It looks like dark matter can be heated up and moved around

It looks like dark matter can be heated up and moved around
The Milky Way and its dark matter halo. Credit: Sload Digital Sky Survey

Look at a galaxy, what do you see? Probably lots of stars. Nebulae too. And that's probably it. A whole bunch of stars and gas in a variety of colorful assortments; a delight to the eye. And buried among those stars, if you looked carefully enough, you might find planets, black holes, white dwarves, asteroids, and all sorts of assorted chunky odds and ends. The usual galactic milieu.

What you wouldn't see is what most of that galaxy is really made of. You wouldn't see the invisible, the hidden. You wouldn't see the bulk of that galactic mass. You wouldn't see the dark matter.

Dark Matters Most

Dark matter is a hypothetical form of matter, and in that hypothesis you are swimming in it right now. As far as we can tell, based on decades of careful, meticulous observations of everything from the movement of stars within to the movement of galaxies within clusters to the early moments of the big bang to the growth of structure across the entire universe (i.e., we've worked really hard on this), our cosmos is not what is seems at the surface.

The main result: most of the raw stuff in our universe simply doesn't interact with light. Its usual name is "dark matter," but a better name might be invisible matter. We're not exactly sure what it is (we're still working on that bit), but the dark matter seems to be some sort of microscopic particle that floods every galaxy, imbuing them with extra mass. Because this dark matter doesn't interact with light, it doesn't feel anything to do with the , meaning it simply passes through normal matter without noticing or caring a single bit.

The Weight of Nothing

As powerful as this dark matter is in terms of explaining deep and perplexing problems of the universe, it does have some weaknesses. Most notably, when astrophysicists run computer simulations of the growth of galaxies – tracking their formation and evolution over the course of billions of years using all the known physics that go into making a galaxy a galaxy – they find that the dark matter tends to really, really clump up to obscenely high densities in the center of those galaxies.

That's a fine and dandy prediction on its own, but it doesn't quite match up with observations. While we can't directly see the dark matter (remember: invisible) we can see its effects on everything else, including normal matter. The dark matter may not play the electromagnetic game, but it does talk to gravity, because gravity is super-friendly and is able to talk to every shred of mass and energy in the entire universe.

So if you fill up a galaxy with dark matter, and the dark matter tends to clump a lot in the center, then there will be a lot of weight in the center of the galaxy, drawing in the surrounding gas. As that gas compresses onto the core, it will shrink and collapse, triggering massive star formation events, popping out litters of new stars.

In other words, the cores of galaxies should have heaps upon molecular heaps of gas and . And though galactic centers are very rich places indeed, they're not that rich.

It looks like dark matter can be heated up and moved around
The galactic core, observed using infrared light and X-ray light. Credit: NASA, ESA, SSC, CXC, and STScI

The conclusion of that the banal prediction about the behavior of dark matter in galactic cores isn't the full story. Since we have so many other good reasons to believe that dark matter is a thing, the question becomes: what kicks it out of the core?

Shaking Things Up

Give ten theoretical physics a problem and they'll come up with a dozen solutions. And in the case of the "cuspiness" of dark matter cores, they've managed to pop out all sorts of fun explanations. Perhaps dark matter is more exotic than we thought, able to slightly interact with itself through a new fifth force of nature, smoothing itself out in the core. Maybe dark matter is just a tad naturally warm and energetic, and has a hard time bundling up in the center.

As cool as those options are, maybe the explanation is something more mundane. The dark matter can influence the behavior of normal matter via gravity, and the same is true in reverse. While substantially less bulky than their dark counterparts, the regular matter of our universe can tug and pull and spread everything else, even if just a tiny bit.

Recently a team of astronomers studied several populations of dwarf galaxies, where the link between dark and normal matter could most easily be examined. They used these samples to hunt for any relationships between star formation and central density. In this scenario, if a galaxy experienced a lot of recent star formation, triggering explosive supernova winds and other temperamental outbursts, then that would drive lots of normal matter out of the core, and gravity would do its thing and pull some of the dark matter along with the normal stuff.

The study found an intriguing result: Dwarf galaxies with a lot of recent ("recent" being within the past six billion years) had smoother central densities, while their less active siblings were much more cuspy in their centers, favoring this hypothesis that normal matter can indeed influence the dark. While this doesn't completely solve the riddle of the nature of , it is a substantial step forward.


Explore further

Dark matter on the move

Citation: It looks like dark matter can be heated up and moved around (2019, January 11) retrieved 22 May 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2019-01-dark_1.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
111 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Jan 11, 2019
'Pushed out' dark matter *is* curved spacetime.

Dark matter is a supersolid that fills 'empty' space, strongly interacts with ordinary matter and is displaced by ordinary matter. What is referred to geometrically as curved spacetime physically exists in nature as the state of displacement of the supersolid dark matter. The state of displacement of the supersolid dark matter is gravity.

The supersolid dark matter displaced by a galaxy pushes back, causing the stars in the outer arms of the galaxy to orbit the galactic center at the rate in which they do.

Displaced supersolid dark matter *is* curved spacetime.

Jan 11, 2019
Last paragraph of article:
The study found an intriguing result: Dwarf galaxies with a lot of recent star formation ("recent" being within the past six billion years) had smoother central densities, while their less active siblings were much more cuspy in their centers, favoring this hypothesis that normal matter can indeed influence the dark. While this doesn't completely solve the riddle of the nature of dark matter, it is a substantial step forward.
Or it could just be the usual normal gas/dust being affected in the ORDINARY manner being ejected from the central region by BH jets, widespread radiation pressure and novae/supernovae 'winds'.

That is, the SAME mass relocations/distributions would result at the various stages of galaxy formation if that 'dark' matter is 'ordinary' NOT 'exotic'.

This is the sort of preconclusions-based 'interpretations' that Big Bang BIAS will engender as long as 'publish-or-perish' HACKS are too brainwashed/lazy to think/see through.

Jan 12, 2019
it could just be the usual normal gas/dust ... if that 'dark' matter is 'ordinary' NOT 'exotic'
If it were normal, everyday matter, it would radiate: it could be observed directly via EM radiation.

The stuff of which "dark matter" is composed, on the other hand, cannot be seen or observed directly (hence the monicker), but merely inferred by its' gravitational interaction with normal matter.

Can you complete the equation?

Jan 12, 2019
Or it could just be the usual normal gas/dust being affected in the ORDINARY manner being ejected from the central region by BH jets, widespread radiation pressure and novae/supernovae 'winds'.


Total nonsense. As SkyLight said, it would be detectable. Dust in infrared, and gas from its emissions. Such as Lyman-alpha, for instance. If you've been told this once, you've been told a hundred times. Try to grasp it. It isn't rocket science.


Jan 12, 2019
@SkyLight.
it could just be the usual normal gas/dust... if that 'dark' matter is 'ordinary' NOT 'exotic'
If it were normal, everyday matter, it would radiate: it could be observed directly via EM radiation.

...stuff of which "dark matter" is composed, on the other hand, cannot be seen or observed directly (hence the monicker),..
Haven't you been reading PO articles for the last few weeks/months/years? :)

All 'rationalizations' for 'exotic' DM became passe' once recent astro/cosmo discoveries/reviews by mainstream began finding vast 'previously dark/faint' mass in the form of 'ordinary' matter previously 'undetected'; due to older scopes etc not being able to detect the numerous low-surface-brightness and/or distant clouds/galaxies/clusters of 'ordinary' (previously dark) matter increasingly being detected by newer scopes/reviews etc.

It's the 'tip of the iceberg' of 'ordinary' DM.

Can you 'connect' all the old/recently found 'dots' being pointed out, mate? :)

Jan 12, 2019
All 'rationalizations' for 'exotic' DM became passe' once recent astro/cosmo discoveries/reviews by mainstream began finding vast 'previously dark/faint' mass in the form of 'ordinary' matter previously 'undetected'; due to older scopes etc not being able to detect the numerous low-surface-brightness and/or distant clouds/galaxies/clusters of 'ordinary' (previously dark) matter increasingly being detected by newer scopes/reviews etc.

The tip of the iceberg of 'ordinary' DM, mate. :)


Total crap. That is predicted, but missing, normal; matter. As any scan of the literature would tell you. You are just making sh!t up. As usual.

Jan 12, 2019
@jonesdave.
The tip of the iceberg of 'ordinary' DM, mate. :)
Total crap. That is predicted, but missing, normal; matter. As any scan of the literature would tell you. You are just making sh!t up. As usual.
We have passed the 'missing matter' requirement, mate; it's now many times more than those 'missing baryons problem' etc expectations concocted early on based on (now falsified) 'BB-nucleosynthesis' assumptions and other BB-based/biased 'interpretations' of observational data re CMB, Redshift etc.

