Dark energy and gravity

[Alaskans]

Edit: it contains some already known theories

I havent been focusing on science perhaps nearly as much as I should, so bear with me. I was thinking of quantum mechanics while sleeping. My line of thought, dark energy being effected by magnetism turned out to be bogus, or I couldnt make it work, but it sparked my interest. I only just thought this up, it probably isnt perfect.

The idea of air bubbles in water came to mind, and how all planets and atoms are influenced to form spheres, despite  their kinetic movements.

I propose that all matter is being pushed on at all sides by all the dark energy in the universe. That dark energy is like a layer of rubber across the universe, that is it wants to be evenly distributed everywhere. Perhaps the reason the universe is expanding is not because there is more dark energy being created, but that dark energy is spreading out, trying to make itself evenly distributed. To dark energy matter is an invasive energy pushing it away, therefore it tries to enter the space where an atom is and pushes on the walls of the atom, making it spherical. The denser an atom is the more dark energy it pushes out, therefore the more dark energy pushes on the walls of the atom. Being classified as void by dark energy gives matter the ability to clump together, to dark energy, a planet is a large atom, this creates gravity in the matter's immediate area. We (us, atoms, planets) are like waterbugs walking on the surface of a spherical pond.

[Alaskans]

Oops, didnt see the thread on gravity already made (I'm not very aware in the morning  ). What do you guys think of my theory? Im sure you could poke a lot of holes in it, granted there are some things I didnt bother explaining in detail because I wanted it short and simple.

[bewarevileye]

That is very nice, you may be right could explain gravity.  I believe something similar to what you believe.  I believe that we are submereged in a membrane in a higher dimensional unviverse.  Something has to be holding us together.  Their are energies all around us invisible to us.  I believe the mind plays a part in making reality come true.  What we believe is what we see.  If we believed something is possibly without a remote doubt then it will come true.  It's all about believe.  Who knows maybe it's our own mind thats holding our matter together and keeping on us on the ground.  Our own mind doesn't originate from this world is what I believe but something very powerful that it is that can do powerful things.

[CFTraveler]

Oops, didnt see the thread on gravity already made (I'm not very aware in the morning  ). What do you guys think of my theory? Im sure you could poke a lot of holes in it, granted there are some things I didnt bother explaining in detail because I wanted it short and simple.

I like it for lots of reasons.  The dark energy could be where virtual particles get their energy to exist albeit virtually, and it would provide the 'background' for the holographic theory, it would illustrate gravity, etc.   It would even explain why light bends. 

[MisterJingo]

Edit: it contains some already known theories

I havent been focusing on science perhaps nearly as much as I should, so bear with me. I was thinking of quantum mechanics while sleeping. My line of thought, dark energy being effected by magnetism turned out to be bogus, or I couldnt make it work, but it sparked my interest. I only just thought this up, it probably isnt perfect.

The idea of air bubbles in water came to mind, and how all planets and atoms are influenced to form spheres, despite  their kinetic movements.

I propose that all matter is being pushed on at all sides by all the dark energy in the universe. That dark energy is like a layer of rubber across the universe, that is it wants to be evenly distributed everywhere. Perhaps the reason the universe is expanding is not because there is more dark energy being created, but that dark energy is spreading out, trying to make itself evenly distributed. To dark energy matter is an invasive energy pushing it away, therefore it tries to enter the space where an atom is and pushes on the walls of the atom, making it spherical. The denser an atom is the more dark energy it pushes out, therefore the more dark energy pushes on the walls of the atom. Being classified as void by dark energy gives matter the ability to clump together, to dark energy, a planet is a large atom, this creates gravity in the matter's immediate area. We (us, atoms, planets) are like waterbugs walking on the surface of a spherical pond.

Hey Alaskans,

I only just came across this thread. Something to note is that atoms are not spherical, neither are electrons or other particles. Classical physics created the idea of spherical subatomic particles and atoms with tidy orbits of electrons mimicking a solar system.
Such particles cannot actually be fit into any shape, they are simply discreet units of energy with certain properties – this inability to give them shape can be seen in wave-particle duality.
Regarding planets, taking Earth as an example, it is not actually spherical. It bulges at the equator due to the centrifugal spin pushing its malleable core outwards – gravity is stronger than this spin though, so the planet doesn't tear itself apart and form a rough spheroid shape (in space-time theory, this is due to the gravity well Earth greats on this fabric).

Dark Matter (and more importantly Dark Energy) is an area which is still very much open to discussion, there are a number of theories out there which actually believe this form of matter/energy is a phantom, and our current understanding of gravity and cosmology lead us to see a deficit of matter in the universe which has led to the production of this phantom – when in fact, modifying our laws of gravity will make up for the missing mass/energy.

There was recently a map of dark matter created:



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6235751.stm

It seems that on the whole dark matter is found where there is visible matter, but in quite a few places, there are large amounts of dark matter but no visible matter.

