Can dark energy be explained by symmetrons?

Jan 28, 2013 by Lisa Zyga feature
Estimated constraints on symmetron dark energy, a new model in which fifth forces between massive objects play a role in accelerating the universe’s expansion. Credit: Upadhye. ©2012 American Physical Society

(Phys.org)—A field that permeates the universe and gives rise to a new force, or "fifth force," between massive objects may be a candidate for dark energy and an explanation for why the expansion of the universe is accelerating. This field, called the symmetron field, is so named because it has a symmetry in regions of high density, while in regions of low density, such as a vacuum, the symmetry is broken and the field mediates the new force.

Currently, the symmetron concept is purely theoretical. But in a new study, physicist Amol Upadhye at Argonne National Laboratory in Argonne, Illinois, has calculated that a previously unexplored symmetron regime near the scale will give rise to a fifth force at submillimeter distances. He proposes that short-range gravity experiments can search for the fifth force at these distances and possibly reveal if dark energy is in fact a symmetron field.

"Much of my work has focused on chameleon dark energy theories, and I really only started thinking about symmetrons last summer," Upadhye told Phys.org. "Modern experimental techniques and technologies have advanced enough to search for at distances of interest for dark energy theories."

As Upadhye explained, a symmetron field could fulfill the role of dark energy by acting as a negative pressure.

"Dark energy in general can be described by a constant (or slowly varying) density, such as that due to a field whose potential is minimized at a small, positive value," he said. "In the presence of such an energy density, Einstein's equation of (GR) predicts that the universe will expand at an accelerating rate. In GR, pressure gravitates; positive pressures contribute to the decelerating . Dark energy acts as a negative pressure which leads to an accelerating expansion.

"The simplest model of a dark energy is 's cosmological constant, a constant vacuum energy density which explains all available data. The big question in cosmology is whether or not the dark energy is just a cosmological constant. Alternative theories predict that the vacuum evolves with time, or that new ('fifth') forces exist between known particles.

"Since GR is very accurate in the laboratory and the solar system (regions in which the density is much higher than the cosmic mean), any fifth force must be 'screened' at high densities. The symmetron mechanism is one way to screen fifth forces."

In theory, a symmetron field will mediate a fifth force when its is broken, which requires a vacuum. In this broken-symmetry phase, the symmetron couples to matter with a certain matter coupling energy. Here, Upadhye investigated the scenario where the matter coupling energy is 1 TeV and the symmetron mass is 10-3 eV. Then he solved the symmetron equations of motion to estimate constraints on the symmetron.

The Eöt-Wash experiment may test for Upadhye’s predicted torque signal due to the symmetron field. A fifth force could be measured in the submillimeter distance between the two disks. (Left) An illustration of an older model and (right) a photo of a newer instrument. Credit: The Eöt-Wash Group at the University of Washington

This symmetron field regime, where the matter coupling energy is 1 TeV, is not only of interest due to its potential to be tested. This energy is also possibly associated with physics beyond the standard model. If this is true, experiments may reveal new effects that indicate new physics.

One such experiment is the Eöt-Wash torsion pendulum experiment being carried out by scientists at the University of Washington in Seattle. Upadhye's calculations allowed him to predict the torque signal that the symmetron would produce in an Eöt-Wash experiment.

"It turns out that Eöt-Wash just happens to probe an interesting range of parameters because they have targeted the experiment at the right range of distances," he said. "Fifth force screening mechanisms are not perfect, so there are residual fifth forces which can be detected by sufficiently sensitive experiments probing the right distances. My paper approximated these residual fifth forces and showed that Eöt-Wash excludes a substantial portion of them."

In this experiment, the presence of a fifth force would cause a metal disk to rotate in such a way as to align with a second metal disk.

"Eöt-Wash uses a pair of metal disks with the same pattern of holes in each one," Upadhye said. "The upper disk is suspended from a wire, allowing it to rotate freely, while the lower disk is rotated at a uniform rate. Fifth forces would cause the upper disk to rotate so as to align its pattern of holes with that on the lower disk. So, by looking for small torques on the upper disk leading to torsional oscillation, Eöt-Wash can search for fifth forces. The experiment can be repeated over a range of separations between upper and lower disks, allowing them to determine the rate at which fifth forces decrease with distance. Since this experiment has been designed to study distances as low as 50 microns, it is very useful for testing fifth forces due to dark energy."

