thought leads us to some clues. Imagine, we live I a tiny itsey bitsey bubble of matter called a universe,
which is inside an immenser pure energy mega environment.
Posted by: Charley I Februarv o8. 2014 at 05:52 PM
To clarify (and not to spam the board here) imagine a bubble of matter inside an event horizon, the reverse of a black hole. The universe
is that bubble. The matter in the outside shell is going at almost velocity C from the center. Then it increases to C and is converted to pure
energy... at this point I the "horizon of the universe" ... reverse of a black hole where matter turns into energy and you have a singularity
point.
Then are black holes punch throughs? Punched through to the outside of the universe's horizon itself or are they pockets of horizon inside
our universe? I also think out of the box, always have...but with reason and logic de jour.
We see the universe, as Einstein said, as a giant illusion and this illusion is created inside our objects mentality...we see things as images
instead of what they really are.
And let's clarify dark matter for those who are lost here. Dark matter is matter we can't detect (yet). This includes sub atomic particles
floating around galactic and intergalactic space, atoms/ions/plasma, molecules and any and all forms of non reflective non photon
emitting matter of all sorts. I read once that black holes were considered dark matter and I disagree, we can see/perceive where they are
(we can't see a black hole, just where it's many effects start being detectable).
Posted by: Charley I February o8. 2014 at o6:o8PM
I'm looking forward to a better explanation of how the universe came into being. I find it hard to see how a point of nothing can explode
into a bunch of Gas and radiation. The part about how matter came about is easy to understand.
Posted by: John I February 08. 2014 at 11:30 PM
This theory seem to be very "down to earth". That's why I like it. No 11th dimensions or matter that appears out of nothing.
All things are really simple in the universe, when their properties are boiled down to the essentials. I think that gravity, the beginning of
our universe, dark matter etc. will prove to be very obvious once their true nature is discovered.
String and quantum theories are nice tries, but they seem too complex and foll of uncertainty, chaos and randomness. Structure and
hierarchy is something that prevails from the very smallest particles to the grandest scales of galactic clusters. I think following that same
path will lead to new answers. "All stuff is made of something."
Posted by: Thomas I February 09. 2014 at 01:13AM
This thread hits an interesting point. If we go back to the "Big Bang," then what caused that?
We could go on ad-infinitum this way, or get around the problem by assuming that The Universe has always been here ..... , Infinite!
I don't think this is simplistic because Occam's Razor states ''When all else fails, the simple solution is usually the best!
Posted by: Allan W Janssen I February 09. 2014 at 02:22AM
Very interesting!
Dark matter shonld also be renamed "imaginary matter"!
Posted by: PP I February 02. 2014 at os:47 AM
i don't believe that changing the name of Black Hole to "gravity abnormality" solves anything .Can anyone explain what's with all those
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2014/02/dark.gravity-dark-matter-might-not-exist-todays-most-popular.html

5/12

9/7/2014

"Dark Matter Might Not Exisf' (Weekend Feature)

photos of lensing effect of very far galaxies ? Could they be castaway black holes (from ex-twin blackhole systems) that just bend the light
(acting like lenses) and have nothing left around them to be "seen" ?
Posted by: Gaugain I February 09, 2014 at os:s2 AM
Dumb question - or two;
Why does the universe appear to be the same 13.5 billion years old in any direction we look? Is the universe anthropogenic?
If an object emitted light 13.5 billion years ago and we're just now seeing it, then that object was 135 billion light years away at the time
the light was emitted?
Posted by: Epat I February 09. 2014 at oz:sS AM
The theory of the origins of (this)universe starts with the "Big Baug"; since we can see the residue of the explosion that occurred at its
birth. The theory of the Big Bang comes in conflict with what exactly made the explosion, and what was life prior to the birth of this
universe. If there was a Big Bang what was it that created the Big Bang and how long did it exist? If we went back in time some 200
trillion years what would we see? The common notion of time is that time was "created" at the time of the Big Bang. What if time has no
beginning and has no end? Amen(Amen Ra). How does gravity respond on the scale of universes? I am not talking about multi-verses,
but the concept of universe both large, small and dwarf that are clustered and rogue in the infinite expanse of space and time; say for
example of a small quadrant of space of one hundred quintrillion light years.
Posted by: kristi276 I February 09. 2014 at o8:og AM
An article full of "darkness", dark assumptions, dark conclusions and nothing clearly told about what correlations the authors have
actually found in their study whicil I believe is really interesting.
Posted by: Avetik Grigoryan I February 09. 2014 at 10:30 AM
Time in absolute sense is non-existent. It is just an experiential reality that is assumed by an experiencer. If there is no experiencer, there
is nothing like time. The brain tends to link up two points of actions (motions or processes) with its memory function. This associative
memory experience is called time. The universe is perpetuity of motions or processes, cilemical or otherwise.
Or else: imagine the begiuning or end of so-called time billions and trillions of years before or after, but still the question remains: what
was before or will be after that?
Saying that time started with big bang and ends with the end of the universe, is partial explanation. Big baug was rather a beginning of a
series of processes/motions that would stop one day.
Time is an illusion, but a persistent one for any life form as sucil haviug conscious memory.
RajnishRoy
http:/frewiringthebrain.net/
Posted by: Rajnish Roy I February 10, 2014 at 04:16AM