A very interesting article in last months New Scientist concerned the possibility that the universe shows a fractal distribution (and using fractal geometry can explain the interaction of quantum particles). I've posted a few paragraphs in quotes below:

Fractals allow Pietronero to paint a very different sort of picture - one in which the irregular distribution of matter that we see around us never evens out into a smooth structure, but repeats itself at ever grander scales. Fractals are familiar enough: we see them in the branching of trees, the curves of coastlines, lungs, turbulence and clouds. No matter what scale you look at them, fractal patterns look the same. Think of broccoli: a tiny branch looks much the same as the whole vegetable. Zoom in or zoom out, the structure looks the same - exquisitely detailed, never smooth. Fractals can be beautiful to look at, but when it comes to galaxies it may be a subversive kind of beauty.

Certainly the universe does not look smooth. Some regions contain clusters of matter; others are virtually empty. Hundreds of billions of stars group together to form galaxies, and galaxies congregate in clusters. Clusters assemble into colossal structures called superclusters that can stretch out for 100 million light years and look uncannily like fractal patterns (see Diagram).
Even superclusters string together in long filaments and sheets that stretch like ghostly cobwebs across an otherwise empty sky. The Sloan Great Wall, for example, which was discovered in 2003, spans more than a billion light years. These filaments and sheets seem to encircle huge voids of empty space. The voids range from 100 to 400 million light years in diameter, making the whole assemblage appear as an immense, glowing lattice punctuated by wells of darkness.
No one disputes that the universe is far from smooth on relatively small scales - by which cosmologists mean thousands of light years. But Hogg's team is convinced that if you zoom further out, smoothness reigns. "When you're looking at the size scales of galaxies, groups of galaxies, clusters, superclusters and filaments, it looks like a fractal," says Hogg. "But once you get larger than all of that, then it starts to look homogeneous."

What has convinced him is his team's analysis of the latest data from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, the largest 3D map of the galactic universe so far. His team insists that the map is proof of smoothness. The fractal camp, however, are sceptical. In fact, they say the Sloan observations confirm what they've been claiming all along.
It might appear to be deadlock, but at least with the Sloan survey the two sides can agree what they're disagreeing about. For years Pietronero and his team argued that the statistical methods mainstream cosmologists were using to establish homogeneity were flawed because they start off by assuming that matter is evenly spread. The team was mostly ignored until 2004, when Hogg and astrophysicist Daniel Eisenstein of the University of Arizona in Tucson spent a summer in Paris with Pietronero's colleagues, cosmologists Francesco Sylos Labini of the Enrico Fermi Centre and the Institute for Complex Systems, Rome, and Michael Joyce of the Pierre and Marie Curie University, Paris.

"We argued every day about fractals," Hogg says. "Those battles raged over lunch and coffee and finally convinced us by the end of our visit that we should be doing the analysis as they say."
When they returned to the US, Hogg and Eisenstein applied the fractal team's methods to a sample of 55,000 luminous red galaxies mapped by Sloan. They found that the galaxies do form a fractal pattern, but as they looked at bigger and bigger scales, the pattern appeared to disintegrate and smooth out at just over 200 million light years - a scale far larger than most cosmologists had expected.

The million-dollar question is: what is the real distribution of dark matter? Is dark matter smooth or fractal? Is it clustered like the galaxies, or does it spread out, unseen, into the great voids? If the voids are full of dark matter, then the apparent fractal distribution of luminous matter becomes rather insignificant. But if the voids are truly empty, the fractal claim requires a closer look.
Astronomers are now providing our first glimpse into the voids and our first look at the pattern of invisible matter. Richard Massey of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena and others in the Cosmic Evolution Survey project have just created the first 3D map of dark matter in the universe (New Scientist, 13 January, p 5). They were able to find the dark matter by observing its gravitational effect on any light streaming past it. Combining data from the Hubble Space Telescope, the Subaru telescope in Hawaii and the Very Large Telescope in Chile, they mapped the distribution of dark matter at scales ranging from 23 million to 200 million light years across.
Massey's team found that the dark matter distribution is nearly identical to the luminous matter distribution. "The first thing that strikes me is the voids," Massey says. "Vast expanses of space are completely empty. The dark matter makes up a criss-crossing network of strings and sheets around these voids. And all the luminous matter lies within the densest regions of dark matter."
Although this distribution of dark matter seems to favour the idea that the universe is fractal, Hogg isn't convinced. "It is interesting," he says, "but measurements of dark matter are much less precise than measurements of galaxy distributions."

Something of interest you might want to look into is the Higgs Boson and Higgs Field:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_field

We already have circumstantial evidence for its existence, and the LHC (http://public.web.cern.ch/Public/Content/Chapters/AboutCERN/CERNFuture/WhatLHC/WhatLHC-en.html) at CERN goes online later this year and will potentially provide solid evidence for its existence.

