Total Posts:50|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Dark matter and the nature of time

Discipulus_Didicit
Posts: 3,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2015 7:40:03 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
The purpose of this thread is to host an open dialectic on the topic of a new (new for me at least, I only heard about it a few months ago) theory on the nature of dark matter and, more specifically, the implications of this theory as it relates to various philosophical questions regarding the nature of time.

Concepts that will be discussed include:
- Gravitational propagation
- The nature of dark matter
- Time as a dimension of spacetime
- Growing Block Universe theory of time
- Eternalism and Presentism theories of time
- Anything else related to any of this that is brought up.

Please keep in mind that the actual theory itself is only meant to explain the nature of 'dark matter' and on its own does little to speculate on the implications of such for the various theories of time which exist. Such speculations are the reason for the existence of this thread.

Now I will present the basic ideas behind the scientific theory which inspired this thread. Because I am reciting this mostly from memory there may be some holes in the picture I am about to paint until/unless I rediscover the actual scientific paper that I read all those months ago rather than just some article about the theory.

Without further ado:

Previous ideas regarding the phenomenon known as dark matter tend to make the same fundamental assumption about dark matter. This assumption, simply put, is that dark matter is... well... matter. More specifically it is a form of matter that, for various reasons, is difficult to impossible to detect. This seems like a reasonable enough assumption given the observations.

But what if this assumption is wrong?

What if instead this phenomenon can be explained without any new exotic forms of matter, and without the need for any new fundamental forces to exist? What if dark matter phenomenon can be explained with nothing more than a new theory of gravity?

Conventional theories of gravity state that gravity propagates through the three spatial dimensions, but what if gravity propagates through the fourth dimension of time as well? experiments have confirmed that propagation of effects through time in this manner is in fact possible. It has not yet been confirmed that this is the case with gravity for certain, but it is certainly possible that it is. If indeed gravity does project through the fourth dimension of time then this could explain various phenomenon proported to be the result of exotic undetectable dark matter.

So, the question is if gravity propagates through the fourth dimension of time then what does this say about various philosophical ideas such as eternalism or presentalism? While I do have my own opinion as to the answer to this question I do not yet wish to elaborate further upon said opinion, both because I want to hear what others have to say and also because my fingers hurt from all this typing already.
Cobalt - You could be scum too.
Matt - I suppose. But I also might not be.

Kiri - Yeah, I don't know what DD is doing.
Vaarka - He's doin'a thingy do

DD - The best advice most often goes unheeded.
Wise Man - KYS, DD.
DD - Case in point ^
Fkkize
Posts: 2,149
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2015 8:27:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/5/2015 7:40:03 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
The purpose of this thread is to host an open dialectic on the topic of a new (new for me at least, I only heard about it a few months ago) theory on the nature of dark matter and, more specifically, the implications of this theory as it relates to various philosophical questions regarding the nature of time.

Concepts that will be discussed include:
- Gravitational propagation
- The nature of dark matter
- Time as a dimension of spacetime
- Growing Block Universe theory of time
- Eternalism and Presentism theories of time
- Anything else related to any of this that is brought up.

Please keep in mind that the actual theory itself is only meant to explain the nature of 'dark matter' and on its own does little to speculate on the implications of such for the various theories of time which exist. Such speculations are the reason for the existence of this thread.

Now I will present the basic ideas behind the scientific theory which inspired this thread. Because I am reciting this mostly from memory there may be some holes in the picture I am about to paint until/unless I rediscover the actual scientific paper that I read all those months ago rather than just some article about the theory.

Without further ado:

Previous ideas regarding the phenomenon known as dark matter tend to make the same fundamental assumption about dark matter. This assumption, simply put, is that dark matter is... well... matter. More specifically it is a form of matter that, for various reasons, is difficult to impossible to detect. This seems like a reasonable enough assumption given the observations.

But what if this assumption is wrong?

What if instead this phenomenon can be explained without any new exotic forms of matter, and without the need for any new fundamental forces to exist? What if dark matter phenomenon can be explained with nothing more than a new theory of gravity?

Conventional theories of gravity state that gravity propagates through the three spatial dimensions, but what if gravity propagates through the fourth dimension of time as well? experiments have confirmed that propagation of effects through time in this manner is in fact possible. It has not yet been confirmed that this is the case with gravity for certain, but it is certainly possible that it is. If indeed gravity does project through the fourth dimension of time then this could explain various phenomenon proported to be the result of exotic undetectable dark matter.

So, the question is if gravity propagates through the fourth dimension of time then what does this say about various philosophical ideas such as eternalism or presentalism? While I do have my own opinion as to the answer to this question I do not yet wish to elaborate further upon said opinion, both because I want to hear what others have to say and also because my fingers hurt from all this typing already.

This is easily the most thought provoking post I've read so far on this forum.

I am neither a physicist nor particularly well read in cosmology, but it seems to me that this would disprove presentism. For if gravity can affect different times, then they have to exist.
That leaves GBU, SBU and eternalism. The question now is whether gravity only travels mono- (-> GBU v SBU) or bidirectional (-> eternalism). Personally, I don't see the reason why it should be the former, but then again, I haven't read the article. I'm interested in your reasoning behind time travelling mono-directional in a way that supports the GBU over the SBU.

(P.S.: I probably screwed up Latin and Greek prefixes. They always confuse me.)
: At 7/2/2016 3:05:07 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
:
: space contradicts logic
Fkkize
Posts: 2,149
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2015 8:28:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I'm interested in your reasoning behind time travelling mono-directional in a way that supports the GBU over the SBU.
*gravity
: At 7/2/2016 3:05:07 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
:
: space contradicts logic
Discipulus_Didicit
Posts: 3,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2015 9:37:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/5/2015 8:27:30 PM, Fkkize wrote:

This is easily the most thought provoking post I've read so far on this forum.

Why thank you =)

I am neither a physicist nor particularly well read in cosmology,

I noticed that you only have a high school level education. Same here. We are equally qualified to converse on this topic.

but it seems to me that this would disprove presentism. For if gravity can affect different times, then they have to exist.

If indeed this theory is accurate I believe that you are correct. Meh, I was never much of a presentist fan anyway.

That leaves GBU, SBU and eternalism.

I used to favor eternalism, as you know I now favor the GBU.

The question now is whether gravity only travels mono- (-> GBU v SBU) or bidirectional (-> eternalism).

Concise and straight to the point, not like me at all. I like it!

Personally, I don't see the reason why it should be the former, but then again, I haven't read the article. I'm interested in your reasoning behind gravity travelling mono-directional in a way that supports the GBU over the SBU.

My reason for thinking that gravity travels mono-directionally rather than bi-directionally through time is quite simple. After all, gravity only travels mono-directionally through space, why expect it to be any different for travelling through time? (if indeed it does turn out to travel through time at all) this could be wrong of course but it is the option with the least assumptions, and hence I am an eternalist no longer.

As for why I prefer the GBU over the SBU, that is more to do with the cosmological expansion than what I have laid out here, but I could still go into it in a later post if things head in that direction.

(P.S.: I probably screwed up Latin and Greek prefixes. They always confuse me.)

If you mean the bi and mono you used both correctly
Cobalt - You could be scum too.
Matt - I suppose. But I also might not be.

Kiri - Yeah, I don't know what DD is doing.
Vaarka - He's doin'a thingy do

DD - The best advice most often goes unheeded.
Wise Man - KYS, DD.
DD - Case in point ^
Fkkize
Posts: 2,149
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2015 10:26:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/5/2015 9:37:40 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
At 8/5/2015 8:27:30 PM, Fkkize wrote:

This is easily the most thought provoking post I've read so far on this forum.

Why thank you =)

I am neither a physicist nor particularly well read in cosmology,

I noticed that you only have a high school level education. Same here. We are equally qualified to converse on this topic.

but it seems to me that this would disprove presentism. For if gravity can affect different times, then they have to exist.

If indeed this theory is accurate I believe that you are correct. Meh, I was never much of a presentist fan anyway.

That leaves GBU, SBU and eternalism.

I used to favor eternalism, as you know I now favor the GBU.

The question now is whether gravity only travels mono- (-> GBU v SBU) or bidirectional (-> eternalism).

Concise and straight to the point, not like me at all. I like it!

Personally, I don't see the reason why it should be the former, but then again, I haven't read the article. I'm interested in your reasoning behind gravity travelling mono-directional in a way that supports the GBU over the SBU.

My reason for thinking that gravity travels mono-directionally rather than bi-directionally through time is quite simple. After all, gravity only travels mono-directionally through space, why expect it to be any different for travelling through time? (if indeed it does turn out to travel through time at all) this could be wrong of course but it is the option with the least assumptions, and hence I am an eternalist no longer.

I'd say gravity travels only mono-directional in the sense of "away from the object". In fact, if you imagine some object, a sphere perhaps, in a Newtonian space (this way my head doesn't hurt thinking about it), then I think it is more accurate to say that gravity travels unidirectional. If we now take the space around the sphere to be time, then we have a picture of gravity propagating both into the past and into the future. Of course single gravity waves, if I might call it that, could still be travelling into either direction, however, they are not just emitted in a single one.

As for why I prefer the GBU over the SBU, that is more to do with the cosmological expansion than what I have laid out here, but I could still go into it in a later post if things head in that direction.
SBU is generally unmotivated and has no defenders that I am aware of. Michael Tooley for example, the probably most famous proponent of GBU, says we must reject eternalism, because it conflicts with (libertarian) free will. Hence, I can at least see why people would favor GBU.

(P.S.: I probably screwed up Latin and Greek prefixes. They always confuse me.)

If you mean the bi and mono you used both correctly
: At 7/2/2016 3:05:07 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
:
: space contradicts logic
Discipulus_Didicit
Posts: 3,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2015 10:54:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/5/2015 10:26:08 PM, Fkkize wrote:
I'd say gravity travels only mono-directional in the sense of "away from the object". In fact, if you imagine some object, a sphere perhaps, in a Newtonian space (this way my head doesn't hurt thinking about it), then I think it is more accurate to say that gravity travels unidirectional. If we now take the space around the sphere to be time, then we have a picture of gravity propagating both into the past and into the future. Of course single gravity waves, if I might call it that, could still be travelling into either direction, however, they are not just emitted in a single one.

I think it would still be safe to assume that gravitational propagation is mono-directional in nature. Propagation of effects into the past seems like it would cause lots of nasty little paradoxes, especially given that said propagation is said to have such a large effect as to be noticeable in different galaxies many light years away.

SBU is generally unmotivated and has no defenders that I am aware of. Michael Tooley for example, the probably most famous proponent of GBU, says we must reject eternalism, because it conflicts with (libertarian) free will. Hence, I can at least see why people would favor GBU.

I'm all about free will. I think truth is more important though.

Is free will true? No idea.
Cobalt - You could be scum too.
Matt - I suppose. But I also might not be.

Kiri - Yeah, I don't know what DD is doing.
Vaarka - He's doin'a thingy do

DD - The best advice most often goes unheeded.
Wise Man - KYS, DD.
DD - Case in point ^
Fkkize
Posts: 2,149
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2015 11:08:37 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/5/2015 10:54:12 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
At 8/5/2015 10:26:08 PM, Fkkize wrote:
I'd say gravity travels only mono-directional in the sense of "away from the object". In fact, if you imagine some object, a sphere perhaps, in a Newtonian space (this way my head doesn't hurt thinking about it), then I think it is more accurate to say that gravity travels unidirectional. If we now take the space around the sphere to be time, then we have a picture of gravity propagating both into the past and into the future. Of course single gravity waves, if I might call it that, could still be travelling into either direction, however, they are not just emitted in a single one.

I think it would still be safe to assume that gravitational propagation is mono-directional in nature. Propagation of effects into the past seems like it would cause lots of nasty little paradoxes, especially given that said propagation is said to have such a large effect as to be noticeable in different galaxies many light years away.

The beauty of eternalism and in this regard GBU, too, is that it has very smooth solutions to all kinds of time paradoxes. Basically, gravity waves from the future could not alter how the world is now, because they haven't done it already.
IEP has a brilliant passage about eternalism and the grandfather paradox that hopefully captures what I am trying to say.

"In fact, if you do go back, you would already have been back there. For this reason, if you go back in time and try to kill your grandfather before he conceived a child, you will fail no matter how hard you try. You will fail because you have failed." - http://www.iep.utm.edu...

SBU is generally unmotivated and has no defenders that I am aware of. Michael Tooley for example, the probably most famous proponent of GBU, says we must reject eternalism, because it conflicts with (libertarian) free will. Hence, I can at least see why people would favor GBU.

I'm all about free will. I think truth is more important though.
I sure think we have free will, just not libertarian.

Is free will true? No idea.
You sound like vi_spex, lol.
: At 7/2/2016 3:05:07 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
:
: space contradicts logic
Discipulus_Didicit
Posts: 3,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2015 11:45:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/5/2015 11:08:37 PM, Fkkize wrote:
At 8/5/2015 10:54:12 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
At 8/5/2015 10:26:08 PM, Fkkize wrote:
I'd say gravity travels only mono-directional in the sense of "away from the object". In fact, if you imagine some object, a sphere perhaps, in a Newtonian space (this way my head doesn't hurt thinking about it), then I think it is more accurate to say that gravity travels unidirectional. If we now take the space around the sphere to be time, then we have a picture of gravity propagating both into the past and into the future. Of course single gravity waves, if I might call it that, could still be travelling into either direction, however, they are not just emitted in a single one.

I think it would still be safe to assume that gravitational propagation is mono-directional in nature. Propagation of effects into the past seems like it would cause lots of nasty little paradoxes, especially given that said propagation is said to have such a large effect as to be noticeable in different galaxies many light years away.

The beauty of eternalism and in this regard GBU, too, is that it has very smooth solutions to all kinds of time paradoxes. Basically, gravity waves from the future could not alter how the world is now, because they haven't done it already.
IEP has a brilliant passage about eternalism and the grandfather paradox that hopefully captures what I am trying to say.

"In fact, if you do go back, you would already have been back there. For this reason, if you go back in time and try to kill your grandfather before he conceived a child, you will fail no matter how hard you try. You will fail because you have failed." - http://www.iep.utm.edu...

SBU is generally unmotivated and has no defenders that I am aware of. Michael Tooley for example, the probably most famous proponent of GBU, says we must reject eternalism, because it conflicts with (libertarian) free will. Hence, I can at least see why people would favor GBU.

I'm all about free will. I think truth is more important though.
I sure think we have free will, just not libertarian.

Is free will true? No idea.
You sound like vi_spex, lol.

Lol. I miss that guy already.

Hm, I did not expect time travel paradoxes to make it into the OP list. I tried to set up an illustration of why gravity propagating into the past is problematic using @ and $ and little ---> arrows symbols in a cute little pictue but it got way too complicated way too fast and now my brain is broke. Its harder than it looks, trying to represent four dimensions on a two dimensional surface lol.

I'll read that article you linked but suffice it to say for now, I am skeptical of it. Maybe I will learn something at least.
Cobalt - You could be scum too.
Matt - I suppose. But I also might not be.

Kiri - Yeah, I don't know what DD is doing.
Vaarka - He's doin'a thingy do

DD - The best advice most often goes unheeded.
Wise Man - KYS, DD.
DD - Case in point ^
Fkkize
Posts: 2,149
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2015 9:49:30 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/5/2015 11:45:13 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:

Hm, I did not expect time travel paradoxes to make it into the OP list. I tried to set up an illustration of why gravity propagating into the past is problematic using @ and $ and little ---> arrows symbols in a cute little pictue but it got way too complicated way too fast and now my brain is broke. Its harder than it looks, trying to represent four dimensions on a two dimensional surface lol.
I know that feel. Never think about hypercubes...

I'll read that article you linked but suffice it to say for now, I am skeptical of it. Maybe I will learn something at least.
Look out for our team debate :)
: At 7/2/2016 3:05:07 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
:
: space contradicts logic
tejretics
Posts: 6,094
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2015 4:23:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/5/2015 7:40:03 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
The purpose of this thread is to host an open dialectic on the topic of a new (new for me at least, I only heard about it a few months ago) theory on the nature of dark matter and, more specifically, the implications of this theory as it relates to various philosophical questions regarding the nature of time.

Concepts that will be discussed include:
- Gravitational propagation
- The nature of dark matter
- Time as a dimension of spacetime
- Growing Block Universe theory of time
- Eternalism and Presentism theories of time
- Anything else related to any of this that is brought up.

Please keep in mind that the actual theory itself is only meant to explain the nature of 'dark matter' and on its own does little to speculate on the implications of such for the various theories of time which exist. Such speculations are the reason for the existence of this thread.

Now I will present the basic ideas behind the scientific theory which inspired this thread. Because I am reciting this mostly from memory there may be some holes in the picture I am about to paint until/unless I rediscover the actual scientific paper that I read all those months ago rather than just some article about the theory.

Without further ado:

Previous ideas regarding the phenomenon known as dark matter tend to make the same fundamental assumption about dark matter. This assumption, simply put, is that dark matter is... well... matter. More specifically it is a form of matter that, for various reasons, is difficult to impossible to detect. This seems like a reasonable enough assumption given the observations.

