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

More on Dark Matter, best yet

Sep 2, 2017 10:42AM PDT

Found a most interesting book on the dark matter topic. Actually one dealing totally with dark matter and trying to explain its existence. Further, arriving in the understand that WIMPs maybe the missing particle being the source. This topic goes on why it maybe the case. The author Dr. Freese goes to explain the breakdown of WIMPs leading to particles that continue on into "annihilation". Its this annihilation process that gets my
further interest even more. Understand the total annihilation is a process that is 100% done, Unlike fission the process of nuclear reactors currently used releases 1% of energy. Compared to 100% release that's one heck of an improvement. In turn this maybe the cause of dark energy. An entirely different subject, the
annihilation of virtual particles thought of existing in space that pop-up into exsistance yet are opposite
charges, attract and annihilate each other. Dark matter in its breakdown maybe also mimicking similar process
though not in its entirely. The simple breakdown of WIMPs leads to particles that can further either build-on or annihilate themselves. However, this maybe the foundation of hydrogen proliferation from basic free particles.

Reading the book produced yet another interesting topic, one of "dark stars". During the universe early big bang period, dark mater resided along with baryonic matter. Since gravity is about the only known action to effect dark matter as well as typical matter of star stuff. They proceeded to become star material, however including
dark matter. This being in the early universe a denser period. The properties of dark star matter doesn't create as much heat as known stars now but could collect materials far in excess of that required limits for normal star production. These huge stars once heated up began to ignite and being cooler weren't as hot but much brighter due to annihilation process. This ignition period depends on material collect would burn bright but still last
shorter and begin the process of collapse as fuel was exhausted. Thias leads to "black holes" which maybe the source of early HUGE black holes that should have existed in the early period. These black holes provided the start of and/or the clumpiness required for stars and galaxies. These early dark stars have long gone but those remaining if present would also be few, black holes of this period. The so-called later "inflation period" would kick-off after this time to proceed to what is our known universe.

While interesting, it is also a confusing subject for this writer. As I would think this mechanism would continue and understand no reason why it would stop. Of course, I'm just a reader of this but can ponder it all. Since dark matter continues to exist why hasn't been exhausted by now if 13.8B yrs. is long enough to do this or maybe not.

I made this post to know I found more info in this book than any other prior. Being released in 2014 allows it to contain newer info and data to be explained. The author hopes more understanding of the topic will be forth coming and it may. As more data is collected from better instruments, devices, sensors or detectors found on Earth or satellites does the duties required of them.

tada -----Willy Happy released on 9/1/2017

The Cosmic Cocktail
Author: K. Freese
ISBN: 9780691153353 (hard cover)

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Written by Clingy Matter Being?
Sep 2, 2017 11:29AM PDT
- Collapse -
(NT) Good one.
Sep 5, 2017 5:04PM PDT
- Collapse -
Thanks for the heads up, Willy.
Sep 2, 2017 3:31PM PDT

I've just finished editing.
Gen 1:3. And God said, "Let there be dark." Then there was dark. And God said, " Let there be light." Then there was light.
Thus endeth the reading. Happy
But, wait a minute! That sequence is already there, implied in Gen 1:1!
Oh, well, I guess we'll just have to wait to see who's right, as James always says.
BTW you compared "fission" to "the process of nuclear reactors". I'm sure you meant "fusion", right?
The blog below is the online version of Science News magazine. Spend some time on it and you'll get more dark matter than you can handle. Even better, the comment streams have some heavy-duty people from many disciplines on them, and most of them are friendly and willing to answer questions.
Better yet, it seems to be the entire contents of the paper magazine, without ads and for free.
https://www.sciencenews.org
Share and enjoy.

- Collapse -
Great source
Sep 5, 2017 12:56PM PDT

I love this stuff. Why is it a puzzle that something in the sub-atomic particle size can't be effected by my sneeze. It would a super nova of sorts compared to the size and probably would butterfly effect the world around me. It really can as I see it. -----Willy Happy

wait awhile, I need to correspond with my multi-verse double and see what he sees. Yeap, he's loony too. adios

- Collapse -
That's correct
Sep 5, 2017 12:50PM PDT

Fission is the tearing apart or smashing of atom(s) while fusion is the joining or combination of atom(s) that's general terms. Though they produce energy, fission is the typical one used as fusion is a more involved process. Fusion is one that the nuclear people want but more complicated. The Chinese will no thought want anything nuclear because of their dependence on foreign oil and home coal(dirty).

I review some white papers or online sources, sometimes they put it in rather raw form. Like, I'm no physicist, just a curious person. Another more recent book is "Cosmic Fuzz", read like an almanac IMHO. It covers the same material but in a boring way. Informative but lacking my interest.