Last December, Upadhye visited the Eöt-Wash group, and the researchers were very interested in testing new dark energy theories. Currently they are designing a new torsion pendulum experiment which should be substantially more sensitive to fifth forces. Upadhye plans to work further on his calculations to allow for more accurate testing.

"An approximate treatment such as that in my symmetrons paper is useful for forecasting constraints, but in order to analyze the real data from the upcoming Eöt-Wash experiment, I plan to do more accurate computations of these fifth forces," Upadhye said. "Several years ago I did such a computation for chameleon fifth forces. I plan to speed up that calculation as well as extend it to symmetron fifth forces. Using the extensive computational resources available here at Argonne, I will analyze Eöt-Wash data and test these dark energy theories."

Explore further: Nike krypton laser achieves spot in Guinness World Records

More information: Amol Upadhye. "Symmetron Dark Energy in Laboratory Experiments." PRL 110, 031301 (2013). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.031301

4 /5 (32 votes)

Related Stories

Recommended for you

New approach to form non-equilibrium structures

12 hours ago

Although most natural and synthetic processes prefer to settle into equilibrium—a state of unchanging balance without potential or energy—it is within the realm of non-equilibrium conditions where new possibilities lie. ...

Nike krypton laser achieves spot in Guinness World Records

13 hours ago

A set of experiments conducted on the Nike krypton fluoride (KrF) laser at the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) nearly five years ago has, at long last, earned the coveted Guinness World Records title for achieving "Highest ...

Chemist develops X-ray vision for quality assurance

18 hours ago

It is seldom sufficient to read the declaration of contents if you need to know precisely what substances a product contains. In fact, to do this you need to be a highly skilled chemist or to have genuine ...

The future of ultrashort laser pulses

18 hours ago

Rapid advances in techniques for the creation of ultra-short laser pulses promise to boost our knowledge of electron motions to an unprecedented level.

IHEP in China has ambitions for Higgs factory

Jul 23, 2014

Who will lay claim to having the world's largest particle smasher?. Could China become the collider capital of the world? Questions tease answers, following a news story in Nature on Tuesday. Proposals for ...

User comments : 60

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Maggnus
1.9 / 5 (9) Jan 28, 2013
The maths involved in this are staggeringly complex. There is a lot of room for people who are interested in finding new physics to get involved. Aether and vacuum proponants, are you up to the challenge?
rah
2.4 / 5 (28) Jan 28, 2013
Of course! A symmetron field! Why didn't I think of that? Under certain favorable conditions found around the SAA, the symmetron field can manifest a portal for the Symmetron Transformer which is even more powerful than Megatron! The maths are so elegant that it's hard to ignore.
gwrede
4 / 5 (20) Jan 28, 2013
Sorry, I gave a One to rah. With the crap in most of the posts here, it's really hard to tell when someone is not serious. -- Which only tells us how profoundly screwed up some of the kooks here are.
ValeriaT
1.3 / 5 (14) Jan 28, 2013
OK, another particle on the list...;-) During time the physicists proposed dozens of theoretical models, which could be ordered by the rest mass of particles involved into line: ...scalar field, quintessence, mirror matter, axions, dilatons, inflatons, heavy photons, fat strings, sterile neutrinos, chameleon particles, dark fluid and dark baryons, fotinos, gravitinos and WIMPs, SIMPs, MACHOs, RAMBOs, DAEMONs and micro-black holes... ..and I probably missed many others.

Whereas the existing observations indicate rather clearly, that the dark matter effect is composed of "cold", "warm" and "hot" dark matter components, which exhibit different properties. So we can say quite reliably, every theory, which considers the dark matter as a result of single particle is predestined to failure - no matter which particle it actually is.
Q-Star
4 / 5 (21) Jan 28, 2013
Whereas the existing observations indicate rather clearly, that the dark matter effect is composed of "cold", "warm" and "hot" dark matter components, which exhibit different properties. So we can say quite reliably, every theory, which considers the dark matter as a result of single particle is predestined to failure - no matter which particle it actually is.


