Was the majority of the universe created by fusion?

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by Beaconator, Aug 15, 2022.

  1. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,897
    Beac, three of your last four posts contain non sequiturs - two things you've connected that have no immediately apparent relationship with each other:
    - dark matter passing through us and the universe accelerating,
    - dark matter in galaxies and hydrogen
    - matter reaching the speed of light and fusion.

    They hint at some misunderstandings you may have. Why not gather your thoughts and rephrase them as questions?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,379
    Good luck with that.

    But kudos to Beaconator for raising an interesting issue.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Beaconator Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,486
    At some point dark matter has to interact with itself, whether it is because of a huge mass under the stress of gravity or two different bodies in a head on collision, otherwise there would be no fusion and no universe as we know it?


    Glad to see you took me off you ignore list. You would have missed all the fun.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,897
    No. Like photons, dark matter passes right through itself.

    It only needs to interact gravitationally to fulfill its cosmological function.
     
  8. Beaconator Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,486
    I don’t know if that is true or not… it seems to me that dark matter would only have temperature when interacting with something in a way other than gravitationally. Yet there are many competing theories of both hot and cold dark matter and how they shaped the beginning of galaxies.
     
  9. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,897
    Why does dark matter need to have a temperature?

    Again, I think that there some hidden assumptions you have.

    Gravity - contributed by both dark matter and vanilla matter - still causes vanilla matter to gather and clump. It is that clumping that brings about fusion in stars.
     
  10. Beaconator Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,486
    it doesn’t, except in the Big Bang. Dark matter has to transform into regular matter. This process may not happen in fusion but has to elsewhere. Perhaps in black holes?

    dark matter not having temperature means it is a precursor to the Big Bang?
     
  11. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,897
    No it doesn't.

    The rest of your statements seem to depend in this misconception.
     
  12. Beaconator Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,486
    Why not? is there another mechanism for the Big Bang?

    dark matter existing before the Big Bang may be a misconception but ultimately a hard one to rid or prove either way.
     
  13. Beaconator Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,486
    perhaps we can derive gravity from both the relativistic and non relativistic Maxwell- Boltzman equations? Taking all aspects of temperature off the non-relativistic one? Or the pressure of gravity…
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2022
  14. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,897
    Perhaps you should start with learning what we know so far. That seems to be a big enough bite to chew for now.

    What do you mean by "another" mechanism? What's the one you think is default?

    There is a hypothesis that dark matter was created during the inflationary epoch, between 10^-36 and 10^-32 seconds after the creation after the creation of the universe.

    But that has nothing to do with whether dark matter interacts with itself or anything about converting to regular matter. I really don't know where you're getting all this.



    Look, every time I answer one question, you respond with another misconception, though you never state your belief overtly. This is a known trolling technique. You may or may not be deliberately trolling but either way, you're asking me to put more effort into teaching you about dark matter than you've done yourself.

    I think I'm going to step back from this, and wait to see if you can compose a coherent question that includes what physics you already believe to be the case, so that it can be systematically corrected. If that doesn't happen soon, I will likely put you back on Ignore. Up to you.
     
  15. Beaconator Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,486
    Perhaps dark matter revealed itself in the inflationary period… but a gravitational object without temperature that doesn’t interact with anything including itself (most of the time) stands to reason it may have been there all along?
     
    Last edited: Sep 6, 2022
  16. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,897
    Posting guesses about stuff you don't know about in the first place does not constitute a coherent question.

    You're still just trolling. Shame on you.

    :ignore:
     
  17. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,379
    It seems cosmologists do talk of hot, warm and cold dark matter, but this is somewhat figurative, being related to something called free streaming length. I don’t fully understand how free streaming length is assessed, though.
     
  18. Beaconator Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,486
    On that I’ll admit I have no idea either. I’m not sure if it implies dark matter moving at a speed has a “warm temperature” and stationary has a “cold temperature”
     
    Last edited: Sep 6, 2022
  19. Beaconator Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,486
    Hey! I’m just trying to make sense of things just like anybody else. I’m just not very good at it.
     
  20. Beaconator Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,486
    alright I stepped back a bit and rethought my arguments.

    Dark matter may be the currier that displaces temperature into normal matter. Causing the expansion of entropy.

    dark matter under immense gravitational pressure may act sort of like a black hole in the way in which hydrogen is formed.
     
  21. Beaconator Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,486
    I just had another thought.

    Dark matter only moves in a line. It does not have an interference problem.

    if gravity were to take hold of dark matter it would move in a perfect straight line before and after encountering the source of gravity.
     
  22. Beaconator Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,486
    Is dark energy bound by the speed limit of light or by the speed limit of gravity?
     
  23. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    39,286
    Beaconator:

    Every time you have made a claim in this thread, you have completely failed to tell anybody why you think it is - or could be - the case. In a few instances, you have alluded to vague pseudo-explanations, but either they are just random thoughts or else you've not actually investigated any of them to do even the most basic check for plausibility.

    Dressing your pseudo-speculations up as questions doesn't help. If you actually want to learn something, don't tell us your half-baked "theories". Ask some real questions.

    Your posts read like you are unable to concentrate on any one thing for very long, or as if you're deliberately trying to muddy the waters by introducing new concepts or problems in every post.

    Try resolving one issue before introducing 20 new ones.

    Try something other than idle speculation in a knowledge vacuum.

    If you're honestly interested in cosmology, astronomy or particle physics, why not try to actually learn something about the topic? You have to learn to walk before you can run. It's blindingly obvious that you're not currently equipped to meaningfully speculate on the topics you're trying to discuss in this thread (if that's what you're actually trying to do). So why not try to fix that?

    Let's look at what you've said, then.
    Why? What brought you to that conclusion? What physics do you know that led you to that conclusion? Why don't you explain to other readers what convinced you that this statement is true? Your posts would be a lot more useful if you included some reasons for your beliefs - if you actually believe them and you actually have reasons, that is. Do you?
    Explain how a "huge mass under the stress of gravity" is relevant to question of whether "at some point dark matter has to interact with itself".
    Explain how two bodies in a head on collision bears on the question of dark matter interaction.

    The "otherwise" in your statement also doesn't connect to anything went before. Are you okay?
    What led you to that hypothesis, exactly? Please explain. Refer to the physics you think is relevant.
    Do you have any reason at all to think that dark matter existed before the big bang? If so, tell me your reason(s).
    Which specific equations are you referring to? Can you post them? Can you link to them?

    Explain what led you to think that maybe we can "derive gravity" from the equations to which you refer.
    Please give me ONE example of "a gravitational object without temperature". Tell me why you beleive that such objects exist.
    These two statements are nonsensical. Are you okay?
    Tell me how. What physics is relevant to this conclusion? Why do you believe it? What evidence or arguments convinced you of the usefulness of this speculation?
    Please cite ONE source that supports your claim (other than yourself, obviously).
    Please cite ONE source that supports this claim.

    I expect a detailed response from you to this post. I sincerely hope you are not simply trolling.
     

Share This Page