''Time is an illusion... " Opinion only.

Posted by: Oligonicella 1 February 10. 2014 at o6:g6 AM
My favourite prediction is that the Higgs is a composite boson, with the two spin 1 parts cancelling to spin o, and with a little energy
difference combining in a different energy state to a spin 2 graviton. The LHC may eventually show this as two close peaks where the
Higgs has been "found". using Boltzmann energy level occupation (black body statistics), the actual energy density would control the
relative Higgs to graviton ratio, and "modulate" the relative inertial to gravitational mass. Therefore G is not constant. As said I predict
this, and submit it to LHC while awaiting them producing more results of significance as more Higgs mass level events are proouced.
Does higher than expected photon coupling sound familiar?
Posted by: Simon Jackson I Februarv 10. 2014 at o8:19AM
-The dark
substance.
-In the world of
the dark

substance,
-from there
looked at our
world's clear
substance
the dark
substance.
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2014/02/dark.gravity-dark-matter-might-not-exist-todays-most-popular.html

6/12

9/7/2014

"Dark Matter Might Not Exisf' (Weekend Feature)

-Let us return to

the
spacetime
physics.
-So not flat the
waving

of the space.
-This means that
the
space is different
between
his coordinates
timehijacking they
arise.
-So the real space
not
time
homogeneous.
-So the space of
our Earth
may not be time
simultaneously
homogeneous.
-What causes the
storms

ofthespace
waving?

-Because the
smaller
bigger space
storm may
break out in any
of the
dots of the space.
-The material
masses of
the worlds which
cannot
be seen can cause
the
largest storm ,

(the dark
substances).
-The space storm
the time
pressure,you are
gravitational
disturbance
with an other
word.
-This a meteorite
to an
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2014/02/dark-gravity-dark-matter-might-not-exist-todays-most-popular.html

7/12

9/7/2014

"Dark Matter Might Not Exisf' (Weekend Feature)

impact
measurable,but
some other way

to be
contemplated it
dared for
tbis passage his
result no
collision,

buttbisa
gravitation and
time distortion.
-According to the
space
time physics,
the unknown
worlds'
single part moves
in each
other.
-Because of that
because
the masses on the
identical
wavelength exist
only physically for
each
other.
-so his
passage
happening
on each other
does not
cause the
different
worlds' celestial
bodies a
problem in the
spacetime
physics.
-These substance
masses

may pass through

each
other in the space
time
physics.
-This dark
substance.
-The dark
substance.
-This the
substances of
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2014/02/dark.gravity-dark-matter-might-not-exist-todays-most-popular.html

8/12

9/7/2014

"Dark Matter Might Not Exisf' (Weekend Feature)

the real substance

masses
in the dark
worlds.
Posted by: Karika Imre /Hungary/ I February 10. 2014 at 11:02 AM
My theory of stuff, still working on, , ,

If it was found by normal thinking it would be found easy. The graod unification theory would (should) explain everything. Where would
the energy of the beginning of our universe come from? Energy from aoytbing in our universe could not supply large enough energy to
start our universe. So, the energy must have come from someplace other then in our universe. I think from outside of our 3d space & 1d
time (3D), urn, ok, I got it. 4D (4d space & 1d time). Ok tske a small piece of 4D matter changed to a large amount of 3D matter (or 4D
energy to 3D energy).
How could 4d chaoge to 3d? What in our universe change dimension(s), urn, oh, yeah, what about very large star going to a black hole?
3d to o dimension (singularity), cao the black hole tske 1d reduction at a time? What I believe is the event horizon becomes a new
universe that is (in our universe) reduced one dimension to a true 2d universe. So we cao imagine one added dimension at our beginning
(some call it big baog).
Now I have enough energy for a very large big bang. Let us take a megaton nuclear explosion with a camera recording the event, but
forgot to start the recorder. The nuclear explosion happens up high in the sky, and we tum on the recorder late aod get the nuclear
explosion large in the sky. What we see is a sphere growing at a very large rate.