Zephyr, read the article again,,,, it's about dark energy, not dark matter.
indio007
1.6 / 5 (7) Jan 28, 2013
The maths involved in this are staggeringly complex. There is a lot of room for people who are interested in finding new physics to get involved. Aether and vacuum proponants, are you up to the challenge?


knock yourself out....
http://arxiv.org/...7804.pdf
EyeNStein
1 / 5 (7) Jan 28, 2013
Perhaps we just undestand spacetime wrongly. What if the same effects that let us see the CMB radiation allow CMB gravitation. There would be loads of it from the mass of matter and anti-matter which existed before annialation. I realise it cancells/averages to zero for us but from our POV it is non zero elsewhere.
definitude
1 / 5 (2) Jan 28, 2013
Classification is always a matter up for consideration. Tomato vs. Tomato, you can call the force that demands balancing or the force that does the balancing, either way you have to decide what to exclude from the definition. Or, you could explain it all in a Theory of Everything. It is amazing how long it takes to adopt a good idea that is independant of its maker!
ValeriaT
1.3 / 5 (12) Jan 28, 2013
Zephyr, read the article again, it's about dark energy, not dark matter.
You're right, but the chameleon particles were proposed for both dark matter, both dark energy (in the same way, like the symmetrons, after all). In the dark sector you can invent whatever stuff you want.
packrat
2.3 / 5 (9) Jan 28, 2013
Here's a laugh for everyone. Odd theory of the day. If everything in the universe is affected by entropy then the energy in vacuum must also be. Since the only way to effectively dilute that energy is to spread it over a larger area then that is why the universe is expanding and 'dark energy' is just a name for what's happening.
Q-Star
2.5 / 5 (11) Jan 28, 2013
Here's a laugh for everyone. Odd theory of the day.,,,,,,, Since the only way to effectively dilute that energy is to spread it over a larger area then that is why the universe is expanding and 'dark energy' is just a name for what's happening.


Actually that is not as laughable as you intended. We are stuck on our fondness for enthalpy, entropy, and the conservation of energy. The only thing that works well that also allows you to keep those items as they are, is the concept of a net Zero energy for the universe,,, various forms of negative (potential) energy such as vacuum energy, gravitational energy and various forms of positive energy, thermal, kinetic, electromagnetic,,,, add them all up and you get zero,,,,

It's the explanation for a flat universe on cosmological scales, and the curved spacetime on local scales. I'm not sure of the exact figures, but the latest WMAP data seems to measure the flatness to about 1 part in trillions over the entire observable universe.
vacuum-mechanics
1 / 5 (9) Jan 28, 2013
"Much of my work has focused on chameleon dark energy theories, and I really only started thinking about symmetrons last summer," Upadhye told Phys.org. "Modern experimental techniques and technologies have advanced enough to search for new physics at distances of interest for dark energy theories."
As Upadhye explained, a symmetron field could fulfill the role of dark energy by acting as a negative pressure.

This is one new theory and experiment about dark energy; anyway it seems to be a complicate and difficult to understanding. Maybe this alternate simple scientific explanation could help to visualize the mysterious energy.
http://www.vacuum...14〈=en
Benni
1.5 / 5 (8) Jan 28, 2013
Albert Einstein:Relativity-Section 30
Written: 1916 (this revised edition 1924)
Part III: Considerations on the Universe as a Whole

The Structure of Space According to the General Theory of Relativity

If we are to have in the universe an average density of matter which differs from zero, however small may be that difference, then the universe cannot be quasi-Euclidean. On the contrary, the results of calculation indicate that if matter be distributed uniformly, the universe would necessarily be spherical (or elliptical) . Since in reality the detailed distribution of matter is not uniform, the real universe will deviate in individual parts from the spherical, that is the universe will be quasi-spherical. But it will be necessarily finite. In fact the theory supplies us with a simple connection between the space-expanse of the universe and the average density of matter in it.

(See also Mach's Principle which was the basis for Einstein's concept of a "closed universe")

Benni
1 / 5 (6) Jan 28, 2013
@ Q-star

Immediately above I posted a quote directly from Einstein's GR, it does not support the concept of a "flat-infinite" universe.
guptm
3 / 5 (2) Jan 28, 2013
It's not 'Eot-Wash'. It is 'Eotvos', a famous Hungarian physicist who first invented the Eotvos pendulum and designed Eotvos experiment on gravitational and inertial mass which inspired Einstein to formulate relativity.
Thadieus
1.6 / 5 (5) Jan 28, 2013
@Q-Star
Our whole universe was in a hot dense state,
Then nearly fourteen billion years ago expansion started. Wait...
The Earth began to cool,
The autotrophs began to drool,
Neanderthals developed tools,
We built a wall (we built the pyramids),
Math, science, history, unraveling the mysteries,
That all started with the big bang!

"Since the dawn of man" is really not that long,
As every galaxy was formed in less time than it takes to sing this song.
A fraction of a second and the elements were made.
The bipeds stood up straight,
The dinosaurs all met their fate,
They tried to leap but they were late
And they all died (they froze their asses off)
The oceans and pangea
See ya, wouldn't wanna be ya
Set in motion by the same big bang!