If incorrect go ahead and point it out. -----Willy Happy

- Collapse -
Normally it wouldn't matter, but you typoed
Sep 5, 2017 1:56PM PDT

the exact opposite.
Keep reading. Each time builds your vocabulary.
Fusion is what's said to drive the stars, including the one that keeps us alive. So far, not even close to a sustained reaction here. The potential is so great it drives the scientists.
Do something about that sneezing. Flu season is coming.

- Collapse -
Typo?
Sep 5, 2017 2:55PM PDT

I see no typo in Willy's post. Fusion is combining two light nuclei into one heavier (say: 2 deuterium into 1 helium), fission is splitting one heavy nucleus (say: uranium or plutonium) into 2 fragments by shooting neutrons into it. Both produce energy, or they would be impossible.

- Collapse -
I just re-read it, to make sure.
Sep 5, 2017 4:34PM PDT

"Unlike fission the process of nuclear reactors currently used releases 1% of energy."
I mentally inserted a comma after "fission" because I think he meant that, but only if I also changed "fission" to "fusion". That would make it 'nuclear reactors are inefficient [true] but fusion is unlike that; closer to 100%', also true.
Otherwise he was [correctly] describing fission, but with no reference to fusion, rendering "unlike" unnecessary; strike it. Does that make sense?
Willy is one of our more enthusiastic posters, likely to speed up the Linotype and let the clauses fall where they may. [But we love him, anyway. Happy]

- Collapse -
I see
Sep 6, 2017 2:07AM PDT

I only read the post you replied to ("That's correct." 12:50 PM), while your quote "Unlike fission ..." is from the top post. That was incorrect indeed.

Fusion is more efficient then fission, indeed. But it's still a long way from 100%. http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/NucEne/nucbin.html says it's 0.375%, comparing the weight of inputs - deuterium (PN) and tritium (PNN) - and outputs - helium PPNN and lone neutron N -.

Post was last edited on September 6, 2017 8:46 AM PDT

- Collapse -
(NT) Both topics disccussed.
Sep 6, 2017 7:28AM PDT
- Collapse -
BTW, as you no doubt know, fusion's
Sep 5, 2017 4:54PM PDT

useful output [if we ever get to that], comes only after a considerable input of energy. Many, very high powered lasers are the current method being tried. A scientist once joked that the first successful fusion plant would have to run a long time just to make up for all the non-fusion power that went into the years of its R & D.

- Collapse -
Fusion of stars
Sep 6, 2017 7:26AM PDT

Fusion is the process stars go by as they produce elements, mostly hydrogen, later helium, etc. until iron if it gets that far. While fission is where a critical mass is achieved and causes it to "split" releasing energy that way. I don't where I missteped. However, if annihilation is the point an entirely different yet again. -----Willy Happy

- Collapse -
A strange thing I saw in the heavens recently
Sep 5, 2017 2:01PM PDT

This may or not have anything to do with dark matter, but it was the strangest thing I've ever seen whyen stargazing. It was the last Thursday of August 2017 and after Stargate SG1 quit playing on Comet TV, at 10pm I went out onto my deck here in Maryland. For once it was a reasonably clear night. I was looking toward the two dippers, but mainly the smaller one, which was NNW of my position then. The two bright stars seem to be the top two of the handle. At first the one star was a bit above the other, but over the next 2 hours as the earth turned they both became parallel to earth horizon, but still high in sky, maybe 35 degrees upward.

Suddenly, as I'm looking up at it, a new star appeared about 2 inches from the top star on the left, as measured at arm length and began moving toward the top star. Now of course I thought it might be a plane high in the sky turned on it's lights, however no blinking of red or green, and those can be seen still above 30K altitude. I also considered since it was only 3 hours after sunset it was some satellite that caught sunlight just right to suddenly appear to be a star.

It began a steady course toward the top star and was on line if it continued to also cross exactly over both stars, the top and the next one in the handle. The speed didn't change, it was steady and went direct to the star and then blinked out, like out of existence.

Of course that caught me by surprise, it was like it had crashed into the star, but if that was so, being so far away as the star is, then it's speed would be incredible. There was even a moment of slight light increase of the star as that happened. I also considered maybe a meteor, but those are usually quite fast streaking across the sky and make a bigger flashout at the end. This was NOT like that at all.

I sat there, still entertaining maybe some plane other than commercial with typical red/green flashing lights had caused it. I kept looking to see when it might appear again on the other side of the star as it would be heading to the second star.

About 30 minutes later suddenly to the right side of the second star, a new star blinked into appearance. You can imagine my surprise, and it was about the same distance from that second little dipper star as the first moving star had been to the first little dipper star. It then began to move to the left toward that second star. When it reached the star, it also blinked out, just as had happened with the first.

By this time of course, the coincidence of this happening to both stars exactly the same was stunning, to say the least. I contemplated other possible causes, dismissing the meteor, high plane, satellite possiblities. The only two I can think of that might offer any hope of explaining it is either some sort of atmospheric lensing effect that caused the first star to create a double through bent light that then merged back to it, and then the lensing moved over the second star, but caused it in reverse. I also contemplated if it might be some sort of cosmic gravity lensing effect too.