[greggkroodsma]

Edit: it contains some already known theories

I havent been focusing on science perhaps nearly as much as I should, so bear with me. I was thinking of quantum mechanics while sleeping. My line of thought, dark energy being effected by magnetism turned out to be bogus, or I couldnt make it work, but it sparked my interest. I only just thought this up, it probably isnt perfect.

The idea of air bubbles in water came to mind, and how all planets and atoms are influenced to form spheres, despite  their kinetic movements.

I propose that all matter is being pushed on at all sides by all the dark energy in the universe. That dark energy is like a layer of rubber across the universe, that is it wants to be evenly distributed everywhere. Perhaps the reason the universe is expanding is not because there is more dark energy being created, but that dark energy is spreading out, trying to make itself evenly distributed. To dark energy matter is an invasive energy pushing it away, therefore it tries to enter the space where an atom is and pushes on the walls of the atom, making it spherical. The denser an atom is the more dark energy it pushes out, therefore the more dark energy pushes on the walls of the atom. Being classified as void by dark energy gives matter the ability to clump together, to dark energy, a planet is a large atom, this creates gravity in the matter's immediate area. We (us, atoms, planets) are like waterbugs walking on the surface of a spherical pond.

When you think of a big glass of water with things floating around and you take that and compare with the universe and all the planets and say that is the same does not really lead you to think any other way.  Now, if you put water equal to dark energy and make the universe the big glass of water, wouldn't we be falling to the bottom?  I get your idea of we are waterbugs walking on the surface of a spherical pond, but it is impossible to walk on water.  So that makes dark energy something totally differrent than anything we can think of.  Blast anything into outer space and what happens?  The dark energy does not stop it.  In fact, dark energy lets it go. 
It's the atmosphere of this earth that is water and you can only jump so high.  So, I don't think that any words can describe what you call 'dark energy.'  In distant galaxies scientists have found evidence of the beginnings of life or the beginning compunds.  Those are the simplest sugar compounds and I think it is this sugar compond that holds everything in its place.  Pretty sticky stuff.

[morning_star]

I'm not sure where I heard this, but I did hear that some scientists were investigating whether or not space is actually a void.  It seems to be a imminently obselete theory. 

[Awakened_Mind]

A 'holographic universe'. Space is predominately just that, empty space. If you had a basketball representing the proton of a hydrogen atom, the nearest elctron would be 20miles away relatively. Something along those lines. There's still that fuzziness about even the most mundane elements of our reality.

-AM

[iNNERvOYAGER]

"........beginnings of life or the beginning compunds.  Those are the simplest sugar compounds and I think it is this sugar compond that holds everything in its place.  Pretty sticky stuff.

Exactly! With all that sticky stuff around, who needs Dark Matter? 

I'm sorry for being a big dolt, but I still can't understand how we can be out ahead in position to observe an event that occurred 6.5 Bil years ago that we supposedly originate from, aka the big bang singularity?

I've always loved cosmology, fascinated by Stephen Hawking's work, and reading these discoveries and contemplating on the theory is one of the few things that makes me proud of Humanity.

But I still don't get this simple and fundamental theory that we are collecting light that was emitted 6.5 Bil years ago from a position that we originated from, .

An example of the basis for my difficulty: I fire a rifle at a target. I want to observe the bullet hitting the target up close. So, I suddenly travel at a speed of Mach X  faster than the bullet, to the target in time to be in position to get a good view of the bullet hitting the target.

Sounds good in theory, at Mach speeds and given an ultra super G suit for protection,

But how do we account for being able to move at beyond light speed to be out ahead in position to collect these ancient photons that have been traveling 6.5 Billiion years from a position that we originated from?

The only answer I can think of is that the initial creation event occurred in a different time and distance scale than we exist in now.

http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmology_faq.html        .hope this helps me.

  according to this, the confusion is caused because of an expanding rate of scale that is independent of the speed of light and the velocity of objects in the universe.  ( i need to go to math class   )

In a recent National Geographic TV series, Naked Science, the guest cosmologist used a balloon to demonstrate the theory of an expanding universe by starting with a small balloon, then drawing a small circle and points on the surface to represent galaxies, then he inflated the balloon into a big ball, and the circle also expanded, and all the points became further apart.
THEN, the balloon was inflated until it burst, to further explain the theory!

[Old Dood]

But how do we account for being able to move at beyond light speed to be out ahead in position to collect these ancient photons that have been traveling 6.5 Billiion years from a position that we originated from?

I would think the speed of thought would be much 'Faster' and would achieve what you are asking....wouldn't it?

[Awakened_Mind]

No. The speed of thought is limited to how fast the brain can send signals. It's the will of mind that moves us at incredible speeds in the astral, the thought is merely a shadow.

Some part of our being exists in an eternal moment, without a given speed. Instantaneous. If that's true, then we are multidimensional, whether materialism can prove it or not.

-AM