It all started with the big BANG!

It's expanding ever outward but one day
It will cause the stars to go the other way,
Collapsing ever inward, we won't be here, it wont be hurt
Our best and brightest figure that it'll make an even bigger bang!
...........
Maggnus
3.3 / 5 (8) Jan 28, 2013
Well we got ValeriaT and vacuum-mechanics! Notice how neither of them has attempted anything towards a real theory, like, oh I don't know, say math? Lol true imbeciles!
AmritSorli
1 / 5 (6) Jan 29, 2013
Dark energy is the energy of the space itself.
It has its density which depends of the matter presence.
In outer space density is: (mp x C2)/Vp
mp - Planck mass
Vp - Planck volume
yep
1 / 5 (13) Jan 29, 2013
With the Electrical Universe Theory there is no need for dark energy symmetron magic black hole big bang hupla. Why is this so difficult to imagine. One only needs to look around our own solar system to realize dark energy is bogus. All this trash to support big bang cosmology.
"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality" Albert Einstein
The truth is we are all imbeciles and have little understanding of much of anything. This is why we spend billions of dollars every year on creation myths. Our dogma blinds us to the light that wakes us every day.
Phil DePayne
1.5 / 5 (8) Jan 29, 2013
This is a violation of the KISS principle: (K)eep (I)t (S)imple (S)tupid
dan42day
2.6 / 5 (11) Jan 29, 2013
These physics articles are starting to sound more and more like Star Trek NG techno-babble to me.

Not faulting the writers, just noticing the expansion of my own ignorance rapidly increasing. Must be trapped in a symmetron field.
Shinichi D_
1.8 / 5 (5) Jan 29, 2013
I think we over complicating it. Vacuum is not empty. It's made up of virtual particle pairs. That pop into existence, diverge from each other, then converge and annihilate each other. But what happens when we expand space/vacuum. There will be more and more particle pairs. New pairs arise constantly. So statisticaly in expanding space there is more virtual pairs in the diverging phase, then in the converging. This pressure is Dark Energy. In contracting space, near galaxies, and clusters, it's the opposite. That is Dark Matter. This pressure on solid objects is called gravity. (yes, perfect, pure gravitational force can be found in one place in the universe - the surface of a black hole). What we experience here on earth, is a combination of gravity and (a little) DM. A galaxy or a cluster is thin, mostly made up of vacuum (contractig). That is why they appear to contain huge (proportionally) amounts of DM.
In thousand characters.
LarryD
1 / 5 (2) Jan 29, 2013
Oh dan42day, poor fellow! Let me try and cheer you up. God (in which I do not believe) blows down through his magical straw, a rate of 0.9999c creating the BG as his breath exits, a universe having a rate of 0.5314c directly forward and 0.4685c at the circular expansion points. But after many billions of years (but a moment to God) God thinks those pesky humans are far too curious about his creation and decides to call the whole thing off and begins sucking back at .9999c. However the curved expansion has slowed to 0.2937c while the forward expansion has increased to 0.7062c and to make things worse God has now a total of 2.2877c which is not what God expected...'must be that 'free will' bit I'm missing. But a clue unfolds with 26 letters of the English alphabet.
GSwift7
2.7 / 5 (7) Jan 29, 2013
It's not 'Eot-Wash'. It is 'Eotvos', a famous Hungarian physicist


This was a deliberate pun, not a mistake. Here's a quote from the Eot-Wash Group web site:

Our group's name is a pun on the name of a famous gravitational physicist, the Hungarian Count von Eötvös


It says Wash, as in University of WASHington. Here's a link to their official web site:

http://www.npl.wa...eotwash/

After doing some extra reading, I can't find any sign that the guy from the article above has any official connection with the Eot-Wash Group. The UW team appears to be doing emperical testing with extreme precision using advanced torsional balances. I don't see any trace of theoretical work there. They are merely doing tests and taking data.

The guy above appears to be completely seperate, and he works at Argonne, which is 1500 miles away in Illinoi. Personally, I think he is speculating wildly and without any data to support him. I wonder if his boss approved this?
Whydening Gyre
1 / 5 (9) Jan 29, 2013
But a clue unfolds with 26 letters of the English alphabet.

And this going - where?
GSwift7
2.8 / 5 (9) Jan 29, 2013
BTW is gravity and/or gravitational collapse entropic process? If yes, is the radiation of matter into photons entropic process?