And more 'ordinary' (previously 'dark) DM to come...as newer/better scopes/reviews proceed.

Holding to (now falsified) BB-created furphies/rationalizations/interpretations of what we observed early on, instead of to what we are now observing better than ever, is tantamount to holding to 'religious beliefs' rooted in old BB-hypotheses-era fantasies, rather than objective scientific acknowledgement of evolving picture of reality now being discovered by mainstream. :)

Jan 12, 2019
We have passed the 'missing matter' requirement, mate; it's now many times more than that
'missing baryons problem' expectations which were concocted early on based on (now falsified) Big Bang nucleosynthesis and other BB-based/biased 'interpretations' of observational data re CMB, Redshift etc. And more 'ordinary' (previously 'dark) DM to come, mate...as newer/better scopes/reviews proceed


Nope, you made that up. As usual.


Jan 12, 2019
@jonesdave.
We have passed the 'missing matter' requirement, mate; it's now many times more than that....'missing baryons problem' expectations which were concocted early on based on (now falsified) Big Bang nucleosynthesis and other BB-based/biased 'interpretations' of observational data re CMB, Redshift etc. And more 'ordinary' (previously 'dark) DM to come, mate...as newer/better scopes/reviews proceed
Nope, you made that up. As usual.
Until you actually do the hard work of objectively connecting all the old/new dots being highlighted by recent mainstream discoveries/reviews, your one-liner denial is just like the (willfully uninformed) opinion of any poster on the internet forums, mate. You have to 'let go' of your long-inculcated BB-biased fantasies/beliefs and start anew, objective and ready to connect all the new/old 'dots' of the evolving new picture which mainstream astro/cosmo discoveries/reviews are ONLY JUST starting to redraw for you as we speak! :)

Jan 12, 2019
Until you actually do the hard work of objectively connecting all the old/new dots being highlighted by recent mainstream discoveries/reviews, your one-liner denial is just like the (willfully uninformed) opinion of any poster on the internet forums, mate. You have to 'let go' of your long-inculcated BB-biased fantasies/beliefs and start anew, objective and ready to connect all the new/old 'dots' of the evolving new picture which mainstream astro/cosmo discoveries/reviews are ONLY JUST starting to redraw for you as we speak! :)


Nope, more sh!te. And no evidence to back it up. Fairy tales.
[

Jan 12, 2019
@jonesdave.
Until you actually do the hard work of objectively connecting all the old/new dots being highlighted by recent mainstream discoveries/reviews, your one-liner denial is just like the (willfully uninformed) opinion of any poster on the internet forums, mate. You have to 'let go' of your long-inculcated BB-biased fantasies/beliefs and start anew, objective and ready to connect all the new/old 'dots' of the evolving new picture which mainstream astro/cosmo discoveries/reviews are ONLY JUST starting to redraw for you as we speak!
Nope, more sh!te. And no evidence to back it up. Fairy tales.
So, you're sticking with all the (now falsified) BB-generated "Fairy tales", mate? Your choice, of course; but it's not healthy/objective to stick to increasingly demonstrably ridiculous BB-dependent 'interpretations'/ increasingly bizarre/unscientific 'exotic'-DM-defending 'rationalizations'. No skin off my nose what you believe/fantasize. It just isn't science. :)

Jan 12, 2019
So, you're sticking with all the (now falsified) BB-generated "Fairy tales", mate? Your choice, of course; but it's not healthy/objective to stick to increasingly demonstrably ridiculous BB-dependent 'interpretations' and increasingly bizarre/unscientific BB-defending 'rationalizations'. No skin of my nose what you believe/fantasize, mate....it's just not science. :)


Give it up, you clown. Nobody has falsified anything. Link it if you think otherwise. Who wrote this crap? Where? When? In a notebook under your bed, is it? Lol.

Jan 12, 2019
@jonesdave.
So, you're sticking with all the (now falsified) BB-generated "Fairy tales", mate? Your choice, of course; but it's not healthy/objective to stick to increasingly demonstrably ridiculous BB-dependent 'interpretations' and increasingly bizarre/unscientific BB-defending 'rationalizations'. No skin of my nose what you believe/fantasize, mate....it's just not science.
Give it up, you clown. Nobody has falsified anything. Link it if you think otherwise. Who wrote this crap? Where? When? In a notebook under your bed, is it? Lol.
The 'latency' between mainstream bit-by-bit discoveries/reviews and 'final stage' of formal overarching reforming of the cosmological standard model to reflect all the implications is a long period. All BB-related hypotheses/interpretations/rationalizations suffering falsification in bit-by-bit manner (as in 'death by a thousand cuts') as mainstream continues the trend begun in recent years. You just won't see it, mate. :)

Jan 12, 2019
The 'latency' between mainstream bit-by-bit discoveries/reviews and 'final stage' of formal overarching reforming of the cosmological standard model to reflect all the implications is a long period. All BB-related hypotheses/interpretations/rationalizations suffering falsification in bit-by-bit manner (as in 'death by a thousand cuts') as mainstream continues the trend begun in recent years. You just won't see it, mate. :)


Irrelevant word salad. Just another crank.

Jan 12, 2019
@jonesdave.
The 'latency' between mainstream bit-by-bit discoveries/reviews and 'final stage' of formal overarching reforming of the cosmological standard model to reflect all the implications is a long period. All BB-related hypotheses/interpretations/rationalizations suffering falsification in bit-by-bit manner (as in 'death by a thousand cuts') as mainstream continues the trend begun in recent years. You just won't see it, mate. :)


Irrelevant word salad. Just another crank.
Denial from a falsified-BB defender and exotic-DM believer. :)

Jan 12, 2019
@jonesdave.
The 'latency' between mainstream bit-by-bit discoveries/reviews and 'final stage' of formal overarching reforming of the cosmological standard model to reflect all the implications is a long period. All BB-related hypotheses/interpretations/rationalizations suffering falsification in bit-by-bit manner (as in 'death by a thousand cuts') as mainstream continues the trend begun in recent years. You just won't see it, mate. :)


Irrelevant word salad. Just another crank.
Denial from a falsified-BB defender and exotic-DM believer. :)


What am I supposed to be denying, you idiot? Link, please, or STFU.

Jan 12, 2019
@jonesdave.
@jonesdave.
The 'latency' between mainstream bit-by-bit discoveries/reviews and 'final stage' of formal overarching reforming of the cosmological standard model to reflect all the implications is a long period. All BB-related hypotheses/interpretations/rationalizations suffering falsification in bit-by-bit manner (as in 'death by a thousand cuts') as mainstream continues the trend begun in recent years. You just won't see it, mate. :)
Irrelevant word salad. Just another crank.
Denial from a falsified-BB defender and exotic-DM believer. :)
What am I supposed to be denying,...?
The increasingly bleedin' obvious unfolding under your very nose over the last few weeks/months/years of PO reports about what mainstream astro/cosmo discovery/review is slowly but relentlessly revealing about findings of vast quantities of previousy 'dark' but 'ordinary' matter, mate, that's what. Re-read it ALL. Objectively. Without long-inculcated 'BB-blinkers'. :)

Jan 12, 2019
The increasingly bleedin' obvious unfolding under your very nose over the last few weeks/months/years of PO reports about what mainstream astro/cosmo discovery/review is slowly but relentlessly revealing about findings of vast quantities of previousy 'dark' but 'ordinary' matter, mate, that's what. Re-read it ALL. Objectively. Without long-inculcated 'BB-blinkers'. :)


Nope, no such thing has happened. You are either lying, or too stupid to understand what you read. I asked for links to say that we have discovered more missing baryonic matter than we predicted. Where is it? Still under your bed? Lol.


Jan 12, 2019
@jonesdave.
The increasingly bleedin' obvious unfolding under your very nose over the last few weeks/months/years of PO reports about what mainstream astro/cosmo discovery/review is slowly but relentlessly revealing about findings of vast quantities of previousy 'dark' but 'ordinary' matter, mate, that's what. Re-read it ALL. Objectively. Without long-inculcated 'BB-blinkers'. :)
Nope, no such thing has happened. You are either lying, or too stupid to understand what you read. I asked for links to say that we have discovered more missing baryonic matter than we predicted. Where is it? Still under your bed? Lol.
Mate, it's all there in PO reports. You should actually try and connect the dots and extrapolate; and also understand that every new scope/review etc keeps adding more and more finds of 'previously dark' but 'ordinary' matter. While 'exotic' DM is STILL far from being detected as ever, despite all the many/diverse past/continuing efforts to find such. :)

Jan 12, 2019
Mate, it's all there in PO reports. You should actually try and connect the dots and extrapolate; and also understand that every new scope/review etc keeps adding more and more finds of 'previously dark' but 'ordinary' matter. While 'exotic' DM is STILL far from being detected as ever, despite all the many/diverse past/continuing efforts to find such. :)


No, it is not in PO reports. Show me the papers, and quit lying.

Jan 12, 2019
@jonesdave.
Mate, it's all there in PO reports. You should actually try and connect the dots and extrapolate; and also understand that every new scope/review etc keeps adding more and more finds of 'previously dark' but 'ordinary' matter. While 'exotic' DM is STILL far from being detected as ever, despite all the many/diverse past/continuing efforts to find such. :)
No, it is not in PO reports. Show me the papers, and quit lying.
Do your own due diligence, mate. I haven't time or inclination to pander to denialists who didn't (or won't) read it all for themselves as it unfolds. Jd, you remind me of the old days when religious zealots/evangelists were allowed to go door-to-door with their long-and-strongly-inculcated 'spiels and rationalizations' for beliefs/fantasies which denied the self-evident reality around them. Scientific and Logical arguments were futile; their 'belief and denial' were powerful 'blinkers' for blocking out the bleedin' obvious. Not good.

Jan 12, 2019
Do your own due diligence, mate


Wanker! They don't exist, you lying POS! You are making shit up., and I am calling you on it. Prove your lies, or STFU.

Jan 12, 2019
@jonesdave.
Do your own due diligence, mate


Wanker! They don't exist, you lying POS! You are making shit up., and I am calling you on it. Prove your lies, or STFU.
Have it your way, mate. No skin off my nose that you apparently 'missed' it all; which explains why you still hold to increasingly falsified BB, Inflation and exotic-DM beliefs/interpretations of recent mainstream astro/cosmo discovery/review data/revisions etc. I'll leave you to your 'certainties', jd; while I myself will continue to comprehend/connect all the old/new 'dots' of the evolving science reality that mainstream is now painstakingly delivering, a 'dot' at a time, for us all. Good luck anyway, Jd. :)

Jan 12, 2019
"It looks like dark matter can be heated up and moved around"

Same old broken record. We can't see it, we can't observe it, we can't feel it, none has ever showed up in our detectors, and I still weigh the same as before the time I ever heard of this ethereal cosmic fairy dust . I wonder if the person who wrote this can solve Differential Equations.

Jan 12, 2019
I wonder if the person who wrote this can solve Differential Equations.


Considering that Paul has PhD in Physics, I'm sure he can. http://www.pmsutt...searchcv

It's a good bet he knows a hell of a lot more than you do about most things involving science, math, and communication, too.

BTW, your obsession with DEs is just flat-out bizarre.

Jan 12, 2019
@Benni got presented with some PDEs, specifically the Schwartzchild solution to GRT, and was unable to do anything with them. Couldn't even understand that a system of PDEs implies an infinity of sets of simultaneous equations with different coefficients. Apparently it still burns.

Jan 12, 2019
jd, when you argue with unrealitycheckbounced?
You are arguing with a woocultbot.
A piss-poorly-programed Artificial Stupid.
Coded to repetitiously repeat the same nonsense, endlessly.

Just apply the Turing Test & you will realize you are being spoofed by a ghost in the machine.

Jan 13, 2019
Last paragraph of article:
The study found an intriguing result: Dwarf galaxies with a lot of recent star formation...
had smoother central densities, while their less active siblings were much more cuspy in their centers, favoring this hypothesis that normal matter can indeed influence the dark. While this doesn't completely solve the riddle of the nature of dark matter, it is a substantial step forward.
Or it could just be the usual normal gas/dust being affected in the ORDINARY manner being ejected from the central region by BH jets, widespread radiation pressure and novae/supernovae 'winds'.

That is, the SAME mass relocations/distributions would result at the various stages of galaxy formation if that 'dark' matter is 'ordinary' NOT 'exotic'[/q says RC

-contd-


Jan 13, 2019
@rj - The thing with @RC is this: he's a narcissist and a psychotic. He needs desperately to feel he's at the center of things, that he's the only one who knows the truth, and that others i.e. (the mainstream, you and me) are far less intelligent than he is. This, notwithstanding the fact that he's often arguing with real scientists, university graduates, PhDs, whatever.

He also hears voices and messages in his head which he then scribbles down as part of his TOE - his Theory of Everything - which contains no math whatsoever (since he doesn't understand math). An earlier version of this junk magnum opus can be read here: http://earthlingclub.com/ - the latest version will never see the light of day, since it seems to need constant "revision"

So his constant putting people down is part of his sorry psychological condition, he's been doing this for decades now in various online forums, and has proved himself incapable of understanding the fact that he's basically a basket-case.

Jan 13, 2019
-contd-
@RC
And therefore, this alleged Dark Matter would be also subject to being pulled into a Black Hole just as ordinary Matter is, yes?
If Dark Matter is so widespread as a halo that interacts with gravity, then it should readily enter into a Black Hole.

Jan 13, 2019
@rj - The thing with @RC is this: he's a narcissist and a psychotic. He needs desperately to feel he's at the center of things, that he's the only one who knows the truth, and that others i.e. (the mainstream, you and me) are far less intelligent than he is. This, notwithstanding the fact that he's often arguing with real scientists, university graduates, PhDs, whatever.

----------------
So his constant putting people down is part of his sorry psychological condition, he's been doing this for decades now in various online forums, and has proved himself incapable of understanding the fact that he's basically a basket-case.
says SkyLight

The topic here seems to be Dark Matter and its effect - so why are you splitting hairs on RealityCheck's personality and private life - as if anyone really cares? Perhaps you might like to join me and greenonions in the Australia climate forum to discuss foul language use amongst American female politicians?

Jan 13, 2019
@SkyLight, and the things his rice krispies whisper to him.

This does not surprise me in any way.

Psychosis and narcissism are definitely related. Hopefully @RC doesn't decide some fine day that the neighbors are using radar beams to torment him and go buy a gun.

Jan 13, 2019
@SEU appears to have asked a relevant question among all the psychotic delusions.

Yes, dark matter would be sucked in by a black hole. What we don't know is what it would do on the way in, in the accretion disk. But being affected by gravity, one would expect DM to experience all of the effects that normal matter does under the influence of gravity.

Jan 13, 2019
Upon re-reading, it seems necessary to me to add that the gravitational effects on DM would also cause redounding effects upon normal matter in the accretion disk. I don't know enough to say whether these are allowed for in models, but I expect they are.

Since there is no reference to a paper in this article I cannot tell.

Jan 13, 2019
Perhaps you might like to join me and greenonions in the Australia climate forum to discuss foul language use amongst American female politicians?
Do you mean this one?
Alex Ocasio-Cortez is proving that she is missing a cerebral cortex, as is the newly elected Democrat Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib and her foul description of late of the POTUS as a "mother f*cker"
No thanks - I never discuss politics.

I did take a look at the discussion, and was struck by two points in particular:

- that, by your own words, you are a Creationist and therefore incapable of engaging in meaningful discussion concerning science. It would seem that you are engaged in a holy war, using bullying tactics to try undermine the work of scientists engaged in objective study of the world around them. You bring only your ill-informed opinions and hateful rhetoric to the table, whereas scientists publish their work based on observation and analysis of data for all to see.

[TBC]

Jan 13, 2019
[continued]

Here's a nice quote of your position on this
demons who inhabit the weak-minded humans, mainly those who are ATHEISTS. Physorg is a popular forum that is practically FILLED with Atheists - which is why Physorg has become a haven for Satan and its worshippers. This is fact that is undeniable.
So, you constantly engage in conversation with people whom you despise as demons, intent on spreading your own virulent and pathological message on a forum dedicated ostensibly to the discussion of science.

The other point that struck me, after reading many of @greenonions' posts, is how balanced and well-informed his discussion is, and how ready he is to admit that, while he may not be as familiar with climate science as the scientists themselves, he is ready to learn more and, crucially, he trusts them to present objective data. Up to now, I had not been familiar with him or his postings, but he is now in my books as one of the good guys in this forum.

Jan 13, 2019
Yes, dark matter would be sucked in by a black hole. What we don't know is what it would do on the way in, in the accretion disk. But being affected by gravity, one would expect DM to experience all of the effects that normal matter does under the influence of gravity
I agree with this point.

It's also necessary to point out that the DM is not just sitting around, but must also be orbiting the GC, and therefore carries a great deal of angular momentum. There will be some characteristic radius from the GC , inside of which the centripetal force exerted by the GC/BH will be sufficient to cause the DM, and any other massive body, to cascade into the GC/BH. Outside of that radius, the orbit of any massive object would need to be disturbed by interaction with another body in order to bring it within that radius.

