Mystery of dark matter may have been solved by Oxford scientists

[Did You See Them]

Roughly 95% of the universe is believed to be missing - but a new study suggests a fluid which could explain the mystery.
A team of scientists at the University of Oxford may have solved one of the biggest mysteries in modern physics - the issue of dark matter and dark energy in the universe.
Scientists have long suspected there is more material in the cosmos than we can observe and 95% is made up almost entirely of invisible, unknown material dubbed dark energy and dark matter.
The mysterious dark substances are not covered by the existing mathematical model of the universe - known as LambdaCDM - but they are known to exist because of their gravitational effects.

Now scientists have proposed a new model which unifies dark energy and dark matter into a single phenomenon - a fluid which possesses "negative mass".
Dr James Farnes, who led the team at Oxford's e-Research Centre, said: "We now think that both dark matter and dark energy can be unified into a fluid which possesses a type of 'negative gravity'.
More: https://news.sky.com/story/mystery-of-dark-matter-may-have-been-solved-by-oxford-scientists-11572089

"Negative Gravity Fluid" !! Mmm ..!

[petra]

If this is true, maybe the universe is not "losing mass" as some people seem to suspect. For example this article from phys.org (https://phys.org/news/2016-12-physicists-loss-dark-birth-universe.html) says we're losing dark matter, and that it can decay over time. That just does not sound right to me.

It really doesn't make sense how the universe could lose mass unless the laws of thermodynamics (http://physicsforidiots.com/physics/thermodynamics/) are wrong. First law of thermodynamics – Energy can neither be created nor destroyed.

[OmeyocaN777]

This proposal strengthens the theory of The Electric Universe.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=md6T6tWYU_0

[Sunny-side-up]

So nothing solved, just another model to bat around for the next 10 years or so.

petra

It really doesn't make sense how the universe could lose mass unless the laws of thermodynamics are wrong. First law of thermodynamics – Energy can neither be created nor destroyed.
no but it can be transformed yes?

[Did You See Them]

The words "fluid" and "negative gravity" stuck out for me in relation to the "Dark matter".
I find it strange that the Vrill Society (Maria Orsic etc) studied and delved into the make up of "Ether" and purportedly built flying machines ( Bell ?) with spinning "fluids" (Red Mercury) that created "negative gravity"

[petra]

So nothing solved, just another model to bat around for the next 10 years or so.

petra

It really doesn't make sense how the universe could lose mass unless the laws of thermodynamics are wrong. First law of thermodynamics – Energy can neither be created nor destroyed.
no but it can be transformed yes?


Yes Indeed :)

[yelik]

To me the whole universe could be a sort of DNA chain swimming around in this so called dark fluid

[shaberon]

First law of thermodynamics – Energy can neither be created nor destroyed.

Every finite process removes energy by entropy.

At the same time, we cannot quite define (or, place a limit on) potential energy. With quantum flux, particle-antiparticle pairs constantly arise from "nothing", and if one falls in a black hole and the other does not, energy has just been added. Even if there are no black holes, quantum flux happens. Relativity might just be an educated guess about ether. You can't observe a black hole directly to prove it is what it's presumed to be.

I'm not sure we have a clue what 96% of the physical cosmos is.

[petra]

First law of thermodynamics – Energy can neither be created nor destroyed.

Every finite process removes energy by entropy.

At the same time, we cannot quite define (or, place a limit on) potential energy. With quantum flux, particle-antiparticle pairs constantly arise from "nothing", and if one falls in a black hole and the other does not, energy has just been added. Even if there are no black holes, quantum flux happens. Relativity might just be an educated guess about ether. You can't observe a black hole directly to prove it is what it's presumed to be.

I'm not sure we have a clue what 96% of the physical cosmos is.

Energy disappearing into seemingly nowhere just doesn't sound right to me, clueless as I may be :) I suspect nothing never really "goes away" completely, and maybe the reason why is that any other way of working would essentially be flawed, in my mind.

If scientists were to discover that our universe is definitely losing energy, I'd just assume the energy had gone into another "universe" which those scientists are not able to observe.

Quantum anything confuses me, and maybe you're right, but particle-antiparticle pairs arising out of seemingly nothing just sounds suspicious... and dangerous? That just sounds like it'd be chaos.

I have a hard time understanding "Chaos Theory", so that probably ties in. The first principle is the Butterfly Effect too. I got a little synopsis of what Chaos Theory is from this link (https://fractalfoundation.org/resources/what-is-chaos-theory/)

---first paragraph pasted below---

What is Chaos Theory?
Chaos is the science of surprises, of the nonlinear and the unpredictable. It teaches us to expect the unexpected. While most traditional science deals with supposedly predictable phenomena like gravity, electricity, or chemical reactions, Chaos Theory deals with nonlinear things that are effectively impossible to predict or control, like turbulence, weather, the stock market, our brain states, and so on.

[silvanelf]

Now scientists have proposed a new model which unifies dark energy and dark matter into a single phenomenon - a fluid which possesses "negative mass".
Dr James Farnes, who led the team at Oxford's e-Research Centre, said: "We now think that both dark matter and dark energy can be unified into a fluid which possesses a type of 'negative gravity'.
More: https://news.sky.com/story/mystery-of-dark-matter-may-have-been-solved-by-oxford-scientists-11572089


It seems that the new model is not going to fly. I've found just another paper on arxiv which came to the same conclusion.


It is shown that the concept of "negative mass" introduced by Farnes (2018) to describe the dark sector within a unifying theory with the negative cosmological constant contradicts both the essence of the General Relativity and the available observational data. A viable model with modified weak-field General Relativity is mentioned.


https://arxiv.org/abs/1903.06037

[Ernie Nemeth]

It is interesting how the science community will not just shoot their dying horse. The universe is not composed of particles. The universe is smooth and not grainy. There is an ether. Get over it already.

It all has to do with consciousness...even science requires an observer.

[silvanelf]

It is interesting how the science community will not just shoot their dying horse.

Richard Feynman — 'I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.'

Unfortunately, mainstream physics prefers the opposite approach. The basic assumption: Einstein's theory has to be correct at all costs. Conclusion: there must be some kind of "dark matter" ...

Some years ago, an astronomer complained bitterly about the dogmatic attitude in current astronomy. Guess what? He didn't like Big Bang.