Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Dark energy? huh!

Jul 12, 2010 4:54AM PDT

Even the experts don't know what it truly is or rather its something that must exist in some way. Wow, the big brains can't point their finger at it but explain as best they can what it must be doing. It's like going to accident and constructing the sequences that lead up to it.

http://hubblesite.org/hubble_discoveries/dark_energy/

In math one of the biggest events is the introduction of the number "0". Without zero that becomes a place holder and obvious great value to numbers is that is means something, even though it's a zero. Maybe, in my way of thinking, dark energy is the ideal and perfect form of matter that is nothing. Being nothing, anything it comes across allows it free access and can't slow it down. IT DOESN'T CREATE ENERGY NOR WASTE IT, but allows anything that exists once it passes its barrier to impart what matter is as if a waste product. Matter thus acts as if it was the 1st presence but isn't as "nothing" was there 1st. Nothing as in nothing. Is it such a new force that it is something from nothing. The best way to describe this is one looking into a void(cliff hanging) and steps into it. Knowing nothing of what would happen beforehand and all becomes immediately come into play, the forces that exist become all too apparent. The apparent ease of passing into nothing is better than the forces that it leads behind those forces act in greater harmony and somehow effect the outcome, which under matter acts upon matter as in gravity, is at least slows down. When not present the dark energy forces being the closet allow its existence to be known as matter passes, to include all energies or substances. What do you think buck-o's -----Willy Happy

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
I have often wondered
Jul 12, 2010 6:08AM PDT

if either dark energy or dark matter really exist, or whether there are some errors, however minute, in the calculations that suggest these anomalies are needed.

Somehow neither fit the physics or chemistry that I learned about.

Mark

- Collapse -
The math
Jul 12, 2010 11:23AM PDT

What i find interesting is the math used to explain all this and other problems. They throw together the variables and constants, yada, yada and don't come out right. So they add or subject the equation to new variables until it matches they're wanted outcome. They use this to explain parallel universes, as in 10 levels to make it all happen. So, these same eggheads, Einstein being one figured an "universal constant" was needed to make the theory work, before darl energy was ever hit upon.

I don't know this level of math nor the principles it represents, yada, yada, but the thinking process does interest me. Of course the conclusions are open to debate or future proof. I truly don't understand is "string theory", I really think its BS, IMHO. -----Willy Happy

- Collapse -
If you think string theory sounds bogus,
Jul 12, 2010 11:50AM PDT

how do you feel about membrane theory? This is the one that came up with 10 dimensions but they say the math fits better with 11.

I love mathematicians and physicists. They sound so serious but come up with names like strange and gluons.

Diana

- Collapse -
One of the best, in my opinion
Jul 12, 2010 8:55PM PDT

was Richard Feynman, sadly no longer with us. I've been watching some of his lecture videos recently, mainly because of his style. He was such a humorous lecturer that watching them were brilliant, even though he lost me soon after the first mention of quarks, muons, and so forth. Happy

His lectures were in pure mathematics which is the only way apparently to describe quantum physics nowadays, but sadly my remaining brain cell cannot cope.

If you have Silverlight installed in your browsers, you might be interested in some of his lecture videos at Tuva;
http://research.microsoft.com/apps/tools/tuva/index.html

I'm not sure he ever spoke about dark energy and dark matter, but i would have liked to have seen his reaction to them.

Mark

- Collapse -
Mirror, mirror on the wall
Jul 12, 2010 11:17PM PDT

I read or saw something about membrane theory, maybe last yr. or so ago. It really was strange and if I remember right, they got into this as a way to "define" or make possible again, their conclusions. They kept on adding to the chalkboard until they figured it made sense. What gets me, this can only be done in math as they can't use some instrument to prove it. This goes beyond any sub-atomic particle, that a neutron or gluon, is!. That's why, I scratch my head as you say all you want via the math, if you can move variables around and even invent new ones to fit the equation. No wonder Einstein did his math in the head, to help prove his own conclusions before putting to paper, things change. Happy Now, if some other new force/theory comes into play, what will they call it? -----Willy Happy

- Collapse -
I remember reading that a proton
Jul 13, 2010 10:39AM PDT

contained three quarks held together by gluons. I'm sorry but I couldn't get past that statement. Every time I tried I got this picture of someone looking through this microscope and putting three quarks together and covering the whole thing with rubber cement (brush and all) Devil

Diana

- Collapse -
Ahh, quarks and gluons
Jul 13, 2010 8:28PM PDT

The fundamental particles...

Unless some bright spark asks, "So what are 'they' made of then?"

Or have they already done that? Happy

Mark

- Collapse -
String theory ....
Jul 13, 2010 8:37PM PDT
- Collapse -
Maybe the reason we keep finding smaller and smaller
Jul 13, 2010 8:55PM PDT

particles is that we are unable to see much larger ones due to our distance from them. Maybe, just maybe, we are just small particles that are part of the make up of some other larger entity and that larger entity is, likewise, a small particle in another...and on and on...

- Collapse -
MIB?
Jul 13, 2010 9:39PM PDT

I remember Men In Black, at the end of the movie, the camera zoomed out and out and out, until the whole Universe became just a marble, and some 'child being' rolling it into other 'marbles'.

I reckon you're right!

Mark

- Collapse -
Big bugs have small bugs
Jul 14, 2010 1:53AM PDT

upon their backs to bite them;
Small bugs have smaller ones, ad infinitum

I've been watching Morgan Freeman's programs on Science channel and they are fascinating but they seem to ask more questions than they answer.

I like the program about the Big Bang. According to scientists for every 1,000,000,001 bits of matter, there were only 1,000,000,000 bits of anti-matter. Therefore, the whole universe is composed of the leftovers.

Diana

- Collapse -
I could suspect that similar thoughts and conversations
Jul 14, 2010 2:05AM PDT

happened long before extensions of our vision such as telescopes and microscopes were invented.

- Collapse -
Make possible
Jul 14, 2010 2:39AM PDT

I recall an old TV variety show, maybe Ed Suliivan, where a bubble expert, one that use soap bubbles could make a "square bubble". Now, tell me you can't do that. The experts said, it couldn't be done. Right before our eyes and within seconds created a square bubble from "round bubbles". The square bubble was within the round bubbles as it caused barriers amongst themselves to produce the bubble, which during the last part was air filled to expand as a square.

I can only guess using our brains, we'll figure these things out. But, unfortunly it has already surpassed me long ago. I just want to understand the mechanics of it all w/o turning a wrench, savvy. -----Willy Happy

- Collapse -
(NT) Sounds like Phlogiston all over again. :-)
Jul 12, 2010 7:12PM PDT