Science Forums

# Substitute to Dark Matter?

## Recommended Posts

Originally posted by: BlameTheEx

Freethinker.

We all know that asking you for proof is wasting our time.

Why not just admit it instead of attacking me when I try once more?

• Replies 88
• Created

#### Popular Days

Originally posted by: lindagarrette

FT, This is most confusing. I did not get the impression from Feynmann that time was a factor in conservation of energy.

I incorporated a couple of different sources into the one comment.

Feynmann shows that particles and anti-particles are the same based on which direction in time we are looking. That a particle going forward in time is the same as an anti-particle going backwards. and vice versa. Conservation of energy shows that we can not create nor destroy energy. GM shows that matter (particles) is energy. Finally QP Uncertainty allows "borrowing" energy across time as long as a zero balance is maintained overall.

Where did you get this equation? Could you explain more, or post references? I understand time is part of the e=mc**2 but only as it relates to the speed of light. Linda

I don't remember where I got the formula from specifically, I usually include that, but missed it this time sorry. But a Google of:

"uncertainty in energy times the uncertainty in time"

provides a variety of resources.

Is the law of conservation of energy violated for a short or long ...

http://www-highspin.phys.utk.edu/~bingham/protfig.html

A Unified Framework for Engineering Science: Principles and Sample ...

http://www.foundationcoalition.org/home/sophomore/SEC_conservation-acct1.html

Also, are you saying that mater (somthing) came form nothing? That would seem to be the reality, given all that's known so far.

If matter is energy (if GM is correct) and if the overall energy level of the universe is zero (with local fluctuations) then yes matter comes from nothing. But that is just a way of phrasing it. Just as we could say "therefore nothing exists".

A Universe from Nothing

http://www.astrosociety.org/pubs/mercury/31_02/nothing.html

##### Share on other sites

The Problem with Gravity: New Mission Would Probe Strange Puzzle

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/mystery_monday_041018.html

It's about a new mission which will seek to solve the conundrum the slowing-down of the Pioneer craft is creating.

##### Share on other sites

Tormod

Nice catch.

It would be fun to debate the design of the necessary experiment.

I would suggest that a large number of small objects are needed. They should be sent in a variety of directions and speeds, but all fast enough to go beyond the outer planets. After the cruise speed is finalised they should be unpowered except for aiming. A simple flat mirror, aimed at the earth would be ideal. Distance and Doppler shift could then be measured by earth or satellite based laser. There should be enough mass to minimise light sail and solar wind effects, but this must vary so that a formula for compensation can be worked out.

This is just the sort of project for testing new technology. Failure of a percentage of the missions would be non-critical, and the probes should be cheap. Nor do the probes have to be identical in design. Each can be a new experiment. What a wonderful way to test ion drives.

While I have suggested a flat mirror with active aiming, perhaps some sort of array of cat's eye devices is possible. That would make the probe entirely passive. Anybody know if such would be good enough?

Another thought:

How about using the proposed Jupiter Icy Moons Orbiter? Presumably it will arrive with some empty fuel tanks. If these were released at different times, and perhaps just given a little push, they would be slingshot in different directions and speeds by Jupiter's gravitational field. Cover them in cats eyes and your done.