1) Yes, gravitational collapse is entropic. It is a loss of potential energy.

2) Yes, radiation of any type is also entropic. It is a loss of electromagnetic (atomic) energy.

Think of entropy as any process that uses up some of the potential to do some work. Of course, this is only valid on a local frame of reference. On the grand scale of the Universe, entropy may or may not have any meaning, depending on whether you are willing to consider 'something outside' of the Universe/Time.

For example, if an object is drawn closer to a center of gravity it loses some potential energy. However, from the point of view of an outside observer, if the sum of mass including both the object and the center of gravity it fell towards moved away, then they both gained potential relative to the third party. Entropy is always relative inside the Universe.
jibbles
1 / 5 (1) Jan 29, 2013
It's not 'Eot-Wash'. It is 'Eotvos', a famous Hungarian physicist who first invented the Eotvos pendulum and designed Eotvos experiment on gravitational and inertial mass which inspired Einstein to formulate relativity.


quptm,
it's was named the eot-wash experiment because the group involved is at the university of washington and employs eotvos pendumums. get it?
jack_sarfatti
1 / 5 (5) Jan 29, 2013
I predict this model will fail. Dark energy has a simple explanation as the large scale excess density of virtual bosons relative to that of virtual fermion-antifermion pairs inside the vacuum. Similarly, dark matter is the short scale deficit of virtual bosons relative to the virtual fermion-antifermion pairs. This is mainstream quantum field theory and general relativity.
LarryD
1.7 / 5 (6) Jan 29, 2013
Dear Whydening Gyre, have you found the missing number yet? Where is it going? It's about Number Theory and in the end any other theory using a lot of maths must survive that too. You must have heard about 'Is God a Mathematician, well maybe God is a Physics Major too...but then I think God is just another theoretical model, for some of us to rely on.
I lean towards what ValeriaT wrote on Jan 28 '...another particle...' but I add that it's about time we started using some economy. If Quarks, Gluons, (Protons, Neutrons) and Electrons and EM don't fit the bill throw them out and start again! Not likely eh? But it seems to me that we're in such a mucking fuddle that we can't see the woods for the trees. I agree that we shouldn't restrict those that can think of new ideas but maybe it's TIME to step back a bit...and I think TIME is the answer, or should I call it a 'Timion'? Oh no not another particle...Ha!
ValeriaT
1 / 5 (5) Jan 29, 2013
gravitational collapse is entropic. It is a loss of potential energy
So when star is losing it's mass/energy with radiation in the opposite direction, is it negentropic effect? It's matter is gaining potential energy during it.
radiation of any type is also entropic. It is a loss of electromagnetic (atomic) energy
OK, so we have a situation, when the stars are losing matter and these matter condense somewhere into another stars and the entropy is still raising, despite the energy of the whole system remains constant. The trick is, the entropy is not just energy dispersal, but it depends on the temperature too. Changes in entropy is related to the distribution of the energy, divided by its temperature. The losing of energy in form of hot radiation is therefore not equivalent the losing of energy of cold matter.
ValeriaT
1 / 5 (6) Jan 29, 2013
Entropy is always relative inside the Universe.
In L-CDM cosmology the initial state of the Universe was the system of lowest entropy and in mainstream cosmology it should just rise after it.
Dark energy has a simple explanation as the large scale excess density of virtual bosons relative to that of virtual fermion-antifermion pairs inside the vacuum
Why this excess should be formed? Without it such an explanation is just a replacement of one mystery with another one, which is more difficult to measure and define in addition.
VendicarE
5 / 5 (1) Jan 29, 2013
Dark energy can also be explained by Dodekatrons, and Flatchmamtasticatrons, TinkieWinkieatrons, and Attractatrons.

Unfortunately, reality doesn't respect any of those either.
full_disclosure
1 / 5 (7) Jan 29, 2013
The 'Coward Herr Vendicar' has childishly changed his personal login profile, slightly to avoid people following his name back through past comments..... Anyone interested in his cowardly death threats towards posters in the past comments section, follow them through the link below.

http://phys.org/p...ndicarD/
vidyunmaya
1 / 5 (4) Jan 29, 2013
Sub:Visible-Invisible Matrix modes in Nature
Necessity-Demand -curiosity-Sustain-Origins-Cosmology Vedas
I have infact sent an abstract -for Fermilab Conference-aug 2011 being at Chicago as visitor.I am yet to find out if they are serious. again i am at Chicago.
Those interested may please contact me. 15 books in CD available for Interaction. Cosmology needs best of brains trust.Suggest Cosmology Chairs for East West Peception and Vision.
dan42day
1 / 5 (5) Jan 29, 2013
Larry,

That was pretty good. I've always had a funny little side theory where god really did create everything 6,000-8,000 years ago but lately he has been having to play catch-up as we keep figuring things out.

