Re: neutrino interaction

Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote:
> Raymond Yohros wrote:
> > because we can only
> > sense its FX over spacetime. it makes sense to
> > conceive that it could be dead stars,plannets,
> > meteors,commets,dust and pieces from exploding stars,etc.
>
> No, this makes *not* sense, since we already know that about 90%
> of dark matter is not baryonic!
>

can this gravitation FX be produce by something other that matr?

>
> >>The electromagnetic force still has the same power then. It doesn't
> >>matter that everything gets colder.
> >>
> > yes, of curse but the weakforce will be gone!
>
> Why on earth do you think so?
>

Because the weakforce can't survive in empty cold enviroments.
the constant friction of matenergy is what keeps the weakforce
going.

>
> >>>and what communication particle will be the most effective producing
> >>>a gravitational effect?
> >>
> >>Depends on what you mean with "communication particle".
> >>
> >
> >
> > particles moving at c
>
> Why do you call that "communication particle"?
>

electrons can also be communication particles but they
are easely trap by nuclei. any particle that's moving
in spacetime at great speed it's a communication particle.
they carry information from one place to another.

>
> Do you mean at *exactly* c, or is approximately at c enough? If you
> mean the first, that rules out neutrinos, since these move at speed
> slightly below c.
>

yes, i was speaking loosly.

>
> > yes but i imagine neutrino density alot stronger than
> > photonic energy when all the stars are dead.
>
> Why do you imagine that? Have you ever done a calculation on that,
> or simply looked at the numbers? You *do* know that numbers for the
> photon and the neutrino density are available in cosmology books,
> don't you?

i know the numbers now and for times behind and ahead
but we are talking about the future of spacetime when
stars are no longer visible in the sky anymore!
can you imagine neutrino density by then?

regards
raymond
www.sonofsound.com

.