Back of an envelope calculation, anybody?

Jan 13, 2019
demons who inhabit the weak-minded humans, mainly those who are ATHEISTS.
Classic psychotic ideation. ATHEISTS[sic] are ENEMIES[sic]. BLACKS[sic] are ENEMIES[sic]. I haven't seen this psychosis in full-blown form before. If the people who experienced it went to mental health professionals and told them this, they would be given drugs that would make them feel better.

Jan 13, 2019
From the article:
Because this dark matter doesn't interact with light, it doesn't feel anything to do with the electromagnetic force, meaning it simply passes through normal matter without noticing or caring a single bit
Well, I'll go out on a limb and make a guess that DM might be no more, or no less than, all those neutrinos emitted in vast quantities by nuclear reactions or nuclear decays.

For a long while, the neutrino was considered a massless particle but since the phenomenon of neutrino oscillation was observed, it implies that neutrinos have non-zero mass. We also know that neutrinos, regardless of flavor, interact only extremely rarely with other matter.

So, we have huge numbers of them, they have non-zero mass, and they appear not to interact with matter - they seem ideal candidates for DM. Otherwise, where do they go to? Is there a hidden neutrino graveyard they all go to to die?

Somebody please point out the obvious flaw in my reasoning here?

Jan 13, 2019
Continuing with my remarks above, I also note that neutrinos interact only extremely rarely with light/photons. This is due to the fact that neutrinos only interact with anything via the W and Z bosons, which are very massive, resulting in really small coupling constants for interaction between other particles and neutrinos. Also, since neutrinos have no charge, they don't participate in electromagnetic interactions,

Jan 13, 2019
The problem, @SkyLight, is that neutrinos as represented in the Standard Model of Particle Physics, are hot dark matter; they move too fast. That's a hint; I can give more if you are curious.

I too believe that massive right-handed neutrinos account for DM; I think this is why they have not been found in particle searches. Because they are right-handed they do not interact with other matter in any way but gravity. I'm still waiting for a DM particle search that will rule them out, and haven't seen one yet.

Jan 13, 2019
The problem, @SkyLight, is that neutrinos as represented in the Standard Model of Particle Physics, are hot dark matter; they move too fast.
Yeah, I was thinking that might be the case - "their masses are less than 1 eV and their energies are at least 1 MeV, so the Lorentz factor γ is greater than 10^6"(Wiki). So, they're going at practically the speed of light.

So, I'm wondering whether successive gravitational encounters might slow them sufficiently for them to be captured into orbits. If indeed they do turn out to be DM, then perhaps the DM in our galactic halo might have originated in other galaxies and vice versa? Pure speculation, but there you go...

Jan 13, 2019
Reading up right now an article on sterile neutrinos which, for others here who are as ignorant of these particles as I am, are "neutrinos with right-handed chirality" (Wiki). Ii's not certain whether these particles exist, but
If they do, their properties are substantially different from observable neutrinos and antineutrinos. It is theorized that they are either very heavy (on the order of GUT scale—see Seesaw mechanism), do not participate in weak interaction (so-called sterile neutrinos), or both.
Interesting stuff, thanks for the clue. Something to while away some time on a Sunday afternoon with tons of snow outside, and me laid up with a bad back :(...

Jan 13, 2019
Not that I care one way or the other, but I note that Benni Bonehead has voted down my last two posts where I speculate as to the nature of DM.

So, instead of commenting or otherwise moving the discussion forward, he simply throws a couple of his shit-wipes around like the mop-slopping janitor he is.

Way to go, Benni!

Jan 13, 2019
Well, @SkyLight, I saw a double rainbow yesterday, which made my day. Only the second double rainbow I've ever seen. We'll see what happens today.

Jan 13, 2019
@SEU appears to have asked a relevant question among all the psychotic delusions.

Yes, dark matter would be sucked in by a black hole. What we don't know is what it would do on the way in, in the accretion disk. But being affected by gravity, one would expect DM to experience all of the effects that normal matter does under the influence of gravity.

says Da Pussyman

So, you've decided to answer the question I had asked of RC to be able to toot your horn, rather than allowing RC to answer it himself when he finds the time. LOL
Uhhh what evidence do you have that a Black Hole is able to suck in Dark Matter? It's not mentioned in the article. Have you ever SEEN Dark Matter being sucked into a BH, or are you simply ASSUMING that it must be also sucked into a BH, similar to normal Matter that has been seen getting sucked into a BH.

Dark matter is a hypothetical form of matter, and in that hypothesis you are swimming in it right now. As far as we can tell...

Jan 13, 2019
-contd-
"And in that HYPOTHESIS you are swimming in it right now..." As far as we can tell. (regarding Dark Matter).

This is not science. Making up hypotheses and pushing it and forcing it on the public as Truth is not what a scientific method should be. Hypothesis is a form of delusion to create the ILLUSION that the delusion of that hypothesis is actual and factual data that is verifiable, validated and 'settled science', which it is most certainly not. They qualify their hypothetical Dark Matter by ADMITTING that is is ONLY hypothesis - and yet, they say that "you are swimming in it right now".
There are lies being told in these articles about Dark Matter, and THIS article that is coming from "Universe Today" is one of the more obviously blatant lies. And the text of the article is obviously geared toward fifth-graders and someone at Universe Today didn't use their SpellCheck.
Hopefully, more humans would have enough sense to demand less hypothesis and more reality.

Jan 13, 2019
This is not science. Making up hypotheses and pushing it and forcing it on the public as Truth is not what a scientific method should be. Hypothesis is a form of delusion to create the ILLUSION that the delusion of that hypothesis is actual and factual data that is verifiable, validated and 'settled science', which it is most certainly not.


.......and adding to this DM narrative is one even more untenable, that infinite gravity can exist at the surface & the center of a finite stellar mass called a black hole, this of course counter to the inviolable & immutable Inverse Square Law of Physics. But of course those of us making a living in the world of real science understand there are those living their entire lives hop scotching from one immutable fantasy to another.

Jan 13, 2019
demons who inhabit the weak-minded humans, mainly those who are ATHEISTS.
Classic psychotic ideation. ATHEISTS[sic] are ENEMIES[sic]. BLACKS[sic] are ENEMIES[sic]. I haven't seen this psychosis in full-blown form before. If the people who experienced it went to mental health professionals and told them this, they would be given drugs that would make them feel better.
says Da Pussyman aka Da Schneibo

In your 'classic psychotic ideation', WHY do your regard Atheists and Blacks as enemies? I certainly don't believe it and I have NEVER seen anyone else say such hateful words as YOU have, Schneibo. It is quite apparent that YOU have your OWN personal demon(s) that are pushing you to make such horrible statements.
You appear to have also made this new account which you named " SkyLight " in which you can talk to yourself and agree with yourself as SkyLight.
I can only imagine that you are under psychiatric care - and insist that everyone else be under such care.

Jan 13, 2019
-contd-
It is evident that Da Pussyman aka Da Scheibo had read my post regarding Dr. Linus Pauling and his assistant Itamo, who had discovered the causes of sickle-cell anemia - a disease of which many of my Black-American friends have died, sadly.

From Wiki:
sickle cell anemia | ˌsikəl sel əˈnēmēə | (also sickle cell disease)
noun
a severe hereditary form of anemia in which a mutated form of hemoglobin distorts the red blood cells into a crescent shape at low oxygen levels. It is most common among those of African descent.

Obviously, after having read that, Da Pussyman decided to make it seem that I regarded Blacks as enemies (as well as atheists) to take advantage of what is scientifically correct and to twist it in order to toot his own horn again.
Da Pussyman aka Da Schneibo is so much like the Little Boy Who LIKES to Lie - and when he is found out, he blames his lies on someone else.
What a sad and lonely existence he must lead.

Jan 13, 2019
so much like the Little Boy Who LIKES to Lie - and when he is found out, he blames his lies on someone else.
What a sad and lonely existence he must lead.


....and is why he finds the culture of Pop-Cosmology such an accommodating day to day existence. He believes it to be an alternate pathway to upper echelons of science with total disregard for the insanity that can make one believe things like the existence of infinite gravity at the surface & center of a finite stellar mass.


Jan 13, 2019
"So there is no question about infinite gravitational force. It stops light from escaping it's Gravitational influence. But it's not because black holes have infinite gravitational force. It's because the gravitational attraction is so high that the escape velocity (Theoretical) corresponding to the black hole exceeds the speed of light. So anything moving at light speed isn't quick enough to escape such a gravitational influence."

>Egg.....I copied a chunk of the Q above. It's the old 19th Century TUGMath BH math solution schneibo pushes here.

In the 19th Century it was thought light was a PARTICLE, then Maxwell very late in the century proved it was a wave & in 1905 Einstein's Special Relativity administered the coup de grace to the particle theory exactly as it is expressed in Quora. It has been readopted by certain Cosmologists because it limits some of the controversy about the infinite gravity & density assertion & the credibility damage it has caused Cosmology.

Jan 13, 2019
@rrwillsj.
jd, when you argue with unrealitycheckbounced?
You are arguing with a woocultbot.
A piss-poorly-programed Artificial Stupid.
Coded to repetitiously repeat the same nonsense, endlessly.

Just apply the Turing Test & you will realize you are being spoofed by a ghost in the machine.
Applying the same test to you elicited the 'results' that you are a 'cheerleader' and 'suckup' troll/bot, programmed to make silly posts which demonstrate that conclusion clearly; and further indicate that you/your programmer is out of their depth when it comes to actually knowing/understanding subtle but crucial distinctions/aspects in the science/logics being observed/discussed by me and those I am discussing with. Please try to be/do better with your valuable opportunities in life, mate. Being an internet troll like that is not helping science or yourself at all. Drop that worse-than-useless 'schtick' of yours and actually learn/genuinely engage in science/logics discourse. :)

Jan 13, 2019
@SkyLight.
@rj - The thing with @RC is this: he's a narcissist and a psychotic. He needs desperately to feel he's at the center of things, that he's the only one who knows the truth, and that others i.e. (the mainstream, you and me) are far less intelligent than he is. This, notwithstanding the fact that he's often arguing with real scientists, university graduates, PhDs, whatever.....
Apparently you've officially joined the 'personal insults in lieu of science' troll brigade here, mate. Shame.

FYI, mate, I already in another thread pointed out the 'relativistic speed' angle re hypothesized low/no mass 'exotic' DM.

So calling me names for making the same observations before you and DS did, makes you look particularly silly/uninformed about me (and what I am actually saying that is correct), doesn't it?

Please inform yourself fully and don't again attempt to troll/strawman me with more obviously absurd misattributions and/or personal insults like that. Thanks. :)

Jan 13, 2019
@S_E_U
@SkyLight.

From S_E_U:
...Dark Matter would be also subject to being pulled into a Black Hole just as ordinary Matter is, yes?


From @SkyLight:
...It's also necessary to point out that the DM is not just sitting around, but must also be orbiting the GC,...
Actually, guys, that whole argument makes it problematic for the 'early stage' (alleged) Big Bang claims; inasmuch the universal matter-energy 'content' was supposedly extremely dense. Which meant that any/all 'exotic' (relativistic, non-EM-interacting) DM particles would immediately proceed, directly and unhindered, to fall into the nearest Black Hole at the speed of light!

Unlike ORDINARY matter photons/electrons/protons, which WOULD be 'slowed' or 'redirected' by E-M absorption/re-emissions/collisions/interactions (eg, as in our sun).

ps: Neutrino 'sea' is randomly/omni-directional extent; it doesn't 'clump'; yet some claim 'preferred' relativistic-moving 'exotic-DM' does 'clump'. Go figure! :)

Jan 13, 2019
@Da Schneib
I totally forgot Rice Krispies whispered!
I haven't been listening for years. Since I was a child in fact.

So I just made a bowl, listened, and they said to me, "Reality Check is a demon. Do not be deceived by him"

Jan 13, 2019
From S_E_U:
...Dark Matter would be also subject to being pulled into a Black Hole just as normal...

Actually, guys,
...
Which meant that any/all 'exotic' (relativistic, non-EM-interacting) DM particles would immediately proceed, directly and unhindered, to fall into the nearest Black Hole at the speed of light!

Unless it was EMITTED by the black hole... (at the speed of light)

Jan 13, 2019
@Benni

Actually, the 2nd link has this:
Black holes don't have "infinite gravity". The only "infinite thing" associated with a black hole is that the value of the Riemann curvature tensor at the center of a (Schwarzschild or Reissner-Nordstrom) black hole is infinity according to general relativity. But we know that general relativity is not supposed to be a reliable theory near the center of the black hole (where the quantum gravity effects presumably take over)--and thus, even this single infinitely large quantity that we can associate with a black hole is also not really reliably infinite.

Anyway, even if the curvature were infinitely large at the center of the black hole, the effects of gravitation of the black hole are always finite at every point (inside and outside of the black hole) except for the center itself. In fact, according to the Birkhoff theorem (for spherically symmetric stationary black holes), the gravitational effects outside the event horizon cannot,,,

Jan 13, 2019
@jimmybobber.
@Da Schneib
I totally forgot Rice Krispies whispered!
I haven't been listening for years. Since I was a child in fact.

So I just made a bowl, listened, and they said to me, "Reality Check is a demon. Do not be deceived by him"
hehehe, good one, mate. :)

Luckily (after properly reading/understanding my on-topic science-correct posts in this thread and elsewhere) you are now fully equipped with the objective sense and knowledge that will help you to resist those 'demonic urgings' from your bowl of Rice krispies, hey! :)

ps: Good luck and good thinking (and lucidity and hearing) in the New Year, mate. :)

Jan 13, 2019
@Da Schneib
I totally forgot Rice Krispies whispered!
I haven't been listening for years. Since I was a child in fact.

So I just made a bowl, listened, and they said to me, "Reality Check is a demon. Do not be deceived by him"
says jimmybobber

You are STILL a child with a father fetish towards Da Pussyman aka Da Schneibo. Now shouldn't
you be out playing in puddles, catching and decapitating cats and frogs, and climbing trees to look into your neighbour's bedroom window? To you, demonic possessions are a joke, right?
ROFLMAO

Jan 13, 2019
@Whydening Gyre.
From S_E_U:
...Dark Matter would be also subject to being pulled into a Black Hole just as normal...

Actually, guys,
...
Which meant that any/all 'exotic' (relativistic, non-EM-interacting) DM particles would immediately proceed, directly and unhindered, to fall into the nearest Black Hole at the speed of light!

Unless it was EMITTED by the black hole... (at the speed of light)
In which case such non-EM-interacting 'exotic'-DM would immediately proceed to the NEXT nearest BH....regardless of where the alleged particle was initially created/emitted. :)

But since you raised that item, mate, have you any references claiming/explaining BH's can/do create/emit any hypothesized 'exotic'-DM type particles...(or even Neutrinos/Anti-Neutrinos for that matter)? If so I would be interested to see the relevant reference/link. Cheers. :)


Jan 13, 2019
@SEU Only a real demon would try to make me believe in demons. You cannot deceive me.

Jan 13, 2019
@Benni

Actually, the 2nd link has this:
Black holes don't have "infinite gravity". The only "infinite thing" associated with a black hole is that the value of the Riemann curvature tensor at the center of a (Schwarzschild or Reissner-Nordstrom) black hole is infinity according to general relativity. But we know that general relativity is not supposed to be a reliable theory near the center of the black hole (where the quantum gravity effects presumably take over)

Guess that's why they call it GENERAL relativity...


Jan 13, 2019

proceed, directly and unhindered, to fall into the nearest Black Hole at the speed of light!

Unless it was EMITTED by the black hole... (at the speed of light)

In which case such non-EM-interacting 'exotic'-DM would immediately proceed to the NEXT nearest BH....regardless of where the alleged particle was initially created/emitted. :)

But since you raised that item, mate, have you any references claiming/explaining BH's can/do create/emit any hypothesized 'exotic'-DM type particles...(or even Neutrinos/Anti-Neutrinos for that matter)? If so I would be interested to see the relevant reference/link. Cheers. :)

Just a thought experiment on the spacetime warping that might occur in the presence of a COLLECTION of masses...
I'd like to see some references on it, too... :-),
as I am increasingly intuiting gravitational wave interaction...

Jan 13, 2019
@Whyde
General Relativity is called so because it deals with all kinds of motion. It includes acceleration (non-inertial frame of reference) where the Special Theory just considered inertial frames of reference.
.

Jan 13, 2019
@Whyde
General Relativity is called so because it deals with all kinds of motion. It includes acceleration (non-inertial frame of reference) where the Special Theory just considered inertial frames of reference.
.

Was a joke about how it works "generally" (ie-in most cases) well...

Jan 13, 2019
@SEU Only a real demon would try to make me believe in demons. You cannot deceive me.
says child jimmy

I have no idea what your beliefs are, or disbeliefs/unbeliefs. You have choices to make during your lifetime. Get and stay on the right road and you'll be fine. I am actually the exact opposite of a daemon, and your beliefs are none of my concern. I can't interfere in your life choices, it is for YOU to decide. My "compatriots" are having fun with Dawkins, by the way. He is very unhappy.

