# [ExI] Dark mass = FTL baryons?

John Clark johnkclark at gmail.com
Thu Aug 17 19:55:48 UTC 2017

```Stuart LaForge <avant at sollegro.com> wrote:

> > that's beauty of the method I used. By taking the ratio of the 4-D
> contents of the lightcone to the contents of the 4-D ball, the distances
> and times cancel out leaving a constant- no matter how big those distances
> and times get. Check the limit at infinity.

You can't go to infinity in all directions, the past is a specific finite
number, 13.8 billion years, the future is unknown and could well be
infinite but almost certainly  is not equal to the past, it is not 13.8
billion years.

If you include the entire "contents of the 4-D ball" you'd be including
events outside our past lightcone that can not influence any observation we
make, so that can't explain the observations we can make of Dark Matter or
Dark energy.

If your talking about 4-D Spacetime and not just 4-D space you've got to
use volume formulas appropriate for hyperbolic geometry not Euclidian
geometry.

> In a way, you can think of 1/(6*pi) as the *maximum* fraction
> of space-time that can be in your past when your lightcone catches up to
> the expansion of the universe.

The universe is not only expanding it's accelerating, so there are events
that can never influence your observations even if you wait an infinite
number of years.  In fact there is some very recent evidence that the
acceleration and may be accelerating and we're heading for the Big Rip in a
few trillion years where even atoms are torn apart, but that part needs
more observation before we can say for sure. But at the very least there is
no doubt the universe is accelerating.

> > You can never see it all, just a maximum of 5.30 percent of it.

About 30% of the universe consists of matter which tends to push things
together, the remaining 70% being Dark Energy which tends to push things
away. Of that 30% how does your idea differentiate between the 25% that is
composed of Dark Matter and the 5% that is regular matter?

> The spacetime interval is irrelevant to the calculation I made because
> we are dealing with the size of the lightcone.

A lightcone measures spacetime intervals, so I don't see how that can be
irrelevant.

>  I use Planck units. By setting c=1, it simplifies the math. I am certain
> that even if you leave c in the equation, it will cancel during the
> division of the lightcone by the hypersphere. Surely you have heard of the
> utility of natural units?

I have heard of Planck units, they are the smallest intervals in Spacetime
you can have before they become dominated by quantum effects, and if it's
in Spacetime you've got to use hyperbolic geometry not Euclidian geometry.

And don't call me Shirley.

John K Clark

>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20170817/92fa45bd/attachment.html>
```