Dark Energy Changing Into Dark Matter.

In summary: Nobody is disputing this asymmetry, although the details of how this arose are not known (i.e. processes like the one mentioned in your article are not sufficient to explain it). The fact is that charge conservation is a very sacred conservation law, and we have no reason to doubt...
  • #1
hankaaron
83
4
If our regular Energy can spontaneously turn into matter (for instance an electron and a positron pair OR, more rarely two electrons pair) why can't Dark Energy turn into Dark Matter particles?

If that's what actually happens then wouldn't the universe eventually decelerate expansion. Shouldn't it at least call into question the common consensus that the universe will expand into cold freeze?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #2
Aside from their names being similar, dark energy and dark matter are not related, as far as we know.
 
  • #3
hankaaron said:
OR, more rarely two electrons pair)
Not just rare, this is forbidden and does not happen a) within the standard model or any extensions I know of and b) in any experiment performed to date.

As matterwave says, DM and DE are quite distinct concepts apart from their names. A quick perusing of the wiki. articles of each should give you some more info to see how they are not (at least in any trivial way) related to one another.
 
  • #4
DM could easily have been termed 'Zwicky' matter and DE termed 'Einstein' energy. That would have averted many of the illusionary issues invoked by the more romantic prefix 'dark'. Fortunately, the term dark cosmic microwave background radiation never caught on.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
Chronos said:
Fortunately, the term dark cosmic microwave background radiation never caught on.

I'm sure it was just an oversite Chronos. I'll send in the paperwork to copyright "Dark CMBR" asap.
 
  • #6
Nabeshin said:
Not just rare, this is forbidden and does not happen a) within the standard model or any extensions I know of and b) in any experiment performed to date.

Electron pair, rather than, electron-positron pair is an acceptable hypothesis to explain why our universe is filled with matter instead of anti-matter.
 
  • #7
hankaaron said:
Electron pair, rather than, electron-positron pair is an acceptable hypothesis to explain why our universe is filled with matter instead of anti-matter.

You need to back this up with acceptable references.

Physics Forums rules, to which everyone agrees when they register,

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=414380,

in part, state
Overly Speculative Posts: One of the main goals of PF is to help students learn the current status of physics as practiced by the scientific community; accordingly, Physicsforums.com strives to maintain high standards of academic integrity. There are many open questions in physics, and we welcome discussion on those subjects provided the discussion remains intellectually sound. It is against our Posting Guidelines to discuss, in the PF forums or in blogs, new or non-mainstream theories or ideas that have not been published in professional peer-reviewed journals or are not part of current professional mainstream scientific discussion. Non-mainstream or personal theories will be deleted.
 
  • #8
hankaaron said:
Electron pair, rather than, electron-positron pair is an acceptable hypothesis
If all it says is that electron pairs and electron-positron pairs are produced it isn't really a hypothesis, it is more like a restriction on types of hypotheses you find plausible, i.e., it is an idea rather than a hypothesis (scientific hypotheses must provide quantitative predictions). The problem is, charge conservation is a well-tested idea that is mutually exclusive with yours. (Your idea implies non-conservation of charge because any process that starts with a certain amount of charge and can end with either an electron-electron pair or an electron-positron pair would end with a different amount of charge than it started with for one of the two results.)

Furthermore, the ratio of positive to negative charge in large objects is known indistinguishable from 1 (to extremely high precision). So, even if charge conservation were violated it could not explain the existence of the overwhelming majority of matter (note that dark matter and dark energy are known to effectively not have any charge associated with them since they have not been observed to interact with electric and magnetic fields in the form of light).
 
  • #10
hankaaron said:
Okay. http://www.space.com/8441-exist-matter-wins-battle-antimatter.html

I can find more, but I'm really surprised to get so much push-back on matter-antimatter symmetry violation.

It looks like you didn't even read the article you are citing. Quote:

Specifically, physicists discovered a 1 percent difference between pairs of muons and antimuons that arise from the decay of particles known as B mesons.

This does NOT imply charge conservation is broken, which you seem to suggest. In each given decay, charge is conserved. What is being discussed in the article, and in general, is that the two processes, the original X and the one containing antiparticles X' occur at slightly different rates, leading to an asymmetry in antimatter and matter.

Nobody is disputing this asymmetry, although the details of how this arose are not known (i.e. processes like the one mentioned in your article are not sufficient to explain it). The fact is that charge conservation is a very sacred conservation law, and we have no reason to doubt it.
 

Related to Dark Energy Changing Into Dark Matter.

1. What is dark energy and dark matter?

Dark energy and dark matter are two mysterious forms of energy and matter that make up the majority of the universe. Dark energy is thought to be responsible for the accelerating expansion of the universe, while dark matter is believed to be the source of the gravitational pull that keeps galaxies and clusters of galaxies together.

2. Can dark energy change into dark matter?

There is currently no evidence to suggest that dark energy can change into dark matter. In fact, dark energy and dark matter are thought to be two distinct and separate entities with different properties and behaviors.

3. How do scientists study dark energy and dark matter?

Scientists use a variety of techniques and technologies to study dark energy and dark matter, such as gravitational lensing, cosmic microwave background radiation, and observations of the large-scale structure of the universe. These methods help us understand the effects of dark energy and dark matter on the observable universe.

4. Is dark energy changing into dark matter a proven theory?

No, the idea of dark energy changing into dark matter is currently just a theoretical concept and has not been proven by scientific evidence. However, scientists continue to explore and study the properties of dark energy and dark matter to better understand their roles in the universe.

5. What implications would there be if dark energy did change into dark matter?

If dark energy were to change into dark matter, it would likely have significant implications for our understanding of the universe and its evolution. It could potentially change our understanding of the fundamental laws of physics and the future of the universe. However, more research and evidence is needed to support this idea.

Similar threads

  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
4
Views
252
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
3
Replies
82
Views
9K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Beyond the Standard Models
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
856
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
913
Back
Top