• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Propagation

E = mc2

So I guess that gives a photon enough energy to wave, propagate and be a particle at the same instant.

And yet earth scientists still don't know how a particle can do those three things simultaneously.

Solution: space is composed of many different kinds of runes. One kind of rune are infinitely thin strings that link up with photons and allow them to wave, propagate and be a particle at the same time.

I think string theorists link these strings with multiple dimensions. They are wrong. There are only four dimensions but those four are composed of diverse runes which have not yet been discovered by scientists. This is because they are partying too much.

Dark Matter

There are some scientists who are actually working on a project, studying computer-generated photos of M87, at least I think that is what they are doing.

Anyway, it is my hope that they will discover something that may shed some light (get it) on where dark matter comes from.

It is my contention that when matter enters a black hole it is broken down into dark matter which then exits the black hole on the other side which is likely millions of light years away from where it entered the black hole.

Evidence of dark matter escaping M87 may be seen in the C-shaped jet of gas which escaped M87 long ago. Or perhaps the evidence will be seen in the other jet that is pointed toward us and appears to be flickering. Perhaps the flickering is a result of interaction between the jet and escaping dark matter.
 
Actually, that kind of is understood. Any number of physics-for-laymen books cover it. Try "Mass" by Jim Baggot, for one.
 
Mr Person said:
Actually, that kind of is understood. Any number of physics-for-laymen books cover it. Try "Mass" by Jim Baggot, for one.
Click to expand...

Physics has established that photons are waves and particles. How can they be both simultaneously? Baggott has an answer?
 
Last edited:
Mr Person said:
Actually, that kind of is understood. Any number of physics-for-laymen books cover it. Try "Mass" by Jim Baggot, for one.
Click to expand...

Physics has established that distantly separate particles can still seem connected. How are they still entangled? Baggott knows the answer?
 
:inandout:
 
Mr Person said:
Actually, that kind of is understood. Any number of physics-for-laymen books cover it. Try "Mass" by Jim Baggot, for one.
Click to expand...

Apparently large bodies of matter also have waves but those waves are very difficult to observe. Is that what gravity waves are?
 
Stuartbirdman said:
Dark matter appears to generate mass, but no particle discovered yet.
Click to expand...

1. True. But it is predicted by theories that otherwise hold up, so it is the working truth until something else is discovered. Particle collider(s) with increasing energy(ies) are part of the effort. Further more detailed universal surveys/analyses are part of it. Theoretical physics is part of it.

2. The lack of evidence to say a thing is not reason to suggest some other thing might be true, not beyond the barest sense of the terms.



Meaning: there is a thing. We call it "dark matter". The term is 100% irrelevant. This "dark matter", whatever it actually is (possibly not matter, you understand, especially given that mass/matter is a measure of the energy content of a thingy, might be anything. All we know is how it behaves. How it must behave, unless everything we know is more horribly wrong than we suspect. And it would be wonderful if that last thing proved true. We'd know more. But it's no basis for speculation. Let them poke and prod. Or, join the field.
 
Mr Person said:
1. True. But it is predicted by theories that otherwise hold up, so it is the working truth until something else is discovered. Particle collider(s) with increasing energy(ies) are part of the effort. Further more detailed universal surveys/analyses are part of it. Theoretical physics is part of it.

2. The lack of evidence to say a thing is not reason to suggest some other thing might be true, not beyond the barest sense of the terms.



Meaning: there is a thing. We call it "dark matter". The term is 100% irrelevant. This "dark matter", whatever it actually is (possibly not matter, you understand, especially given that mass/matter is a measure of the energy content of a thingy, might be anything. All we know is how it behaves. How it must behave, unless everything we know is more horribly wrong than we suspect. And it would be wonderful if that last thing proved true. We'd know more. But it's no basis for speculation. Let them poke and prod. Or, join the field.
Click to expand...

Dark matter is predicted by theories? Link?
 
Mr Person said:
1. True. But it is predicted by theories that otherwise hold up, so it is the working truth until something else is discovered. Particle collider(s) with increasing energy(ies) are part of the effort. Further more detailed universal surveys/analyses are part of it. Theoretical physics is part of it.

2. The lack of evidence to say a thing is not reason to suggest some other thing might be true, not beyond the barest sense of the terms.



Meaning: there is a thing. We call it "dark matter". The term is 100% irrelevant. This "dark matter", whatever it actually is (possibly not matter, you understand, especially given that mass/matter is a measure of the energy content of a thingy, might be anything. All we know is how it behaves. How it must behave, unless everything we know is more horribly wrong than we suspect. And it would be wonderful if that last thing proved true. We'd know more. But it's no basis for speculation. Let them poke and prod. Or, join the field.
Click to expand...

Meaning: there is a thing. We call it "dark matter". The term is 100% irrelevant. This "dark matter", whatever it actually is (possibly not matter,
 
Mr Person said:
1. True. But it is predicted by theories that otherwise hold up, so it is the working truth until something else is discovered. Particle collider(s) with increasing energy(ies) are part of the effort. Further more detailed universal surveys/analyses are part of it. Theoretical physics is part of it.

2. The lack of evidence to say a thing is not reason to suggest some other thing might be true, not beyond the barest sense of the terms.



Meaning: there is a thing. We call it "dark matter". The term is 100% irrelevant. This "dark matter", whatever it actually is (possibly not matter, you understand, especially given that mass/matter is a measure of the energy content of a thingy, might be anything. All we know is how it behaves. How it must behave, unless everything we know is more horribly wrong than we suspect. And it would be wonderful if that last thing proved true. We'd know more. But it's no basis for speculation. Let them poke and prod. Or, join the field.
Click to expand...

Some theories predict dark matter but you don't know what it is?
 
Stuartbirdman said:
Some theories predict dark matter but you don't know what it is?
Click to expand...

Theories predict? No, the relative speeds at which spiral galaxies and others spin is inexplicable without something that has a mass-like behavior. But we cannot detect nearly enough of whatever it is with mass-like behavior with the means we employ. They called it "Dark Matter" because whatever it is that has this effect, it behaves the way we would expect things with mass to. The trouble is we can't measure it. My point was that we don't actually *know* that it is in fact some kind of matter we cannot detect. We just know that whatever the "it" is, it is something that has the same effect that a whole bunch of invisible mass would have.

Without that effect, galaxies would not behave the way they do and the universe would not behave the way it does. It could be some form of mass-having matter we cannot detect, or it could be something that creates the same effect that X amount of mass-having matter would have. The term is irrelevant. All that matters is the equations.




Three books to read if you actually want answers:

"Mass: the quest to understand matter from Greek atoms to quantum fields" Jim Baggott

"The order of time" Carlo Rovelli

"Reality is not what it seems: the journey to quantum gravity" Carlo Rovelli
(Rovelli is one of the leading theoretical physicists exploring a theory, "quantum loop gravity").


I'm not a physicist and your questions are......not quite right. Just read those books and you should have the majority of answers you seek. And if you do read them, remember: these are only approximations of what the math says. Math is the only true language. You'd have to spend decades training in order to understand the full import of the equations. And even the theoretical physicists rarely know how to think about the equations in human languages.

I'm too lazy for decades of training, so I'll take the approximation, even if I don't fully understand it. I like to make my mind spin.
 
Last edited:
I’ve always wanted to see someone talk to themselves and have a full blown conversation in text, I’ve only read about this in Psy books...that’s awesome, thanks.
 
Thingfish said:
I’ve always wanted to see someone talk to themselves and have a full blown conversation in text, I’ve only read about this in Psy books...that’s awesome, thanks.
Click to expand...

Who you talking to here?

Sorry, don't want to interrupt...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom