By George McGinn
Cosmology and Space Research Institute
I don’t believe in Dark Matter or Dark Energy. Even the new Dark Flow.
While I would like to think that our cosmologists and physicists got lazy, what I really believe is they just created placeholders, misleading ones at that, but I wholeheartedly agree that we have no idea what they are, do, or if they are even real.
I like to watch PBS Space-Time on YouTube, as Host and Physicist Matt O’Dowd* would discuss topics that are relevant today in our field, and there is something for everyone, from the novice to the professionals. And while he sometimes will do numerous episodes, like on Dark Matter and Dark Energy, I don’t always agree with what he’s talking about.
But after watching the episode below (it is an older one, but the information is as relevant today as it was when it was reported on), I had to post a reply (which is below) and a short explanation, as I am working on a research paper on Dark Matter, Dark Energy, and the new voodoo science of “Dark Flow,” which I will address in another post here.
Published on Oct 25, 2017 – For years, astronomers have been unable to find up to half of the baryonic matter in the universe. We may just have solved this problem. We’ve known for some time that around 95% of the energy content of the universe is in dark matter and dark energy. This dark sector doesn’t interact with light in any way and so is invisible to us. The remaining 5% – the light sector – represents all of the regular matter in the universe. Yet what if I told you that all of the stars and galaxies and galaxy clusters only comprise 10% of the light sector. The rest has proved as elusive as the dark sector. We think it must exist as extremely diffuse gas in between the galaxies, yet our intense searches miss up to half of it. At least until now.
Here is my reply post to their video on the matter. I have been spending years working on my own theory which I believe is more grounded in the Newtonian laws regarding matter, the expanding universe, and plausible explanations on Dark Matter and Dark Energy:
POST TO SPACE-TIME: What about matter that due to the faster than light expansion of the universe? Do we not count them? Ignore them? At the current rate of expansion, which I believe (no verified) is about 2.4, this would mean less mass would be within the visible range every year, 100, 1000+ years. In the area where light will never reach us there is still matter and star creation which must me counted to get an accurate, exact answer to the total mass to dark matter to dark energy (if this really is another name for the faster than light expansion of the universe) ratio. Until them, this is no more than guess work.
To make this less confusing, what I am referring to is the speed of causality, or speed of light. In several episodes, you represented this on a graph, say X=time, Y=speed, and the speed of “c” cut the graph at 45 degrees. Now everything to the left of “c” is the visible universe, but due to the faster than “c” expansion of the universe, galaxies cross over the line into the area where light is not fast enough to cross over. The same goes for matter. If Dark Energy is a myth, and only explains the rapid expansion of the universe set in motion by the Big Bang, the missing mass is in the part we can’t see. And since we can’t see into it, we have no idea how big it is, nor how old it is. Ninety-five percent of our missing mass may reside there.
The Explanation To My Post
One thing to note here is that the Hubble Constant is also known as “c” which is the limit or the outer boundary of the visible universe. Everything above this line (for example, the Ho=100) cannot be seen by us. Since the expansion of the universe is about 74.2km/s/Mpc (“c=74.2), Ho=100 is faster than the speed of light, so everything, all matter that exists beyond the Hubble Constant is unknown to us. (Km/s/Mpc stands for “Kilometers/second/Megaparsec”)
For those crying that nothing travels faster than the speed of light, my theory disagrees with you. But even using what is accepted today, the universe can expand great distances where it gives the appearance that a galaxy is traveling away from us faster than the speed of light, and the further away the galaxy is, the faster it is traveling compared to one closer to us (I will give you that example further down).
So while cosmologists, astronomers and physicists claim that there is not enough matter to explain the expansion of our current universe,what they are not telling you is that both the expansion of the universe may very well be caused by the pull of gravity of all the matter beyond the Ho line (Hubble Constant). This may contain the missing 95 percent, and it gravitational pull would surely be greater than 5 percent of the mass.
Now everything to the right of “Ho=67” is the visible universe, but due to the faster than light rate of expansion of the universe, the Hubble Constant “c=74.2,” means that the light of those galaxies and other matter left of the Ho=67 line is in the area where light is not fast enough for us to ever see them again. The same goes for matter. If Dark Energy and Dark Matter are myths, and only explains the rapid expansion of the universe set in motion by the Big Bang, the missing mass is in the part of the universe we can’t see. And since light can never escape from it, unless the expansion of the universe slows down to 72km/sec, we have no idea how big it is, nor how old it is. Ninety-five percent of our missing mass may reside where we can’t see it.
Every year, and quite possibly every day due to the faster than light expansion of space we lose the light of the most distant galaxies. And if 95 percent of our matter is to the right of the Ho=67 line, that means the galaxy is larger and even older than 13.7 billion years. And that magic number has to do with the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) that we cannot penetrate.
However, the further a galaxy is from us, its speed is a multiple factor of c=74.2. It is not as simple linear function as the masses think. I am working on a paper that incorporates a new theory of mine, in part based on the work of Adam Riess.
He says that for every megaparsec (1Mpc=3 million light years) away from us, c=74.2 multiplied by the multiple of Mpc. Riess states that each 3 million light years of distance equals 74.2km/s/Mpc. So a galaxy that is 20 megaparsec away from us is expanding at a speed of 1,484km/sec. So the Hubble Constant is only a constant in that it is a factor used to determine the speed of expansion when applied to a galaxy’s distance in Mpc.
When I am done with my research, I will get into more questions I may have raised here, like the obvious one “could this mean that the universe is expanding slower in some places and faster in others,” and my simple answer to that would be Yes. If you look at the chart provided above,
At todays current rate of expansion, in billion of years, all galaxies will pass beyond the cosmic boundary, where its light, traveling much slower than the expansion rate, the only stats we will see is the merge of the Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies, if they even hit us at all.
* Matt O’Dowd is an Australian-born astrophysicist. He is an assistant professor at the Physics and Astronomy Department at the City University of New York and writer and host of PBS Space Time on YouTube. He is a frequent guest on Science Goes to the Movies on CUNY TV, and StarTalk radio with Neil deGrasse Tyson. – Wikipedia