If we look at the recording aod run it backwards, we see the explosion get amaller aod amaller. We might assume it would continue to aod
make or come from a single point. Some believe this is how our universe begao. Why, because when looking back to the far past this
universe continues to get smaller farther in the past. What we see where we cao no longer look aoy farther back is the 4D mass changed to
4D energy, then the 4D energy chaoged to 3D energy (light), then the 3D energy (this is where we start to see clear space) chaoged to 3D
mass. The 3D energy is expanding into the 3D space aod drags the fabric of this universe out at much higher speed then the speed of light.
When the 3D energy slows to our speed of light, 3D mass cao form, aod then must slow even more. The first matter that changes is the
very small particles. With particles moving so close to light speed we have no interaction to these particles to slow them down.
It looks to me the Image of the cosmic microwave background (echoes of the Big Baog) from NASA's WMAP satellite I see the star from
where we came from. It is only in our 3D universe from the 4D universe.

Mass (force of gravity) holds the 4th dimension (quaotum physics) from expaods into our 3D space. All the unstable particles found in
quaotum physics are mega stable in the foll4D universe. Out in deep space where no mass (not even aoy virtual particles).
Mass keeps the 4th dimension in the quaotum level. When there is no mass the 4th dimension expaods larger then quantum level. What
is thought of dark energy is a pocket of 4d larger then quaotum levels. The light in volume is traveling along a 3d route of a ripple in 4d
space. It seems to be expaoding in distance in the 3d route, because the 4th dimension is expaoding like ao increasing amplitude aod
shorter frequency sine wave into our 3rd dimension.
This is my thought of a unification theory. We need to understaod (what I think) black hole. It simply reduces dimensions. Takes 3d
space & 1d time matter into the surface of the event horizon. Matter becomes energy by E=mcA2. Then the energy cao overlap at the
event horizon, aod makes a 2d space & 1d time (surface of the event horizon). This would be a big bang for a new 2d universe.
Now, increase the star dimensions to 4d space & 1d time. When it goes supernova (change 4d space & 1d time to 3d space & 1d time) aod
reduce dimension at the event horizon is our universe. The energy needed for our big baog is the remnaots of a 4d star reduced to 3d. The
4th dimension thickness in our 3d universe must be reduced to quantum length or smaller. This is why gravitational force unit is not as
large as the other force units. Also explains what quaotum physics really is 4d space & 1d time. The size seems to be between 2 x radius of
an election (size a) aod 2 x radius of a proton (size b). The electron jumps easily from one energy state to aootber though the 4th
dimension. This jumping (I think of a worm hole) does not take much energy for such a small object and short 3d distances.
It is the pull of every piece of matter has on every piece of matter. In deep space where there is no matter within a sphere with a very large
radius (many light years), is a place that does the reverse of stated above. It is the push not pull of every piece of matter has on every piece

of matter.
****The galaxy, NGC 1277, formed all its stars in a quick burst roughly 10 billion years ago - less thao 4 billion years after the Big Baog.
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2014/02/dark-gravity-dark-matter-might-not-exist-todays-most-popular.html

9/12

9/7/2014

"Dark Matter Might Not Exisf' (Weekend Feature)

Then it appears to have abruptly switched off.

Yes, the object that fell into the hyper-black hole (4 space 1 way time dimension 4d matter") from the 4th dimension (5th including time)
into our 3d universe (the 4d hyper-black hole has a 3d hyper-event horizon that is our 3d universe). When a 4d object enters the spinning
hyper-black hole it is converted into 3d objects with the 4th dimension thickness reduced to quantum dimensions as the hyper-black hole
spins. As a meat slicer cuts slices off meat, this 4d object gets sliced into 3d and takes time. In such high gravitational field time is
different.
The time it has taken for the object to fall into our 3d universe must have been 4 billion years after the Big Bang, but in the 4th
dimensional universe it was a flash of time.
Yeah, seems to be different 4th dimensional layers of our universe at different time dimensional locations. Each layer is another rotation
around on the 4d event horizon of the 4d black hole. This universe is stretching like a role of bathroom tissue paper. Each next layer
speeds up from the layer before it. This could be why this 3d universe is accelerating apart. The thickness of the 4th dimension is too
small to detect, smaller than the plank's length constant.
Space, time, mass, energy = speed oflight
LET ME TAKE YOU ON A STRANGE JOURNEY (The Rocky, , , Show)
As it takes space, time, mass, and energy to leave earth at a speed called "exit velocity", so to there is a speed to leave the 3rd dimension