Jan 13, 2019
@SEU you do realize a daemon is by definition:
"Daemons are benevolent or benign nature spirits, beings of the same nature as both mortals and deities, similar to ghosts, chthonic heroes, spirit guides, " https://en.wikipe...thology)

You said you are the exact opposite which would be a demon.
"A demon is a supernatural and often malevolent being prevalent in religion, occultism, literature, fiction, mythology and folklore. " https://en.wikipe...ki/Demon

Jan 13, 2019
From S_E_U:
...Dark Matter would be also subject to being pulled into a Black Hole just as normal...

Actually, guys,
...
Which meant that any/all 'exotic' (relativistic, non-EM-interacting) DM particles would immediately proceed, directly and unhindered, to fall into the nearest Black Hole at the speed of light!

Unless it was EMITTED by the black hole... (at the speed of light)
says Whyde

Even if emitted by a hypothetical Black Hole, it would still be drawn back into the Black Hole again, since the gravitation pull of the BH overcomes the velocity of the DM "particles", similar to a vacuum cleaner.

Jan 13, 2019
@SEU you do realize a daemon is by definition:
"Daemons are benevolent or benign nature spirits, beings of the same nature as both mortals and deities, similar to ghosts, chthonic heroes, spirit guides, " https://en.wikipe...thology)
says child jimmybobber

I am not going to quibble about the spelt word. Wikipaedia is often inaccurate, jimmybobber. You are welcome to what you believe to be correct, even if not.

Jan 13, 2019
From S_E_U:
...Dark Matter would be also subject to being pulled into a Black Hole just as normal...

Actually, guys,
...
Which meant that any/all 'exotic' (relativistic, non-EM-interacting) DM particles would immediately proceed, directly and unhindered, to fall into the nearest Black Hole at the speed of light!

Unless it was EMITTED by the black hole... (at the speed of light)
says Whyde

Even if emitted by a hypothetical Black Hole, it would still be drawn back into the Black Hole again, since the gravitation pull of the BH overcomes the velocity of the DM "particles", similar to a vacuum cleaner.
says I

There was an article not long ago where it was said that particles of Matter are emitted through the jets of the Black Hole, but that some of it is pulled back into the BH even if traveling at c. So that it should be the same with the hypothetical DM, when you consider that nearby Stars are gradually pulled in.

Jan 13, 2019
Unless it was EMITTED by the black hole... (at the speed of light)
says Whyde

Even if emitted by a hypothetical Black Hole, it would still be drawn back into the Black Hole again, since the gravitation pull of the BH overcomes the velocity of the DM "particles", similar to a vacuum cleaner.
says I

There was an article not long ago where it was said that particles of Matter are emitted through the jets of the Black Hole, but that some of it is pulled back into the BH even if traveling at c. So that it should be the same with the hypothetical DM, when you consider that nearby Stars are gradually pulled in.

What's the ONE thing a "hypothetical BH" expresses (massively) that we can definitely see?
And which DOESN'T get pulled back into that BH?
Gravity.
Just something to ponder...

Jan 13, 2019
There was an article not long ago where it was said that particles of Matter are emitted through the jets of the Black Hole, but that some of it is pulled back into the BH even if traveling at c. So that it should be the same with the hypothetical DM, when you consider that nearby Stars are gradually pulled in.
I'm not going to be dragged in to this gannet squawk fest between @RC and @SEU, but I just wanted to say this little collection of statements by @SEU displays such a breathtaking lack of scientific knowledge and discipline, that one doesn't know whether to laugh or cry at the sheer ignorance and idiocy displayed.

Jan 14, 2019
This is now becoming as bad as the climate deniers.

Literally ALL evidence points to the climate warming, and it being due to human influence, just as literally ALL evidence points to the existence of a particle that simply doesn't interact with light but has mass.

It really has come down to two options.
The foundation of physics, relativity, which has been tested to ridiculous precision for more than a century, is wrong...
or
There are particles that don't interact with light but have mass, which is entirely consistent with ALL known physics and also explains why it's practically impossible for us to detect.

Gosh it's so difficult, which one should a rational, intelligent person bet on?

Jan 14, 2019
It appears SEU, Benni and RC just cannot help themselves.
No matter how often they are shown to be wrong, they persist in ridiculing themselves.
And the never seen to pick up any new knowledge, no matter how often even simple things are explained to them.

Jan 14, 2019
Unless it was EMITTED by the black hole... (at the speed of light)
says Whyde

Even if emitted by a hypothetical Black Hole, it would still be drawn back into the Black Hole again, since the gravitation pull of the BH overcomes the velocity of the DM "particles", similar to a vacuum cleaner.
says I

There was an article not long ago where it was said that particles of Matter are emitted through the jets of the Black Hole, but that some of it is pulled back into the BH even if traveling at c. So that it should be the same with the hypothetical DM, when you consider that nearby Stars are gradually pulled in.

What's the ONE thing a "hypothetical BH" expresses (massively) that we can definitely see?
And which DOESN'T get pulled back into that BH?
Gravity.
Just something to ponder...
says Whyde

Gravity isn't Matter. It's a weak force; unless they've changed its designation. It's concentrated within a BH to attract Mass.

Jan 14, 2019
-contd-
@Whyde
As Gravity attracts incoming Mass to a BH, it gradually becomes a bit stronger at the surface of the BH as the levels of Mass build up and are compressed (density) by that Gravity. The force of Gravity remains on the surface of the Black Hole in spite of its compressed density since the "work" is at the surface and outwards from that surface.
Gravity doesn't get "pulled back" into the BH since it hasn't left. On the Earth, Gravity pulls on Mass downwards but is limited by distance and other factors of the Mass that's above the surface of Earth due to Earth's Gravity not being as strong and concentrated as that within a hypothetical Black Hole.
What is Gravity? All it is, is Mass being attracted to Mass. The closer together the 2 Masses, the stronger the gravitational pull to join together. That's why some Black Holes are pretty well dormant and not actively swallowing Star Mass - when the Stars are too far for the Black Hole's gravitational pull to reach them.

Jan 14, 2019
-contd-
@Whyde
It should be the same with hypothetical Dark Matter, which should also be pulled into the Black Hole since the DM is said to interact with Gravity - and directly or indirectly with normal Matter.
So if Dark Matter is pulled into a Black Hole - the question now is: Does the Dark Matter build up on the surface of the Black Hole the same as normal Matter does? Does it accumulate level by level (density) the same way that ordinary Matter does? It should if it is an alternate form of Mass that reacts with both Gravity and normal Mass.
Gravity is 0 at the centre of a Black Hole where it is no longer needed. It is too compacted there for Gravity to pull anything.

Jan 14, 2019
@jimmybobber
You said you are the exact opposite which would be a demon.


He also claims to be alien inhabiting a human host.

Jan 14, 2019
ph seu, you missed it. You didn't squint hard enough through that brass spirit horn you use for a telescope...

The DM is greased lightning!
Slipped right in between all the ordinary matter
& down the oubliette of singular distinction.
Carrying it's kit of gravitational mass with it.
This would attract the ordinary mass into following.
Cause, you know, you ordinary's are such copycats.
Not a spark of originality.

"Now remember son! The job isn't finished until the paperwork is done."

Jan 14, 2019
@SkyLight
@Ojorf.

About time you two stopped stroking each other's troll-diicks and started to properly discern between interlocutors before opening your mouths to troll/insult one (ie, me) whom ongoing mainstream reports are increasingly confirming correct all along on many fronts....eg, latest such....

https://phys.org/...ell.html

...wherein is YET ANOTHER VARIATION making a mockery of the naive/simplistic Type Ia 'standard candle' assumptions/claims/techniques relied on by BB/Inflation/Accelerated-Expansion etc FANTASY 'interpretations' of REAL observational data. Yet more evidence of the correctness of my longstanding observations made to @RNP, IMP etc. :)

ps: Intelligent readers/discoursers/scientists have long understood this obvious DEBATING principle: just because one engages in discussions with others, it should NOT be automatically ASSUMED by anyone that that one agrees with those others' views/claims.


Jan 14, 2019
-contd-
@Whyde
It should be the same with hypothetical Dark Matter, which should also be pulled into the Black Hole since the DM is said to interact with Gravity - and directly or indirectly with normal Matter.
So if Dark Matter is pulled into a Black Hole - the question now is: Does the Dark Matter build up on the surface of the Black Hole the same as normal Matter does? Does it accumulate level by level (density) the same way that ordinary Matter does? It should if it is an alternate form of Mass that reacts with both Gravity and normal Mass.
Gravity is 0 at the centre of a Black Hole where it is no longer needed. It is too compacted there for Gravity to pull anything.

Sounds like you think they are real. You should share that with Benni.
And I disagree with your last sentences as to gravity being 0.The piece of mass at the center (atom, quark, whatever) will express it's own gravity (albeit weakly). It will never be 0 as long as it is mass.