Part of the reason we haven't been able to make certain things like the general theory and quantum physics fit together is because he is falling behind on creating the evidence needed for everything to make sense. For example, He's still finalizing things with the Higgs boson.

Kind of like The Matrix. Just hope the sequels don't suck as bad!
LarryD
1.8 / 5 (5) Jan 30, 2013
dan42day, yeah, I want to be Neo and plug myself into the Net so that I don't have to use a computer or suffer signal degradation. And who created the 'oracle', the 'architect', but then who created him? Oh I get it! You did eh?
Seriously though I posted this in a December item:

'I am being over simplistic here, but in my simple view there would be a set of 'basic stable' (fundamental) particles. However these would be (simply) spherical organised energy in one of the stable configurations. Then what one would get from collisions would depend on how much and how the colliding energy was supplied. In other words, there could be hundreds of short lived configurations comprising, say, 2, 4, 8 'layers' of energy waves. I prefer to think that 'Nature' is a very good enconomist.'

The only thing I left out is TIME and most dynamical systems have to include it. Since entropy only allows the time arrow forward, what if Time is a multidimensional coordinate system forming Dark energy?
LarryD
1.8 / 5 (5) Jan 30, 2013
Cont.
Time wouldn't just be a parameter but an active ingredient in all systems. Entanglement would apply too since, 10secs to the left is the same as 10secs to the right (or any direction, (excluding 'exotic' systems)
Just in case anyone is interested the asnwer to my God/0.9999c/universe thingamajig it is 0.2879. Where does clue 26 come in? 2 8 7 9=2 2 8 7 7=26. Oh well dan42day, just thought I'd brighten up your day that's all
Whydening Gyre
1 / 5 (8) Jan 30, 2013
Interresting you should use 26, Larry. Check out this link and see if you see the connection.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composition_of_the_human_body

However, 26 is NOT the "magic" number. And actually there is more than 1 magic number - the magic is the interelation OF thos numbers.
LarryD
1 / 5 (5) Jan 30, 2013
Whydening Gyre, thanks for the link but actually I chose 26 for another reason. Numbering the letters of the English alphabet we get g=7,o=15,d=4 which = 26.
antialias_physorg
3 / 5 (2) Feb 01, 2013
Numbering the letters of the English alphabet we get g=7,o=15,d=4 which = 26


But since Jesus wrote wrote (if he wrote at all) in Hebrew (same goes for the guys who originally wrote the parchements subsequently edited into the bible)...that means less than nothing.
LarryD
1 / 5 (3) Feb 02, 2013
Sorry antialias_physorg you've missed the point-synchronicity! And as YOU introduced Jesus, 'jesus' = 'lucifer'=74: and there's a lot more from where they came. There's a bit more to the English Language than you realise my dear fellow.
Whydening Gyre
1 / 5 (8) Feb 03, 2013
Whydening Gyre, thanks for the link but actually I chose 26 for another reason. Numbering the letters of the English alphabet we get g=7,o=15,d=4 which = 26.

What does the dyslexic agnostic say?
Is there a d o g ... 26 is a funny number, it seems...
mrlewish
5 / 5 (1) Feb 03, 2013
Didn't the Symmetrons play with Perry Como or Frank Sinatra?
mrlewish
not rated yet Feb 03, 2013
Numbering the letters of the English alphabet we get g=7,o=15,d=4 which = 26


But since Jesus wrote wrote (if he wrote at all) in Hebrew (same goes for the guys who originally wrote the parchements subsequently edited into the bible)...that means less than nothing.


You need to stop getting your info from bible class. The New Testament was orginally written and compiled in the common Greek Language of the day. Jesus probably mostly spoke Aramaic though he probably had a working understanding of Hebrew he would have not used it everyday.
VendicarE
not rated yet Feb 03, 2013
"Didn't the Symmetrons play with Perry Como or Frank Sinatra?" - mrlewish

No, they were the nemesis of earth in tv series
"Captain Scarlet and the Symmetrons".

