Here is some weird idea: Dark matter/energy explained by negative mass matter

AI Thread Summary
The discussion explores the theoretical concept of negative mass matter and its potential implications for understanding dark matter and dark energy. Two models are proposed: an anti-symmetric model where negative mass has opposite gravitational and inertial properties to positive mass, and a symmetric model where both properties are negative. A paper by physicist Hyoyoung Choi suggests that negative mass could explain dark matter and dark energy, positing that negative mass would repel positive mass and cluster around galaxies, influencing cosmic structure formation. The hypothesis remains speculative but is not ruled out by General Relativity, prompting interest in its possible significance for modern cosmology. The conversation invites further examination of these ideas within the context of peer-reviewed research.
heusdens
Messages
1,736
Reaction score
0
I have before theoretized about the idea if matter with a negative mass could theoretically exist, and what it's properties would be, acc. to the standard theories (GR).
In fact you could argue for two kinds of models for this hypothetical negative mass matter, namely:

model-1: anti-symetric
gravitational mass of negative matter = negative gravitational mass of positive (normal) matter.
inertial mass of negative matter = intertial mass of positive (normal) matter.

model-2: symmetric
gravitational mass of negative matter = negative gravitational mass of positive (normal) matter.
inertial mass of negative matter = negative intertial mass of positive (normal) matter.

In a paper a Chinese physicus named Hyoyoung Choi discusses the possibility that such kind of negative mass matter could exist (based on the symmetric model-2), and he argues that it could explain the dark matter component in the universe and also be responsible for the dark energy component of the universe.

Just a weird idea that can be shown to be incorrect, or is he up to something imporant, and perhaps a major breaktrough in modern cosmology?

See his paper here:
Hypothesis of Dark Matter and Dark Energy with Negative Mass

A discussion (but his english is unfortunately very poor) can be found here:
Video of the motion of negative mass, dark matter, dark energy

Summary of the idea:
Negative mass matter, although a pure hypothetical proposition, is not a priori disallowed by the theory of General Relativity. If we use the symmetric model, in which the sign of the gravitational mass is equal to the sign of the inertial mass, we have the following properties of negative and positive masses:

1. Positive mass 1 and positive mass 2
Mutual attraction

2. Positive mass 1 and negative mass 2
Repulsion from mass 1 in the opposite direction of mass 2.
Attraction from mass 2 in the direction of mass 1.

3. Negative mass 1 and negative mass 2
Mutual repulsion

Examples:
- If you have a ping pong sized negative mass it will fall to the Earth just like a positive mass ping pong ball.
- If you have two masses with equal quantity but different sign, the negative mass 'chases' the positive mass, and both accelerate in the same direction (Wow! great stuff for building space-ships, they will accelerate indefinately without any propulsion!)
- if you have a large distribution of only negative mass matter, the stuff will mutually repell and become evenly distributed in space.

The hypothesis that this kind of 'dark matter' exists in the form of mass with a negative sign, and was formed (in equal amounts?) together with positive sign matter, would lead in our universe to:
a. Firstly, a uniform distribution of the negative mass matter in the universe
b. As positive matter clumps together (by both mutual attraction of the positive mass, and mutual repell on the negative mass - this would mean large structures could form earlier (?!)) the negative mass will cluster around galaxies, where it acts as the 'dark matter' component.
c. The repelling force of the negative mass matter is the source of 'dark energy', which can be show to have caused the expansion and it's later accelerated expansion of spacetime.
 
Last edited:
Space news on Phys.org
Anyone any comments on this?
 
Sorry, we only discuss published, peer-reviewed articles at PF.
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
The formal paper is here. The Rutgers University news has published a story about an image being closely examined at their New Brunswick campus. Here is an excerpt: Computer modeling of the gravitational lens by Keeton and Eid showed that the four visible foreground galaxies causing the gravitational bending couldn’t explain the details of the five-image pattern. Only with the addition of a large, invisible mass, in this case, a dark matter halo, could the model match the observations...
Hi, I’m pretty new to cosmology and I’m trying to get my head around the Big Bang and the potential infinite extent of the universe as a whole. There’s lots of misleading info out there but this forum and a few others have helped me and I just wanted to check I have the right idea. The Big Bang was the creation of space and time. At this instant t=0 space was infinite in size but the scale factor was zero. I’m picturing it (hopefully correctly) like an excel spreadsheet with infinite...
Back
Top