It is currently Sun Dec 01, 2024 12:49 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:49 am 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep 25, 2013
Posts: 3084
Hey folks,

My brain sometimes likes working on problems in physics, even though I don't have a Masters or Doctorate or anything in Physics. I just know there are problems, and I like to try and think of solutions. There's one idea that's been turning in my head for a while, ever since I read an article talking about the weirdness of how Dark Matter might behave if it were a particle that had no interactions outside of gravity. That idea was Dark Matter Decoupling, because, if everything else was "coupled" together back in time at some point during the Big Bang, then Dark Matter would also have a point of being coupled with everything else as well. However, that was just what started leading to this other idea, and I'd like to think of a way of it being testable.

What if Dark Matter had a quantized energy level that caused it to have a near-0 percent chance of appearing near the center of wherever you looked? I mean, when we look for an electron, we find it not in a specific spot, but in the rings around the atomic nucleus. We find it in those probability shells. Thing is, we never find it in the center of the shell - we find it on the shell. What if the Dark Matter particle's energy levels puts its shell into something so large that we can't normally see it? What if its shell was the size of the solar system? Intrinsically, at our scale, if you look for it, you wouldn't be able to find it. Heck, at that scale, it would almost never appear to be in the spot that you're looking for it in. You could only ever describe it as being "somewhere" in our solar system, right? So it couldn't interact with anything, or would interact so dumbly rarely as to be never.

I need to know a source that can help me learn the math in describing something like this, and then try to figure out a prediction that could only be described by something like this.

_________________
Quote:
"If you refuse to use rock, you will never beat scissors." — Galef, Dakka Dakka Forums


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2019 4:23 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 30, 2013
Posts: 16394
Location: Secret Lair
Dark Matter is anything we can't see that has the same scaling in energy density as regular matter. It is sometimes referred to as "non-luminous" matter. There is no proof that it exists, because we can't currently see or detect it. It is theorized to exist because it would explain a whole bunch of things that otherwise don't obey the normal laws of gravity on a cosmic scale. Most of the credible theories currently relating to the theorized existence of dark matter require it to be made up of subatomic particles that don't quite meet the scale you are talking about.


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 05, 2019 9:04 pm 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Jun 06, 2014
Posts: 1322
Quote:
What if the Dark Matter particle's energy levels puts its shell into something so large that we can't normally see it? What if its shell was the size of the solar system?


I had a similar thought once about entropy. How perhaps, you could exceed maximum entropy and achive a new order. It would be a negative of the previous order

Like:
+Hot
Cold - max entropy
-Hot


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 08, 2019 4:00 pm 
Offline
Conqueror of Eldangard
User avatar

Joined: Sep 25, 2013
Posts: 14140
Location: Kamloops, BC
Identity: Male
An interesting concept. Does the probability distribution of a particle really affect how frequently it interacts with other particles? Just because it's hard to tell exactly where it is doesn't intuitively mean it shouldn't be interacting with something inside its probable distribution range.

_________________
Cato wrote:
CotW is a method for ranking cards in increasing order of printability.

*"To YMTC it up" means to design cards that have value mostly from a design perspective. i.e. you would put them in a case under glass in your living room and visitors could remark upon the wonderful design principles, with nobody ever worring if the cards are annoying/pointless/confusing in actual play

TPrizesW
TPortfolioW


Like this post
Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group