LarryD
1 / 5 (4) Feb 03, 2013
Yes, Whydening Gyre, 26 is funny and strange number to pick for an alphabet. However to get closer to the current discussions take the two words 'quantum gravity' = 107 102 = 209 now divide by 26 and subtract the integer (8) = then invert and the anwser is 26.
'Proton' plus 'electron' plus 'quantum' = =297, divide by 26, subtract the integer (11), multiply the decimal fraction by 26 and the answer is 11. Now 11 x 26 =286 and subtract 'proton' and 'electron' and the answer is 96, Now what atom has just one proton and one electron? Hydrogen, and if you compute the word number for 'hydrogen' it's....yep, 96.
Not enough for you? 'Quark 'gluon' 'proton' = 235, divide by 26, subtract integer (9) and invert...26
Do you get the feeling that there is something odd going here? This is just the tip of the synchronistic iceberg...One might be a coincidence...two mmm well...but after that not likely.
6pm in Thailand so I'm off to dinner.
Whydening Gyre
1 / 5 (8) Feb 03, 2013
It gets even simpler than that, Larry...
VendicarE
1 / 5 (1) Feb 03, 2013
My money is on Plutons.
C Key T Ruth
1 / 5 (3) Feb 03, 2013
Oh dan42day, poor fellow! Let me try and cheer you up. God (in which I do not believe) blows down through his magical straw....

oh how the pendulum does swing from the days of book burning, flat earth, persecution, and denial of science toward the polar opposite denial of a power greater than the pathetic reason of man- which by the way has maybe moved us closer to what.. a mm or 2 closer to the infinite?
Black Energy is the topic and you're hard pressed to explain how it is NOT exactly what was described in 2Thessalonians2- neither you nor the Apostle Paul do a very good job explaining what "heldeth back" until now but for certain it is, without question both accelerating and measurable.
The very premise of mutual exclusivity precludes truth as primary objective.... you ought to know quite well that Newton was generally accurate even before the instrumentation could substantiate the more technical terms for the operational definition of "gravity".
We are, after all, mere men
Q-Star
2.5 / 5 (8) Feb 03, 2013
Yes, Whydening Gyre, 26 is funny and strange number to pick for an alphabet. However to get closer to the current discussions take the two words 'quantum gravity' = 107 102 = 209 now divide by 26 and subtract the integer (8) = then invert and the anwser is 26.
'Proton' plus 'electron' plus 'quantum' = =297, divide by 26, subtract the integer (11), multiply the decimal fraction by 26 and the answer is 11. Now 11 x 26 =286 and subtract 'proton' and 'electron' and the answer is 96, Now what atom has just one proton and one electron? Hydrogen, and if you compute the word number for 'hydrogen' it's....yep, 96.
Not enough for you? 'Quark 'gluon' 'proton' = 235, divide by 26, subtract integer (9) and invert...26


But if you subtract 6 and then add 4 after dividing by 8 you might end up with 26 lower case letters and 26 additional upper case letters, assuming that the Greeks really are the ones who taught the Irish the art of writing.

LarryD
1 / 5 (1) Feb 03, 2013
Well, at least it's better than calling each other names and swearing and it gave you a laugh. Hey...and who is the guy that keeps stealing my addition sign? I'm not going to blame language on the Greeks, it was all down to those Sumerians and the Fibonacci sequence. Won't annoy you chaps anymore so in ever decreasing circles....
Osiris1
1 / 5 (4) Feb 04, 2013
let us try to generate this in more concentrated form...may be an antigravitational force, and may be used for propulsion ...like Alcubierre's warp drive expanding and contracting space selectively in front and back of a ship
antialias_physorg
4 / 5 (4) Feb 04, 2013
and there's a lot more from where they came.

I'm sure. umerology is one of those things where the human braing goes totally apeshit. Constructing patterns where there is only coincidence.

There's a bit more to the English Language than you realise my dear fellow.

I doubt it. You can do numerology in many languages (with different words and different outcomes). And it still means nothing in any language.

if you want to attribute significance to something taht is not significant - fine. But if you structure your life with the aid of such made-up significance then don't be surprised when you suddenly find that you don't understand life (and the universe in general) at all, anymore.

In programming we have a term for that: GIGO (garbage in - garbage out)
antialias_physorg
4 / 5 (4) Feb 04, 2013
Whole the scientific research is about construction of patterns based on coincidences

No. Scientific research tries to establish causality. And in the absence of that at the very least correlation beyond a certain (abitrarily agreed upon) limit of significance. Before that it's just hypotheses. (Note the 'hypo' which is greek for 'less than')

With finding of numerical pattern by coincidence.