and enter the 4th. As mass moves into the 4th dimension it increases in size Oarger value). To move into the 4th (4length 1 time)
dimension mass moves closer to speed of light. As the speed increases so does the 3d mass. When the 3d mass is doubled the mass has
moved into 4th dimension (if ouly a small amount). As a 2d a square moves into 3d as a cube, so does 3d a cube into 4th as a hypercube.
OK, GOOD, HOW DO I DO THAT? What equations do I use?
E = mCA2 from 4length and one time dimensions to 3length and one time dimensions gives a very large amount of energy for a, "Big
Bang theory" to start. The energy density must be maximum for a 4th dimensional black hole. Problem is what are the fundamental
forces in the 4d universe and the 4d universe fundamental particles?
Somehow space, time, mass, energy is formed into speed of light limit.
LET ME TAKE YOU ON A STRANGE JOURNEY (The Rocky, horror, picture, Show)
As it takes space, time, mass, and energy to leave earth at a speed called "exit velocity", so to there is a speed to leave the 3rd dimension

and enter the 4th. As mass moves into the 4th dimension it increases in size Oarger value). To move into the 4th (4length 1 time)
dimension mass moves closer to speed of light. As the speed increases so does the 3d mass. When the 3d mass is doubled the mass has
moved into 4th dimension (if ouly a small amount). As a 2d a square moves into 3d as a cube, so does 3d a cube into 4th as a hypercube.
OK. 4d (space or length dimension) no time dimension. By what and the way you use 4d it would be sd space time. In our universe we
have black holes (3 dimensions of space and one way in time.) with the event horizon where the speed of light and the pull of gravity
balance. What is the thickness of this event horizon? How large is the light travelling in the 2d space one way time event horizon (or 2d
surface of the event horizon)? NOW let us think of the two dimensional universe of the black hole event horizon. How thick is this
universe in the third dimension? I would think it would be within quantum distances. Any thicker would cause the light particle to fall
into or exit into the third dimension away from the black hole. So if the thickness (or the third component) of the event horizon is in the
range of quantum distance, then it seems to be as true a 2d universe as I can think of being. So, this is increased by one space dimension.
In this 4d space (1d in time) universe there was a 4d star Olyper-star). This star is so large; it goes to a 4d black hole with our 3d universe
as the 4d event horizon.
Now so as we continue, we look at what we can see at the event horizon. Light can not travel perpetual to the event. Light travels in 2
dimensions on or in the event horizon. If the light has higher speed it leaves the event horizon out into our 3d universe (exit velocity). In
other words, travel faster than light is leaving 2d into 3d. Add one space dimension and we have our 3d universe on the hyper-surface of
the event horizon of the 4d black hole.
This is why the force magnitode of gravity is so very small compared to the other force. Mass warps and compresses the 4th dinlension to
quantum distances where mass particles exist and when no mass is around (in deep spaces between the galleries).
Oh, this could be why the galleries are moving apart. The lack of mass in deep spaces between the galleries, allows the 4th dimension to
expand Oike a growing amplitude and smaller frequency sine wave in the middle). Then at some point in the past the expansion was
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2014/02/dark-gravity-dark-matter-might-not-exist-todays-most-popular.html

10/12

9/7/2014

"Dark Matter Might Not Exisf' (Weekend Feature)

