<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif">On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 12:00 AM, Stuart LaForge </span><span dir="ltr" style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"><<a href="mailto:avant@sollegro.com" target="_blank">avant@sollegro.com</a>></span><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif"> wrote:</span></div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="gmail-"><br></span></blockquote></div></div></blockquote><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">> </div>I too share this concern, which is why I take my calculations using the<br>
Botlzmann distribution with a grain of salt.</blockquote><div><br></div><div><font size="4">Boltzmann <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">is useless in finding the speed of particles in a gas in temperatures more than a hundred thousand degrees or so, you could go a bit higher if the particles are very heavy and a bit less if the particles are very light.</div></font></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"> <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">> </div>But that being said, we aretalking about conditions in the first microsecond of the big bang. I don't<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>think SR or GR is of much use here either. How can the speed of light in a<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>vacuum be meanigful if there is no vacuum yet, only a superheated<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>quark-gluon plasma that light cannot penetrate?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"></font><font size="4">Saying the speed of light is the fundamental speed limit in the universe is true but a bit misleading, it would be better to say that 186,000 miles a second is the fundamental speed of causation and light is just one of the things that reaches that limit. The effect gravity has is also limited by that speed so you could just as easily say light moves at the speed of gravity. The strong and weak nuclear forces are also limited by that same fundamental speed limit of causation.</font></div></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><br></div><font size="4">And there was plenty of light a <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">microsecond</div> after the Big Bang but you couldn't see anything except a super bright uniform glow because the photons kept being diffused so there was no way to form a<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">n</div> image.</font><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"></blockquote><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="gmail-">
</span><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">> </div>I don't use the term tachyon for precisely this reason. Space noodles are<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>different from<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>tachyons in a number of ways: They are protected from<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>interacting with observers by event horizons.</blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"><font size="4">If that's true then they can never effect any of our observations, but we observe that galaxies hold together even though there is not enough regular matter in them to produce the required amount of gravity to do so. </font></div><font size="4"> </font></div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">> </div>space-noodles would hardly seem to move at all<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>in the short time they manifest in our causal domain. You don't get much<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline"> </div>slower than standing still.</blockquote> <font size="4"><br><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">I don't understand, the title of this thread is "</div>Dark mass = FTL baryon<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">s"</div></font>?<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">".</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"></blockquote><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;display:inline">> </div>This is actually a pretty good explanation although I still don't see why<br>
matter without chemistry would form intersecting filaments instead of<br>
clouds. Why isn't dark matter spread uniformly throughout the universe in<br>
thermal equilibrium. Why is it clumping?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"></font><font size="4">There is no simple answer to that, you've got to do huge supercomputer simulations on what would happen if everything started out very hot and space was expanding and there was one type of matter that was effected by gravity and electromagnetism (regular matter) and another type of matter that was 6 times as plentiful that was just effected by gravity (Dark Matter) and see what happens. In the simulations if you make the Dark Matter particles very light then they're still moving pretty fast and they do indeed form a uniform cloud, and in that simulated universe galaxies never form which is obviously inconsistent with observation. </font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font size="4"><br></font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font size="4">However if you assume Dark Matter particles are very heavy, from a few hundred times the mass of the proton all the way up to the mass of a human cell, then they would form filaments and galaxies of regular matter would form in that simulated universe, and that is consistent with observation.</font> </div></div><div class="gmail_default"><br></div><div class="gmail_default"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><span style="font-size:12.8px">> Any particles that massive would have had to freeze out of the quark-gluon </span><span style="font-size:12.8px">plasma of the big bang fire ball *before* protons when the universe was </span><span style="font-size:12.8px">even younger and hotter.</span></blockquote><div><br></div><div><font size="4">Physicists have a pretty good understanding of the quark-gluon plasma era of the universe but they don't understand Dark Matter, so it must have come into existence well before that, and we know very little about that era. </font></div><div><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><span style="font-size:12.8px">> So where did all that thermal kinetic energy go? WIMPs don't interact with </span><span style="font-size:12.8px">light or matter except gravitationally, so it could not have radiated any </span><span style="font-size:12.8px">of the energy away.</span></blockquote><div><br></div><div><font size="4">Einstein said energy can be converted into matter, M = E/C^2.</font></div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><span style="font-size:12.8px">> The paper's figure of 54 meters per second doesn't even begin to make </span><span style="font-size:12.8px">sense. How are WIMPs able to stay in the galactic halo, where orbital </span><span style="font-size:12.8px">speeds are on the order of 150 km/s at such a puny speed? Any WIMPs moving </span><span style="font-size:12.8px">that slow should have been gobbled up by central black hole of any galaxy </span><span style="font-size:12.8px">long ago.</span></blockquote><div><br></div><font size="4">Dark Matter particles very rarely fall into the central black hole because they'd have to be heading directly toward it and all black holes are very small targets. For a particle of matter (dark or regular it makes no difference) in orbit around a black hole (and it will be in orbit unless it is heading directly toward it) to actually spiral into it the angular momentum of the particle must be reduced and by a lot because the Black Hole is so small. When any sort of matter, dark or regular, gets close to a black hole it is moving very fast, but to spiral in it's got to slow down and get rid of most of that angular momentum. Regular particles can do that by interacting with other particles, but Dark Matter particles can't so unless they're precisely aimed at it they never fall in.</font></div><div><font size="4"><br></font></div><div><font size="4"> John K Clark<br></font> <div> </div></div></div><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><br></blockquote></div></div></div>