So? I didn't say that whenever there's a pattern there's nothing to be found. I said that an APPARENT pattern does not AUTOMATICALLY (or automagically) mean that there's something significant there. String theory hasn't yet shown its worth in making predictions, so it's still in the hypothesis stage.
And numerology hasn't made any testable predictions, either.

Pick up any book on optical illusions. You can test yourself very quickly that there are many things where you think you see a pattern which isn't there at all.
LarryD
1 / 5 (5) Feb 04, 2013
No I don't base my life on coincidental ideas and I think antialias_physorg you've a lot to learn about Life. Life isn't numbers it's events either Macro or Quantum; the numbers are abstract entities that help us understand. We can't understand anything that we aren't able to CLASSIFY; and that is basic Human natuure A famous London College Prof. found that he could solve some physics problems by looking at the synchronicities in Nature sometimes just going for a walk in the park and looking around. GIGO applies to computers and related technology and not to the human brain so stop using computers so much and start using your brain. Just because YOU don't understand something don't call it GIGO. Stop and look around you, listen and learn.
antialias_physorg
4 / 5 (4) Feb 04, 2013
We can't understand anything that we aren't able to CLASSIFY

I agree. But our ability to classify is not infallible. Human brains are very good at trying to see patterns. But very often this means we see patterns where there aren't any.

Example:

1,2,3,4,5
what is the next number?

If you say "it MUST be 6" then you are wrong. There's an infinite number of algorithms that produce this sequence (and of those an infinite subset that produces any number as the next one...or even the word "elephant").

GIGO applies to computers and related technology and not to the human brain

If you've ever seen an optical illusion you know it applies to human brains just as well. Human brains extrapolate (mostly linearly - see the above sequence). Anything that is beyond linear is already very hard for us to grasp.
antialias_physorg
4.2 / 5 (5) Feb 04, 2013
But in many cases such an research starts with accidental finding and blind collecting of coincidence.

Sure. The first hypothesis is always a guess. But to go from there and say that there MUST be something to the guess is a fallacy.
- the guess could be wrong.
- the stuff you have collected could be accidental (e.g. thinking about a song and then hearing it on the radio the same day).

Without the step of verifying the hypothesis against FUTURE/PREDICTIVE experiment it is worthless. Because without that it's just 'fitting stuff to the available data'. And that is all that numerology (and for the time being: string theory) is: fitting stuff to available data.

who only used to solves the tasks prepared with his professor

Bzzzt. To get a PhD you have to do ORIGINAL research - at least over here. While the task was surely set by a professor (posts for getting a PhD are always based on a certain task/subject), the methodology was all my invention.
antialias_physorg
4.2 / 5 (5) Feb 04, 2013
physicists who are just looking for their easy employment

By reiterating that lie it doesn't turn into truth. Physicists can get non-science jobs which pay 2-3 times more than their science jobs, easy. Highly intelligent/skilled people are a sought after commodity on the jobs market. You know how many job applications I had to write after my first science job and after my PhD? One each - and I was hired on the spot each time. And I'd say I was an average researcher.

Also: science jobs don't have regular hours. You are there on the weekends and at night. The word 'overtime' has no meaning (no extra money for the extra hours). It is by no stretch of the imagination an 'easy job'. The pressure is very high (especially the pressure to publish - and you only can publish by getting work done). So don't give us this 'protecting their cushy jobs' crap.
typicalguy
5 / 5 (3) Feb 04, 2013
I can't believe people are arguing some of this stuff.
1. If people didn't research things based on patterns and guesses then we'd still be waiting for lightening strikes to create fire as it's complete pattern recognition that fire is generated by rubbing two sticks together.

2. This is specifically for natello. I'm tired of reading about your cold fusion conspiracy theories. Even if cold fusion were proven to be a valid way to fuse atoms, it would still create a lot of jobs. Physicists aren't ignoring it because it's not going to generate jobs, they don't research it because it's never been reproducible and they don't want to waste their time. Another thing on this topic, you act as though the discovery of true cold fusion would eliminate work on hot fusion. People would still have jobs in that field as it would still provide us with valuable knowledge.

3. Agreement with antialias_physorg. Believe it or not, a lot of physicists work on Wall Street.
antialias_physorg
3 / 5 (2) Feb 04, 2013
Yep. Two of my best friends are mathematicians. They work at Deutsche Bank, making obscene amounts of money (and get to travel all over the place). Now THAT's the kind of job you can get with some serious scientific skills.
No way you can even remotely get that in any science research capacity.