But what if this assumption is wrong?

What if instead this phenomenon can be explained without any new exotic forms of matter, and without the need for any new fundamental forces to exist? What if dark matter phenomenon can be explained with nothing more than a new theory of gravity?

Conventional theories of gravity state that gravity propagates through the three spatial dimensions, but what if gravity propagates through the fourth dimension of time as well? experiments have confirmed that propagation of effects through time in this manner is in fact possible. It has not yet been confirmed that this is the case with gravity for certain, but it is certainly possible that it is. If indeed gravity does project through the fourth dimension of time then this could explain various phenomenon proported to be the result of exotic undetectable dark matter.

So, the question is if gravity propagates through the fourth dimension of time then what does this say about various philosophical ideas such as eternalism or presentalism? While I do have my own opinion as to the answer to this question I do not yet wish to elaborate further upon said opinion, both because I want to hear what others have to say and also because my fingers hurt from all this typing already.

If gravity propagates to the fourth dimension, an inference to the best explanation would suggest that the passage of time is akin to passage through a spatial dimension, which confirms four dimensionalism and eternalism.[https://en.wikipedia.org...]
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
Discipulus_Didicit
Posts: 3,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2015 4:36:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/6/2015 4:23:08 PM, tejretics wrote:

If gravity propagates to the fourth dimension, an inference to the best explanation would suggest that the passage of time is akin to passage through a spatial dimension, which confirms four dimensionalism and eternalism.[https://en.wikipedia.org...]

Do you think four dimensionalism is inconsistent with GBU/SBU models then?
Cobalt - You could be scum too.
Matt - I suppose. But I also might not be.

Kiri - Yeah, I don't know what DD is doing.
Vaarka - He's doin'a thingy do

DD - The best advice most often goes unheeded.
Wise Man - KYS, DD.
DD - Case in point ^
Fkkize
Posts: 2,149
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2015 4:42:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/6/2015 4:36:41 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
At 8/6/2015 4:23:08 PM, tejretics wrote:

If gravity propagates to the fourth dimension, an inference to the best explanation would suggest that the passage of time is akin to passage through a spatial dimension, which confirms four dimensionalism and eternalism.[https://en.wikipedia.org...]

Do you think four dimensionalism is inconsistent with GBU/SBU models then?
It is completely compatible. Any sensible person should adhere to per- or exdurantism. Except of course for the poor presentist, who, again, only get endurantism.
: At 7/2/2016 3:05:07 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
:
: space contradicts logic
Discipulus_Didicit
Posts: 3,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2015 4:47:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/6/2015 4:42:47 PM, Fkkize wrote:
At 8/6/2015 4:36:41 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
At 8/6/2015 4:23:08 PM, tejretics wrote:

If gravity propagates to the fourth dimension, an inference to the best explanation would suggest that the passage of time is akin to passage through a spatial dimension, which confirms four dimensionalism and eternalism.[https://en.wikipedia.org...]

Do you think four dimensionalism is inconsistent with GBU/SBU models then?
It is completely compatible. Any sensible person should adhere to per- or exdurantism. Except of course for the poor presentist, who, again, only get endurantism.

I agree that it is compatible, it seemed like tej was saying that he thought they were not. Perhaps I misread his post.
Cobalt - You could be scum too.
Matt - I suppose. But I also might not be.

Kiri - Yeah, I don't know what DD is doing.
Vaarka - He's doin'a thingy do

DD - The best advice most often goes unheeded.
Wise Man - KYS, DD.
DD - Case in point ^
Fkkize
Posts: 2,149
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2015 4:56:27 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/6/2015 4:47:23 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
At 8/6/2015 4:42:47 PM, Fkkize wrote:
At 8/6/2015 4:36:41 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
At 8/6/2015 4:23:08 PM, tejretics wrote:

If gravity propagates to the fourth dimension, an inference to the best explanation would suggest that the passage of time is akin to passage through a spatial dimension, which confirms four dimensionalism and eternalism.[https://en.wikipedia.org...]

Do you think four dimensionalism is inconsistent with GBU/SBU models then?
It is completely compatible. Any sensible person should adhere to per- or exdurantism. Except of course for the poor presentist, who, again, only get endurantism.

