[ExI] Dark mass = FTL baryons?
Stuart LaForge
avant at sollegro.com
Sun Aug 20 18:21:44 UTC 2017
John Clark wrote:
>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.
Well I would say at the scale of about 3 billion lightyears, structures
stop being apparent and the universe becomes of sufficiently homogenous
density for my calculation to be valid. So any radius of the 4-D ball
between 3 billion and 13.8 billion light years would suffice.
>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.
Blackhole singularities are outside our light cone as well, hidden behind
event horizons to protect causality, yet they nonetheless influence the
shape of space-time if not outright cause events to happen in their local
vicinity even if we can't see the singularity itself.
I claim the same privilege for superluminal space-noodles of dark matter.
They can gravitationally warp space-time and according to GR, that's just
geometry. To say gravity is subject to causality is like saying an
elephant's trunk causes its ass.
>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.
The *official* volume element for Minkwoski 4-D spacetime is
dV=c*(dt/gamma)*(gamma*dx)*dy*dz which notice the gammas cancel and you
are left with dV=c*dt*dx*dy*dz. That happens to be identical to the volume
element for Euclidean space if you substitute w=c*t into dV=dx*dy*dz*dw.
So this is an important thing to remember:
The radius is only an invariant in Euclidean space. The spacetime interval
or proper time/distance is an only invariant in Minkowski space-time. But
volume is simultaneously an invariant in both spaces. I used it to bridge
the gap. I stand by my math.
>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 dark matter is superluminal relative to our rest frame. The velocity
of normal matter is v < c. The velocity of dark matter is v > c. That is
the biggest difference. My prediction for normal matter content is
1/(6*pi) ~ .0531 , dark matter content is 5/(6*pi)~ .2652, and dark enery
content is 1-(1/pi)~ .6817
A better question would be why dark matter would take a 5:1 ratio with
normal matter. I have not really come up with a good model for why this
would be so but I am working on it.
At the moment, I can come up with no better explanation than that the
constant I derived by dividing the 4-volume of the past lightcone by the
4-volume of a circumscribed 4-d ball came out to 1/(6*pi) and there
happens to be a 6 in the denominator suggesting a total mass proportion of
both types of matter to be 1/pi or approximately .3183.
>A lightcone measures spacetime intervals, so I don't see how that can be
>irrelevant.
It is irrelevant because I am using the set of all events and not
intervals between individual events. As you mentioned, the hypotenuse of
Euclidean space and space-time interval of Minkowski space-time don't mix.
Fortunately, like I mentioned above, the 4-volume is also invariant and it
is invariant in both geometries.
Stuart LaForge
More information about the extropy-chat
mailing list