slower (4d sine wave was small amplitude and very long 'almost flat' frequency). The expansion had to have a point where it was a linear
expansion and change to an acceleration of the expansion. In the midpoint between the galleries where the lowest amount of mass began
the smallest point of ripples where the 4th dimension was able to push the 3d space into rolling up (or folding up) like a sine wave that is
higher in the middle and the peeks are closer together. As we approaching any mass from the center this sine wave (ripple in the 4th
dimension) flattens closer we get to mass. Just like a sine wave following a bell curve, the mid section is the highest point and levels off at
the edges, so does the ripples in the 4th dimension. Another example we take a road that is 2 dimensions with many hills in the 3rd
dimension. If we also take another road right next to the first without any hills and set up a start line and set the finish line, the road with
the ripples in the 3rd dimension will travel farther and faster to keep up with someone on the shorter road.
This could be true because the expansion is where the lack of the gravitational pull is not able to keep the 4th dimension to quantum
distances. As the galleries (source of mass or gravitational force) increase in distances between them the larger the 4th dimension
expands into our universe.
Yes but how does the, "spooky action at a distance" work or happens? The way I see it, it is a quantum element that involves the 4th
dimension. The quantum event happens when we entangle the players in this dance. The dancers share quantum attributes. When these
players are moved a distance (great distances sometimes) in 3 dimension, but they stay connected in the 4th dimension. And this is how
the electron moves from one energy level(s) to others.
There is 4th dimension at quantum levels. Let us think about a long hallway ten feet high and five feet wide, and we move a pole of 12 feet
long and can ouly orientate the length in one of the x, y, or z coordinates. X is aligned to the length of the hall. Y is height, and Z is width.
We move the pole down the hall orientated to the X coordinate. If we cut the pole in half to 6 feet we have one more degree of freedom
that is we move the 6 foot pole down hall in X or Y coordinates and another cut in half to 3 feet we move the pole in X, Y, and Z
coordinstes. We see that moving to small size can increase the number of degrees of freedom. So when we get to quantum levels we have
the 4th dimension as another degree of freedom.
I can go on to see every aspect or mystery in science be explained. This is still a work in progress, so far I am still missing adequate words
to fully explain in detail the way I see the (gig saw puzzle) pieces fall together. It seems to show a different way of thinking than I have
ever seen or listen to in the past.
I have been tinkering with this idea all together for almost 20 years. If anyone can help, and see places that are unclear, and can please
point them out. Last date updated is 7 Feb. 2014.
Posted by: Robert Allen Scheff Jr I February 10, 2014 at 12:13 PM

''how the universe was created"?

Surely you do not believe that someone "created" this?
Posted by: qed I February 10. 2014 at 01:11PM
John Moffat has advocated MOG for years.
Posted by: sas I February 13, 2014 at 01:21 PM
Quite natural questions Gaugain. As well as the 'edge' of space appearing equidistant in every direction from us, the tiniest things we
perceive are the same level of magnitude from us as the largest things we perceive. How can this be? We are magically in the middle of
everything. So it is in a dream: you are always in the middle of your dream. 'We' are in the middle, because 'we' are looking, and the
universe is apparitional, as John Dobson was saying decades ago, and hard scientists have been troubled that they cannot refute, but
quickly go back to their more familiar and comforting constructs. There have always been sages walking around, who have awakened
from identity with a separate observer, who tell us that in fact space/time is in us (a conceptual construct ouly), rather than the reverse.
The theoretical problems will continue as long as the false presumption of the primacy of the separate observer goes unexamined. 'Who is
that one now?', ask the sages, 'You presume to know, but you do not'. 'The entire universe is a tiny bubble in my hand', said one. Sages are
using their whole brains, while scientists have had a spasm of self-recoil into a fear-based adaption of identifying with self/world concepts
generated out left-brain maladaption and chosen to forget this 'fall' into space/time and must generate a conceptual world in order to
perpetually avoid that original fear they have vowed to never feel. The sages roll on the ground laughing at this dream-play, at least for
awhile.
Since the space appearance is expanding, the galaxy needn't have been 13.5light years away 13.5 billion years ago, as what is presently
taken to be the universe, did not exist then.
Posted by: Narada I March 22, 2014 at 02:33AM
Despite everything that has been or will be discovered, the ultimate question of "why is there something instead of nothing?" will still
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2014/02/dark.gravity-dark-matter-might-not-exist-todays-most-popular.html

11/12

"Dark Matter Might Not Exisf' (Weekend Feature)

9/7/2014

need to be asked and answered. Where did the forces governing the universe come from? Where did the Big Bang come from? Even if you
say particles appear and disappear at a quantum scale...why? Wby is particle-antipaticle creation a property of the universe? Where did
the space and time come from? Saying something was "always there" is like saying Thor causes lightning. It's not an answer. The most
likely state of the universe would be no universe at all. Where did the laws governing reality come from? Where did reality come from
itself?
Posted by: John "Ratty" Arbuckle I July 17. 2014 at 05:28AM

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

Postedby:

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:

Your comment has been posted. Post another comment
The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents
automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate .

Continue

..

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2014/02/dark-gravity-dark-matter-might-not-exist-todays-most-popular.html

12/12