Jan 14, 2019
@jimmybobber
You said you are the exact opposite which would be a demon.


He also claims to be alien inhabiting a human host.
says Philharmonic

FALSE. I have NEVER said that I'm an alien anything, nor "inhabiting" a human host. Provide the evidence for your assertions - or STFU

Jan 14, 2019
-contd-
@Whyde
It should be the same with hypothetical DM, which should also be pulled into the Black Hole since the DM is said to interact with Gravity - and directly or indirectly with normal Matter.
So if Dark Matter is pulled into a Black Hole - the question now is: Does the Dark Matter build up on the surface of the Black Hole the same as normal Matter does? Does it accumulate level by level (density) the same way that ordinary Matter does? It should if it is an alternate form of Mass that reacts with both Gravity and normal Mass.
Gravity is 0 at the centre of a Black Hole where it is no longer needed. It is too compacted there for Gravity to pull anything.

Sounds like you think they are real. You should share that with Benni.
And I disagree with your last sentences as to gravity being 0.The piece of mass at the center (atom, quark, whatever) will express it's own gravity (albeit weakly). It will never be 0 as long as it is mass.
says Whyde

HO HO HO

Jan 14, 2019
-contd-
@Whyde
Old Kris Kringle here with more of the same. Share what with Benni? Sounds like WHAT do I think are real, Whyde? How often do I have to state the obvious status of Dark Matter and Black Holes - that they are BOTH HYPOTHETICAL? I can't say they are real and I can't say they are not. But we shall see (in the coming decades or years if these "things" are real. I'm certain that Benni also understands that a hypothesis is ONLY a hypothesis - no matter how much faerie dust and wishful thinking goes into it. So you disagree - saying:
The piece of mass at the center (atom, quark, whatever) will express it's own gravity (albeit weakly). It will never be 0 as long as it is mass.
says Whyde
Gravity IN the CENTRE of a Mass has to be at zero due to all of the DENSITY of Mass ABOVE that centre DISABLING the Gravity from attracting MORE Mass TO the CENTRE of that Mass. However, at the SURFACE of a Mass, Gravity is still capable of attracting MORE Mass to the Mass AT SURFACE

Jan 14, 2019
-contd-
@Whyde
Too late to add to my last sentence above, so I will repeat it with an addendum.
However, at the SURFACE of a Mass, Gravity is still capable of attracting MORE Mass to the Mass that is ALREADY AT or ON the surface


Elementary, my dear Watson.

Jan 14, 2019
-contd-
@Whyde
Too late ...
However, at the SURFACE of a Mass, Gravity is still capable of attracting MORE Mass to the Mass that is ALREADY AT or ON the surface


Elementary, my dear Watson.

Sorry, You're no Mr. Holmes.
The expression of gravity at the surface is a direct result of the mass beneath it. Any single volume of mass within the total volume of mass contributes gravity to the total volume's surface ability to "attract MORE mass". If a particular section is denser, just means more gravity expressed (and contributed) by that section.

Jan 14, 2019
He also claims to be alien inhabiting a human host.
says Philharmonic

FALSE. I have NEVER said that I'm an alien anything, nor "inhabiting" a human host. Provide the evidence for your assertions - or STFU

From a comment you made on Jan 1st;
-contd-
@Whyde

Humans are interesting organisms. Yes Whyde, you/they and my human host and human friends are made of Star-stuff, as Sagan is famous for saying.


https://phys.org/...rse.html

Jan 14, 2019
He also claims to be alien inhabiting a human host.
says Philharmonic

FALSE. I have NEVER said that I'm an alien anything, nor "inhabiting" a human host. Provide the evidence for your assertions - or STFU

From a comment you made on Jan 1st;
-contd-
@Whyde

Humans are interesting organisms. Yes Whyde, you/they and my human host and human friends are made of Star-stuff, as Sagan is famous for saying.


https://phys.org/...rse.html

Perhaps you can chalk it up to seasonal libations...

Jan 15, 2019
@Whyde
LOL I don't indulge in those kinds of spirits.
Everything else is correct. However, I am most certainly not an "alien". And yes, humans ARE interesting organisms. I am in awe of the structural nature of the human body.

Jan 15, 2019
@Whyde
For example - the ability to express excess heat and moisture through the skin's pores and breathing apparatus, as well as through certain organs that filter nutrients for use and removal of waste and excess heat along with it. It is a marvelous design, the human body that works in perfect coordination like a well thought-out designed and programmed machine.

Jan 15, 2019
https://en.wikipe..._theorem

1) A spherically symmetric body affects external objects gravitationally as though all of its mass were concentrated at a point at its centre.
2) If the body is a spherically symmetric shell..., no net gravitational force is exerted by the shell on any object inside, regardless of the object's location within the shell.

inside a solid sphere of constant density, the gravitational force within the object varies linearly with distance from the centre, becoming zero by symmetry at the centre of mass. This can be seen as follows: take a point within such a sphere, at a distance r from the centre of the sphere. Then you can ignore all the shells of greater radius (shell theorem). So, the remaining mass m is proportional to r^3 (because it is based on volume), and the gravitational force exerted on it is proportional to m/r^2 (inverse square law), so the overall gravitational effect is proportional to r^3/r^2 = r, so is linear in r.

Jan 15, 2019
They've been told about the shell theorem before, but didn't get it then. Applause for saying it, but don't be thinking they're gonna stop trolling because they were proven wrong multiple times. They're trolls.

Jan 15, 2019
Yeah, there's also the crap about the BH's "surface", but it would be a waste of time pointing out that obvious error.

Or the "Gravity is 0 at the centre of a Black Hole where it is no longer *needed* " as if somebody (God?) is doing stock-taking?

Or this: "DENSITY of Mass ABOVE that centre DISABLING the Gravity..." blah blah. So, errmm, gravity gets disabled or switched off somehow??

Looks like @SEU's Supreme Being (i.e. the one responsible for the "human body that works in perfect coordination like a well thought-out designed and programmed machine") has no idea of how to build a Universe!

Jan 15, 2019
@Whyde
LOL I don't indulge in those kinds of spirits.

Perhaps you're "human host" should...

Jan 15, 2019
Here's @SEU's "Supreme Being:" https://pbs.twimg...pg:large

These individuals are literally insane.

Jan 15, 2019
Here's @SEU's "Supreme Being"
Holy Tomoley, it's hard to resist a Saviour who kicks serious ass!

Jan 15, 2019
@SEU
and my human host


Humans don't *have* bodies, we *are* bodies. You're either human or you're not. What is it?

Jan 15, 2019
@Whyde
LOL I don't indulge in those kinds of spirits.

Perhaps you're "human host" should...
says Whyde

Why should he? He's a lot more sane and lucid than your friends, Da Pussyman aka SkyLight aka Da Scheide and Captain Beelzebub, who often exhibit drunkeness in their dumb comments.
I exercise my "freedom of speech" here in physorg, and they exercise their right to disagree with me due to their having been indoctrinated by ......
But that only shows how easy it is to pull the proverbial wool over the eyes of weak-minded individuals who don't know that they're weak-minded.

Jan 15, 2019
-contd-
@Whyde
Too late ...
However, at the SURFACE of a Mass, Gravity is still capable of attracting MORE Mass to the Mass that is ALREADY AT or ON the surface


Elementary, my dear Watson.

Sorry, You're no Mr. Holmes.
The expression of gravity at the surface is a direct result of the mass beneath it. Any single volume of mass within the total volume of mass contributes gravity to the total volume's surface ability to "attract MORE mass". If a particular section is denser, just means more gravity expressed (and contributed) by that section.
says Whyde

The Gravity extends only a short distance underneath the surface of the BH, just like on Earth, and is replaced by Density which compresses and compacts the Mass under the surface towards the centre at a much greater volume than could Gravity. The Gravity had already done its work in attracting and drawing in all of that Mass - layer by layer - including Dark Matter, if it exists.

Jan 16, 2019
-contd-
@Whyde

Gravity doesn't Compress. It is a 'weak force' that attracts and draws Matter down toward the Mass that has already landed/settled down to the surface. If Gravity was at the centre of the Black Hole, you would not SEE jets in which Mass is ejected at the Black Hole's poles. The Mass at the centre would be held firmly and would not be able to move in any direction if Gravity was present. No jets in the presence of Gravity at the centre of a Black Hole. It would be physically/scientifically impossible.

Do you SEE JETS in those artist's impressions of Black Holes? Since you do, Whyde, notice that the jets are coming out of both poles - which means that the jets are GOING THROUGH THE CENTRE OF THE BH where there is Mass, and that Mass is being EJECTED THROUGH THE CENTRE with those jets. Which means, no Gravity is present in the exact centre of the Black Hole with all that ejecta leaving.