I agree that it is compatible, it seemed like tej was saying that he thought they were not. Perhaps I misread his post.
Do you prefer endurantism or exdurantism?
: At 7/2/2016 3:05:07 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
:
: space contradicts logic
Discipulus_Didicit
Posts: 3,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2015 5:12:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/6/2015 4:56:27 PM, Fkkize wrote:
At 8/6/2015 4:47:23 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
At 8/6/2015 4:42:47 PM, Fkkize wrote:
At 8/6/2015 4:36:41 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
At 8/6/2015 4:23:08 PM, tejretics wrote:

If gravity propagates to the fourth dimension, an inference to the best explanation would suggest that the passage of time is akin to passage through a spatial dimension, which confirms four dimensionalism and eternalism.[https://en.wikipedia.org...]

Do you think four dimensionalism is inconsistent with GBU/SBU models then?
It is completely compatible. Any sensible person should adhere to per- or exdurantism. Except of course for the poor presentist, who, again, only get endurantism.

I agree that it is compatible, it seemed like tej was saying that he thought they were not. Perhaps I misread his post.
Do you prefer endurantism or exdurantism?

In truth, I am not well versed in all the intricacies of metaphysical philosophy and I have no idea what those words mean. I could easily google the words and then answer, pretending I knew all along, but instead I will admit my ignorance and file it away as something potentially interesting to read up on at a later date.
Cobalt - You could be scum too.
Matt - I suppose. But I also might not be.

Kiri - Yeah, I don't know what DD is doing.
Vaarka - He's doin'a thingy do

DD - The best advice most often goes unheeded.
Wise Man - KYS, DD.
DD - Case in point ^
Fkkize
Posts: 2,149
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2015 5:16:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/6/2015 5:12:55 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
At 8/6/2015 4:56:27 PM, Fkkize wrote:
At 8/6/2015 4:47:23 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
At 8/6/2015 4:42:47 PM, Fkkize wrote:
At 8/6/2015 4:36:41 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
At 8/6/2015 4:23:08 PM, tejretics wrote:

If gravity propagates to the fourth dimension, an inference to the best explanation would suggest that the passage of time is akin to passage through a spatial dimension, which confirms four dimensionalism and eternalism.[https://en.wikipedia.org...]

Do you think four dimensionalism is inconsistent with GBU/SBU models then?
It is completely compatible. Any sensible person should adhere to per- or exdurantism. Except of course for the poor presentist, who, again, only get endurantism.

I agree that it is compatible, it seemed like tej was saying that he thought they were not. Perhaps I misread his post.
Do you prefer endurantism or exdurantism?

In truth, I am not well versed in all the intricacies of metaphysical philosophy and I have no idea what those words mean. I could easily google the words and then answer, pretending I knew all along, but instead I will admit my ignorance and file it away as something potentially interesting to read up on at a later date.

Fair enough.
: At 7/2/2016 3:05:07 PM, Rational_Thinker9119 wrote:
:
: space contradicts logic
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,872
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2015 6:23:45 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/5/2015 7:40:03 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
The purpose of this thread is to host an open dialectic on the topic of a new (new for me at least, I only heard about it a few months ago) theory on the nature of dark matter and, more specifically, the implications of this theory as it relates to various philosophical questions regarding the nature of time.

Concepts that will be discussed include:
- Gravitational propagation
- The nature of dark matter
- Time as a dimension of spacetime
- Growing Block Universe theory of time
- Eternalism and Presentism theories of time
- Anything else related to any of this that is brought up.

Please keep in mind that the actual theory itself is only meant to explain the nature of 'dark matter' and on its own does little to speculate on the implications of such for the various theories of time which exist. Such speculations are the reason for the existence of this thread.

Now I will present the basic ideas behind the scientific theory which inspired this thread. Because I am reciting this mostly from memory there may be some holes in the picture I am about to paint until/unless I rediscover the actual scientific paper that I read all those months ago rather than just some article about the theory.

Without further ado:

Previous ideas regarding the phenomenon known as dark matter tend to make the same fundamental assumption about dark matter. This assumption, simply put, is that dark matter is... well... matter. More specifically it is a form of matter that, for various reasons, is difficult to impossible to detect. This seems like a reasonable enough assumption given the observations.

But what if this assumption is wrong?

What if instead this phenomenon can be explained without any new exotic forms of matter, and without the need for any new fundamental forces to exist? What if dark matter phenomenon can be explained with nothing more than a new theory of gravity?

