Re: Dark matter, antimatter, Pioneer slowing down, and so forth.

From: Mark Fergerson (nunya_at_biz.ness)
Date: 07/03/04 

Date: Sat, 03 Jul 2004 07:31:06 -0700

Neodymium wrote:

> Occurred to me seeing a depiction of our galaxy embedded in an invisible
> mist of dark matter... What if normal matter doesn't even really exist?
> What if what we think of as normal matter is really just a perturbed,
> excited state of the dark matter substrate?

   The ghost of Dirac rises from the grave...

> The dark matter could be like a semiconductor, feeling gravity and a
> unified force. The latter interaction allows excited states to develop,
> spontaneously through thermal noise and otherwise, which manifest as
> particle/antiparticle pairs. These would then be like the electrons and
> holes in a semiconductor.

   Why is the recombination time so long (why are "stable"
particles stable)?

<some snippage here and there>

> The electromagnetic, weak, and strong force would arise among the normal
> matter particles of the universe as mere residuals of the potent grand
> unified force. Dark matter particles would be neutral to the GUF normally,
> but not when ionized. An ionized dark matter particle would become visible
> as a symmetric partner of some kind to the liberated normal matter
> particle -- mirror matter. Why, then, aren't there huge mass differences
> between particles and antiparticles? Because most of the ionized dark
> particle's mass is masked. For the "hole" normal matter particle to move
> does not require the ionized dark particle move. It just requires a nearby
> dark particle donate the hole's antiparticle, and the energy and therefore
> mass being moved is only that of the antiparticle, or the excitation
> energy. Hence, in fact, a particle and its antiparticle should appear to
> have the same rest mass.

   Interesting conclusion from what's essentially handwaving.

> The overabundance of matter over antimatter and all other CP symmetry
> violations then result from the underlying asymmetry between holes and
> conduction-band particles. The latter exist independently of dark matter,
> and can travel freely. The Pioneer probe plus its invisible mini-halo of
> dark matter, or the solar system, or the galaxy, are all *doped*
> "semiconductors" with an overabundance of particles or holes. The universe
> as a whole seems to be doped, maybe because of its composition in terms of
> dark matter particle types. If they're likened to "dark atoms" with a
> "dark nucleus" orbited by normal matter particles, the universe must
> contain dark atoms with a half-full shell and dark atoms with a slightly
> less or slightly more than half full shell, the latter of which produce
> the observed normal matter. The universe is like an N-type or a P-type
> semiconductor.

   Quick; predict its chirality before Uncle Al detects it!

> Any galaxy that goes over our deSitter horizon is
> no longer bound to us any more -- it's on a separate brane floating out
> there in hyperspace!

   Can't be completely unbound; as they say, "gravity never
sleeps". There's gotta be somewhere for the residual
gravitational attraction energy to go.

> The dark matter particles respond to some fully-unified (including
> gravity) force. This force governs all the particles, normal and dark, but
> strongly attracts them to form branes -- somehow. Like the strong nuclear
> force, it's so potent that "unified-charged" complexes are almost never
> observed roaming free, any more than color-charged objects are. Only
> residual forces are normally seen outside of particle accelerators, black
> holes, active galactic nuclei, and the Big Bang. In the case of the strong
> force these hold nuclei together and still involve enough binding energy
> to make things like nuclear weapons possible. In the unified case, the
> binding energy from the RESIDUAL FORCES is nothing less than the energy of
> matter/antimatter annihilation, so imagine how strong the UNDERLYING force
> is!

   You need to be able to predict some numbers eventually.

> A brane basically superconducts bosons and semiconducts fermions, then;
> and it may experience residual forces that promote accretion below a
> critical size (and disintegration above it). Our universe may have
> resulted when branes collided (ekpyrosis), with much of the energy going
> into dark matter excitation that manifested as normal matter. The
> compositions of the colliding branes produced just enough N or P-type
> doping to give rise to a universe with more matter than antimatter within
> the newly merged brane. This is large enough it's now stretching itself
> apart as objects leave our deSitter horizon; the ionization of gravitons
> from the brane makes it have a "surface tension" too weak to hold it all
> together. It's like a water drop coming off a faucet, eventually it necks
> down and breaks off. Something like this also may occur in black holes,
> with the piece of brane fabric "inside" the hole becoming detached. This
> leaves a tear in our brane, which is an absence with angular momentum and
> other qualities. It's an unstable one, because there are loose unified-
> charges on the boundary, and so it slowly decays. As the boundary shrinks,
> brane tension closes the wound more and more rapidly, eventually sealing
> it; the disturbance to the surrounding brane manifests as matter, i.e.
> Hawking radiation occurs as the hole evaporates.

   Another prediction from handwaving. Numbers?

> The dark matter's internal forces must tend to promote the formation of
> three-dimensional bound sheets of the stuff, for the brane to have the
> gross geometry it has. These may be quasicrystalline, and black holes may
> not be the only possible defect in the brane. Other, extremely interesting
> kinds of defect may be possible, which would appear to us as singularities
> of other kinds.

   Care to predict a few?

<snip stuff that made me dizzy>

> Experimental tests may be able to discern whether this hypothesis works
> out. For example, an object coasting relative to the brane instead of at
> rest may experience some friction and eventually slow down. The brane may
> be a resistance-free superconductor as well as semiconductor of fermions,
> but probably only when the fermions are able to combine into spin-even
> larger structures (i.e. composite bosons), just as electrons in a
> superconductor pair up into Cooper pairs. So, one test would be to see if
> an electron shot from an accelerator into a hard vacuum with negligible
> electric and magnetic fields will, if it travels far enough, experience a
> deflection not attributable to what electromagnetic fields remain nor to
> gravity. Moreover, if this is done in near-Earth space, whether the
> direction of the deflection push changes with a yearly cycle. The
> Michaelson-Morley experiment didn't find any anisotropies with photon
> propagation in vacuum, but photons are bosonic. Maybe it's different for a
> loose fermion. Let's find out.

   Oh, boy. And we thought Uncle Al was having a grandiose
moment...

<snip even dizzier-making stuff>

> On the other hand, FTL travel's future will look brigter than ever,
> since all it requires is going supersonic within the brane. Observing a
> superluminal object throwing off Cherencov radiation in pure vacuum would
> be a smoking gun for LR, and probably for this entire theoretical
> exercise. Producing one in a lab (as debris from an LHC collision? In the
> vicinity of a lab-created microscopic black hole?) would do it too. And it
> doesn't mean giving up on wormholes -- all kinds of weird multiply-
> connected 3-manifolds are possible, so shortcuts in the brane are sure
> possible, and the journey time can be very short if the "wormhole fabric"
> has a high speed of sound in it -- i.e. it has a huge speed of light
> inside, and seems to us in internal coordinates to be extremely short even
> if it's long in the embedding 11-space. And it might not be as blamed hard
> to keep the middle of the wormhole from pinching off.

   Wanna talk phonons?

<sorry, brainpuke event>

> There has to be some logic, some *reason*, for moonshine -- it's too
> spooky to be a meaningless coincidence. There's something big and
> fundamental we're missing, just as we might be missing a big and
> fundamental quasiperiodic event-lattice or similar underlying the spooky
> EPR phenomena.

   You've out-Sarfatti'ed Sarfatti! Congratulations!

   Mark L. (pardon me while I wipe my ear" Fergerson

Loading