Jan 16, 2019
-contd-
@Whyde
It looks like SkyLight aka Da Pussyman has posted an agreement with my own posts above regarding Gravity being at Zero at the centre of a Black Hole, when he says:

2) If the body is a spherically symmetric shell..., no net gravitational force is exerted by the shell on any object inside, regardless of the object's location within the shell.

inside a solid sphere of constant density, the gravitational force within the object varies linearly with distance from the centre, becoming zero by symmetry at the centre of mass.


A Black Hole is a solid sphere of constant density - la la la la la - varies linearly with distance from the centre, becoming ZERO by symmetry at the centre of Mass.

Thanks SkyLight aka Da Pussyman for your "Shell Theorem".

Jan 16, 2019
It's a really big turtle; so, it produces a lot of 'dark matter.'

Jan 16, 2019
I exercise my "freedom of speech" here in physorg, and they exercise their right to disagree with me due to their having been indoctrinated by...
Rich irony indeed, coming from a guy who prefers what's written in the Bible over objective scientific discourse.
It looks like SkyLight ... has posted an agreement with my own posts above regarding Gravity being at Zero at the centre of a Black Hole
Nope, just trying to set you right on the mechanism which results in there being zero NET gravitational force at the center of a sphere of uniform composition. Your remark about this being in agreement with what you said is unsurprisingly wide of the mark and indicative of your lack of scientific knowledge and training.
A Black Hole is a solid sphere of constant density
Wrong - do you have a reference for this false statement?
Thanks SkyLight ... for your "Shell Theorem"
Not mine - Isaac Newton's, from 1687. Do try to keep up.

Jan 16, 2019
Gravity doesn't Compress. It is a 'weak force' that attracts and draws Matter down toward the Mass that has already landed/settled down to the surface
...and the matter which has been "drawn down" exerts a force on the matter below it. Force -> pressure -> compression. Try to engage a few more brain cells - it won't hurt a bit, and may help you to understand things a little better.
If Gravity was at the centre of the Black Hole, you would not SEE jets in which Mass is ejected at the Black Hole's poles
This, like so much of what you write on this and other subjects, is pure word-salad - meaningless verbiage concocted to sound as if you actually know what you're talkíng about. Jets emitted by a BH don't actually originate in the BH itself, but are formed from material swept up by the BH from its' surroundings, and redirected - by magnetic fields and other mechanisms - into bipolar jets. BH jets have nothing to do with Shell Theorem, or "zero gravity" at the BH center.

Jan 16, 2019
Just so everything is clear, the Earth is not a solid sphere of constant density. The density increases toward the center. In fact, below the crust, its density is high enough that it can no longer exist as solid, like the crust, but becomes a liquid, the mantle. This is confirmed by P- and S-waves from earthquakes and the detonations of nuclear weapons which show a discontinuity between crust and mantle.

No more could anyone claim that a black hole is of constant density to its center than they could claim the Earth is of constant density to its center. These are primary physical facts.

Jan 16, 2019
Similarly, it needs to be pointed out that a BH is not a solid body in the usual sense, nor does it have a radius in the usual sense.
At the center of a black hole, as described by general relativity, lies a gravitational singularity, a region where the spacetime curvature becomes infinite (Wiki)
Much to the consternation of ordinary folk, and especially math-illiterates like @Benni, this leads to the conclusion that
the singular region has zero volume. It can also be shown that the singular region contains all the mass of the black hole solution. The singular region can thus be thought of as having infinite density
The most commonly-quoted radius of a BH is the Schwarzschild radius, i.e. the radius of a theoretical sphere surrounding the singularity, the surface of which can be defined as
an event horizon, "a perfect unidirectional membrane: causal influences can cross it in only one direction"
BH's are MUCH different from stars, planets, etc.

Jan 16, 2019
Nobody knows what's inside a black hole. Our best theory gives us infinities, a practically sure marker of the breakdown of the theory at extremes. What we know is, one has mass, and can have angular momentum and EM charge. These can all be detected outside the event horizon. Nothing inside the event horizon can be detected and any statements about it are pure speculation, including singularities.

Jan 16, 2019
Has mainstream science considered the hydrino perhaps? No?

"Brilliant Light Power has developed a new commercially competitive, non-polluting, plasma-based primary source of massive power from the conversion of hydrogen atoms of water molecules to dark matter, the previously unidentified matter that makes up most of the mass of the universe. The SunCell® that was invented to harness the new power source catalytically converts hydrogen directly into dark matter form called Hydrino®"

-Perhaps they should like to give dr Randal Mills a call? Or wait til they can buy a car with a suncell in it, and fly over to speak with him in person.

Jan 16, 2019
Ahh, you must mean Randall Mills, the guy who believes that Quantum Mechanics, the most successful theory in the history of science and which is tested trillions of times every day, is WRONG and who believes that the hydrogen atom can drop below the lowest energy state known as the ground state to become what he terms a "hydrino". Such a configuration has never been observed to exist and indeed cannot exist according to QM.

Never to be held back by such piffling constraints, his company purport to extract energy from such "hydrinos" and is currently screwing people out of tens of millions of dollars while he puts the finishing touches to his "hydrino"-powered products.

Robert L. Park, emeritus professor of physics at the University of Maryland has said
they have nothing to sell but bull shit. The company is therefore dependent on investors with deep pockets and shallow brains
So, I'm pretty sure that NO scientist worthy of the title will be calling this fraud.

Jan 16, 2019
Oh, hi Benni! - how ya doin? Got that nukular-powered mop workin' yet?

Jan 16, 2019
Ahh, you must mean Randall Mills, the guy who believes that Quantum Mechanics, the most successful theory in the history of science and which is tested trillions of times every day, is WRONG
Yeah yeah thats what they said about jesus.
they have nothing to sell but bull shit. The company is therefore dependent on investors with deep pockets and shallow brains
What was that like, 20yrs ago? Was dark matter invented 20yrs ago? What doe MSS and your EMERITUS guy have to say about that stuff?

Im not defending mills mind you, Im just highlighting your lack of definitive counter-argument.

I find these curiously compelling
https://brilliant...a-video/

Jan 16, 2019
@ everyone
I assume that everyone who has read my posts above understands that I was responding to what Skylight had posted from Wikipaedia -

2) If the body is a spherically symmetric shell..., no net gravitational force is exerted by the shell on any object inside, regardless of the object's location within the shell.

inside a solid sphere of constant density, the gravitational force within the object varies linearly with distance from the centre, becoming zero by symmetry at the centre of mass.
said Skylight

- "becoming zero by symmetry at the centre of mass" is almost exactly what I had been saying first, when I said -

"Gravity IN the CENTRE of a Mass has to be at zero due to all of the DENSITY of Mass ABOVE that centre DISABLING the Gravity from attracting MORE Mass TO the CENTRE of that Mass. However, at the SURFACE of a Mass, Gravity is still capable of attracting MORE Mass to the Mass AT SURFACE

Apparently, Skydark didn't understand his own words


Jan 16, 2019
It's a really big turtle; so, it produces a lot of 'dark matter.'
says JaxPavan

LOL Is that production of Dark Matter from a turtle similar to the production of slime from a Hagfish?
:)
So Dark Matter is produced by a turtle? Does the turtle also get swallowed by a Black Hole?
:) :)

Jan 17, 2019
oh Phyllis, you are such an optimist. Cut it out, it's annoying!

seu & unreality & jax & benni & all the other wooloons are not human.
They are Artificial Stupids.
Bot sockpuppets programmed to agitprop nonsense on behalf of their puppetmasters.
saudis or russians, really makes no difference.

Jan 17, 2019
All this BH and DM hype have turned this BH in to a mundane lifeless Sagittarius A*

It was only some months since a blackhole described, like the earth having zero gravity at its centre of mass
as it was believed a blackhole was a singularity
just as it was believed what when in never came out
as now gravity is zero at its centre, it is not a singularity, it ejects mass out its spin-axis
and now this non spinning blackhole has been dealt a mortal blow
as its origins lie in a pulsar star
as the latest over hyped darkmatter is nailing the final nails in this blackholes coffin
all myths from the quantum fluctuations that have added this spicy blackhole an infamous fearsome reputation
all these have disappeared into the quantum fluctuations, as a more mundane star has emerged out these burning embers like the phoenix from the ashes
and if this darkmatter doesn't pull its socks up, it's going to have admit it was matter all the time

Jan 18, 2019
@SEU

It's the "world turtle," an explanation for how the universe is held up, interestingly found in Chinese, Hindu, Native American and Scientologist mythologies.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more