Conventional theories of gravity state that gravity propagates through the three spatial dimensions, but what if gravity propagates through the fourth dimension of time as well? experiments have confirmed that propagation of effects through time in this manner is in fact possible. It has not yet been confirmed that this is the case with gravity for certain, but it is certainly possible that it is. If indeed gravity does project through the fourth dimension of time then this could explain various phenomenon proported to be the result of exotic undetectable dark matter.

So, the question is if gravity propagates through the fourth dimension of time then what does this say about various philosophical ideas such as eternalism or presentalism? While I do have my own opinion as to the answer to this question I do not yet wish to elaborate further upon said opinion, both because I want to hear what others have to say and also because my fingers hurt from all this typing already.

I'm more interested in why gravity somehow has dismissed electromagnetism in regards to its effect in the universe. Electromagnetism is 10 to the 32 power more powerful on all objects in space. Chuck Kessler has a great presentation on this if you like in depth analysis on the overlooked things in the universe.

https://m.youtube.com...

As far as spacetime as a dimension,it's a religion for physicists as far as I'm concerned. No physical evidence of time, no proof it exists.
Discipulus_Didicit
Posts: 3,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2015 10:27:13 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/7/2015 6:23:45 AM, skipsaweirdo wrote:

I'm more interested in why gravity somehow has dismissed electromagnetism in regards to its effect in the universe. Electromagnetism is 10 to the 32 power more powerful on all objects in space. Chuck Kessler has a great presentation on this if you like in depth analysis on the overlooked things in the universe.

https://m.youtube.com...

As far as spacetime as a dimension,it's a religion for physicists as far as I'm concerned. No physical evidence of time, no proof it exists.

Ah, I was unaware that we had any plasma cosmologists on this site. Fascinating specimen!

Now physics is a subject that I am rather well versed in. I did not follow your link and I doubt that I will. If you would like to have a conversation about plasma cosmology I suggest we take it over to a different thread, preferably in the science fourm. As stated in the OP the topic of this dialectic is time, and I would rather not change that topic mid thread.
Cobalt - You could be scum too.
Matt - I suppose. But I also might not be.

Kiri - Yeah, I don't know what DD is doing.
Vaarka - He's doin'a thingy do

DD - The best advice most often goes unheeded.
Wise Man - KYS, DD.
DD - Case in point ^
tejretics
Posts: 6,094
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2015 12:41:51 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/6/2015 4:36:41 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
At 8/6/2015 4:23:08 PM, tejretics wrote:

If gravity propagates to the fourth dimension, an inference to the best explanation would suggest that the passage of time is akin to passage through a spatial dimension, which confirms four dimensionalism and eternalism.[https://en.wikipedia.org...]

Do you think four dimensionalism is inconsistent with GBU/SBU models then?

Of course not. That would be utter nonsense. But abductive reasoning taking into account four-dimensionalism would suggest complete tenselessness and eternalism.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
The-Voice-of-Truth
Posts: 6,573
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2015 2:13:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/5/2015 7:40:03 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
The purpose of this thread is to host an open dialectic on the topic of a new (new for me at least, I only heard about it a few months ago) theory on the nature of dark matter and, more specifically, the implications of this theory as it relates to various philosophical questions regarding the nature of time.

Interesting...


Concepts that will be discussed include:
- Gravitational propagation
- The nature of dark matter
- Time as a dimension of spacetime
- Growing Block Universe theory of time
- Eternalism and Presentism theories of time
- Anything else related to any of this that is brought up.

Please keep in mind that the actual theory itself is only meant to explain the nature of 'dark matter' and on its own does little to speculate on the implications of such for the various theories of time which exist. Such speculations are the reason for the existence of this thread.

Now I will present the basic ideas behind the scientific theory which inspired this thread. Because I am reciting this mostly from memory there may be some holes in the picture I am about to paint until/unless I rediscover the actual scientific paper that I read all those months ago rather than just some article about the theory.

Without further ado:

Previous ideas regarding the phenomenon known as dark matter tend to make the same fundamental assumption about dark matter. This assumption, simply put, is that dark matter is... well... matter. More specifically it is a form of matter that, for various reasons, is difficult to impossible to detect. This seems like a reasonable enough assumption given the observations.

I think this is wrong. I will expand on this later in my post.


But what if this assumption is wrong?

Boo-yah.


What if instead this phenomenon can be explained without any new exotic forms of matter, and without the need for any new fundamental forces to exist? What if dark matter phenomenon can be explained with nothing more than a new theory of gravity?

