1. Limited time only! Sign up for a free 30min personal tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Proof that there is no missing/dark matter

  1. Jul 4, 2004 #1
    The acceleration of matter outwards in the big bang is a force (Newton's 2nd law) requiring a reaction (Newton's 3rd law). The reaction is the inward directed force of gravity carried by the fabric of space.

    Proof of 1.7% accuracy without any missing mass: http://www.wbabin.net/physics/cook2.htm

    Background info: http://members.lycos.co.uk/nigelbryancook/


    ‘Electronic Universe’ article (Electronics World, Vol. 109, No. 1804) proves G = 3(H^2)/(4 pi ρ). [Ref: http://cdsweb.cern.ch/search.py?f=author&p=Cook,+N and http://www.wbabin.net/physics/cook1.htm.

    H is the Hubble constant and ρ is the density of universe responsible for causing gravity by reaction of Catt’s 377-ohm space to the big bang, while pi is the mathematical constant. Considering the density, it is highest at early times and thus density increases in the observable space-time trajectory, as we look further into the past with increasing distance.

    But the increasing spread of matter with increasing distance partly offsets this increase, as proven when we put the observed Hubble equation (v = Hr) into the mass continuity equation and solve it. For spherical symmetry, dx = dy = dz = dr. Hence: dρ/dt = -div.(ρv) = -div.(ρHr) = 3d(ρHr)/dr = -3ρH. Solving dρ/dt = -3ρH by rearranging, integrating, then using exponentials to get rid of the natural logarithms (resulting from the integration) gives the increased density to be ρe^(3Ht), where e is Euler’s constant (2.718 ...). In the absence of gravitational retardation (i.e. with the cause of gravity as inward reaction of space to the outward big bang), H = 1/t when H = v/r = c/(radius of universe) = 1/t, where t is the age of the universe, so e^(3Ht) = e^3 = 20.1 and observed G = 3(H^2)/[4pi(e^3)ρ].

    Nugent, Physical Review Letters (v75 p394), cites decay of nickel-63 from supernovae, obtaining H = 50 km/sec/Mps (where 1 Mps = 3.086x10^22 m). The density of visible matter at our local time has long been known to be 4x10^-28 kg/m3. However, White and Fabian in the March 1995 Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, using the Einstein Observatory satellite data, estimate that invisible gas increases this density by 15%.

    Using these data, G = 3(H^2)/[4pi(e^3)ρ] = 6.783x10^-11 Nm^2kg^-2, 1.65% higher than the physical measurement for G of 6.673x10^-11 Nm^2kg^-2. This factual proof gets rid of the ‘dark matter’ speculations of the graviton theorists, as well as explaining the cause of gravity and why the universe is not slowing down. (http://members.lycos.co.uk/nigelbryancook/)
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 4, 2004 #2
    The Big Bang theory as I know it which uses the "inflation model" of expansion does not have mass accelerating outward at any velocity. It is the space between the massive particles that is expanding. Observers at rest in the "crystal lattice" see all adjacent particles moving away at many orders of manitude greater than c. but no relativity violations here as it is the space expanding not the position of the particles.

    This is just what I read.
  4. Jul 4, 2004 #3

    The proof on the linked page is to a paper I put on the CERN document server titled "Solution to a problem with general relativity". There are several "issues" with the standard model which are solved by this model.

    If physical space were expanding, rather than geometric space (volume), its physical properties such as permittivity, permeability, characteristic impedance, and characteristic velocity (c) would change.

    You may have read a book or paper by someone confused by the difference between expanding geometric space (volume), and expanding fabric of space. I suggest Wilson's clear explanation of electromagnetic space:

    "It has been supposed that empty space has no physical properties but only geometrical properties. No such empty space without physical properties has ever been observed, and the assumption that it can exist is without justification. It is convenient to ignore the physical properties of space when discussing its geometrical properties, but this ought not to have resulted in the belief in the possibility of the existence of empty space having only geometrical properties... It has specific inductive capacity and magnetic permeability." - Professor H.A. Wilson, FRS, Modern Physics, Blackie & Son Ltd, London, 4th ed., 1959, p. 361.

    Basically, we don't need to get involved in ether particles speculation, we can use measured properties of the fabric of space which carry magnetic force we can feel between magnets to prove that measurable properties of a physical medium in the fabric of space, "empty space", exist. Measurable properties are scientific, so the fabric of space is a physical reality. Nobody has ever discovered a space in which the electromagnetic permittivity and permeability are zero, so an "empty space" is purely speculation. A vacuum conveys magnetic forces. We measure this as the permeability of a vacuum.
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Similar Discussions: Proof that there is no missing/dark matter
  1. Dark matter? (Replies: 18)

  2. Dark matter (Replies: 5)

  3. Dark matter black hole (Replies: 19)