I can't explain the cause of what I saw, but I certainly intend to start keeping an eye on those two stars as time goes on, because it was truly strange and doesn't seem to fit with what we supposedly know about the universe.

- Collapse -
Assuming your eye-brain connections are OK,
Sep 5, 2017 4:46PM PDT

look around the web for mentions of it.
Lensing sounds good.
I once read a UFO-debunking book that described the earthbound equivalent, electromagnetic wave bending. One episode had a US battleship in WWII trying to sink an island, which was out of range anyway, that the radar insisted was a nearby enemy ship. At the optical level it's looming, and can account for the "impossible" speeds mentioned by observers. BTW I disagree that ALL commercial nav lights are visible on the ground. But then, I'm very old.

- Collapse -
Comet was showing episodes in pairs.
Sep 5, 2017 5:00PM PDT

Try to find the dvd of all the episodes of Firefly, including the ones that didn't air. Then find and watch Serenity, the full-length wrapup film Whedon made after the series was dropped.. Best job I've ever seen of tying loose ends and explaining puzzles. Just where DID the Reavers come from?

- Collapse -
(NT) And, you have GOT to see River in action!
Sep 5, 2017 5:01PM PDT
- Collapse -
My wife is a Firefly fan
Sep 6, 2017 9:28AM PDT

I see them every couple years, all over again. Also one of the Baldwin brothers is in it.

- Collapse -
I thought so, too. "The non-crazy Baldwin" I called him.
Sep 7, 2017 10:36AM PDT

Turns out he's not related.
Adam B. has done many syfy things, usually as the tough guy, but he has good range. Like the one in which some culture worshiped him as a hero and savior, through a misunderstanding, when he was robbing their bank! Happy

- Collapse -
And we all missed the obvious reply.
Sep 5, 2017 5:08PM PDT

'The only dark matter you gotta worry about, James, is between your ears.' Happy

- Collapse -
Any chance it could be a planet?
Sep 6, 2017 4:02AM PDT
- Collapse -
Not from his description.
Sep 6, 2017 5:35AM PDT

Planets "wander" long-term but appear steady each night to the naked eye.

- Collapse -
Only one more possibility
Sep 6, 2017 6:30AM PDT

and that's space aliens searching for a place to land.

- Collapse -
Of course!
Sep 6, 2017 8:29AM PDT

I should have thought of that first!
If they're stupid we needn't worry. If they're smart they'll pass on this planet.

- Collapse -
Actually, something similar crossed my mind
Sep 6, 2017 9:32AM PDT

As the last possible explanation I wondered if something out there could be exceeding the speed of light and then dropping into light speed as it approached the star, but then when it happened on the other star, well....that was just a bit too much.

Two days later though I did read about a new discovery showing gravity lensing effect on star light, and wondered if "dark matter" and all that exploded "magnetic iron" from stars might have anything to do with it.

I'll keep my eyes open on clear nights, but suspect it was a "once in a lifetime" event I saw.

- Collapse -
there's a planet westward of it right now
Sep 6, 2017 9:29AM PDT

I think it's Jupiter, but not always easy to tell difference with unaided eye between Jupiter and Saturn.

- Collapse -
Star map
Sep 6, 2017 7:33AM PDT

At times, I find looking at the online star map and help. While, unlike yours showing movement that hardly makes for a star under typical circumstances, IMHO. All those things you descibed could in fact be possible. I saw similar many yrs. ago and stated at the time to be UFO in the terms to be unknown. I figured a very high plane or Shuttle. The direction and course if noted could be compared. However, the speed of it happening suggested more a plane being close to earth, yada, yada. Also, at least for me, several people witness it also.

- Collapse -
Correction: Seems I was looking at....
Sep 7, 2017 7:58PM PDT

....The Big Dipper. The two stars were the top two in the handle.

- Collapse -
What I possibly saw that night
Sep 17, 2017 1:06PM PDT

Satellites called "Iridium Flares". Still odd they both quit giving off light just as they reached, or crossed the stars Alkaid and Mizar, top two stars in the handle of the Big Dipper.

http://www.heavens-above.com/IridiumFlares.aspx

Here's two near Ursa Major (big dipper) area about that time of night. It possibly explains one of the sightings perhaps, not both. Neither of them according to this map exactly cross those two stars, but were in the area at the time. However, they do seem to blink on, then later blink back off, so in appearance they are the same.

One

Two

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTGVuPr9Epg

- Collapse -
Interesting James.
Sep 17, 2017 1:52PM PDT

My better half bought me a big Newtonian telescope about 10 years ago. I remember the thrill when I first brought Saturn's rings into focus.
Dafydd.

Post was last edited on September 17, 2017 1:56 PM PDT