Never though of it this way: Dark Matter being a form of Gravity. I have my own theory as to just what exactly Dark Matter is.


Conventional theories of gravity state that gravity propagates through the three spatial dimensions, but what if gravity propagates through the fourth dimension of time as well? experiments have confirmed that propagation of effects through time in this manner is in fact possible. It has not yet been confirmed that this is the case with gravity for certain, but it is certainly possible that it is. If indeed gravity does project through the fourth dimension of time then this could explain various phenomenon proported to be the result of exotic undetectable dark matter.

This makes sense. It seems that everything within the Universe id capable of propagating throughout Time, so then why not the laws governing the Universe? The laws of the Universe are above and within everything thereof.

So, the question is if gravity propagates through the fourth dimension of time then what does this say about various philosophical ideas such as eternalism or presentalism? While I do have my own opinion as to the answer to this question I do not yet wish to elaborate further upon said opinion, both because I want to hear what others have to say and also because my fingers hurt from all this typing already.

I don't think Gravity propagating through Time would effect the actual interpretation of Time. To me, it makes sense that Time can still exist as one or can only exist presently while Gravity still propagates through it; I do not think that Gravitational propagation through Time would affect popular philosophical interpretations of TIme. Presently or eternally, everything still needs to be held together in some way or another, and Gravity propagating though Time would fulfill Dark Matter's supposed purpose of holding all particles in place. If you see any flaws in this, let me know and duly correct me if desire.

Now, concerning my theory about Dark Matter:

This concerns the Higgs Boson. Now, you may think that I am going to bring up that "Dark Matter is, well, matter" -- but your suppositions are wrong. Maybe, just maybe, the Higgs Boson (or possibly bosons as a whole) are channels for Dark Matter to propagate through. It is somewhat like the electrical signals and impulses that travel across our nervous systems or through wires; they are just channels for a force to move through.

The more I think about it, the theory that Gravity propagating through time goes in hand with this theory. Maybe Dark Matter is Gravity, and it propagates through Time and Space via the Higgs Boson.

Critiques? Criticism? Tell me what you think.
Suh dude

"Because we all know who the most important snowflake in the wasteland is... It's YOU, champ! You're a special snowflake." -Vaarka, 01:30 in the hangouts

"Screw laying siege to Korea. That usually takes an hour or so." -Vaarka

"Crap, what is my religion again?" -Vaarka

I'm Rick Harrison and this is my pawn shop. I work here with my old man and my son, Big Hoss, and in 23 years I've learned one thing. You never know what is gonna come through that door.
Discipulus_Didicit
Posts: 3,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2015 4:11:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/7/2015 2:13:20 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:

I don't think Gravity propagating through Time would effect the actual interpretation of Time. To me, it makes sense that Time can still exist as one or can only exist presently while Gravity still propagates through it; I do not think that Gravitational propagation through Time would affect popular philosophical interpretations of TIme. Presently or eternally, everything still needs to be held together in some way or another, and Gravity propagating though Time would fulfill Dark Matter's supposed purpose of holding all particles in place. If you see any flaws in this, let me know and duly correct me if desire.

If I understand your thinking correctly, you are saying that the reason this theory, even if true, does not significantly undermine or impact any current philosophy of time such as, say, presentism is because gravities propagation through time could simply be worked into the presentist model. Is this right? As you can probably tell I do not know much about philosophical ideas regarding time, I am more of a science guy. Learning more about the philosophical side is part of the reason I made this thread in the first place.

Now, concerning my theory about Dark Matter:

This concerns the Higgs Boson. Now, you may think that I am going to bring up that "Dark Matter is, well, matter" -- but your suppositions are wrong. Maybe, just maybe, the Higgs Boson (or possibly bosons as a whole) are channels for Dark Matter to propagate through. It is somewhat like the electrical signals and impulses that travel across our nervous systems or through wires; they are just channels for a force to move through.

I don't know how much you know about the Higgs Boson theory, but you seem to at least have the basics. Essentially there is a universal Higgs Boson 'field' overlapping with spacetime, and Higgs Boson virtual particles are the intermediaries between the Higgs field and all the matter in the universe. The Higgs 'particles' can interact with spacetime and the Higgs field, but the field itself cannot interact with spacetime. Because the Higgs is a virtual particle and not actually 'real' per se, this is perfectly consistent with the statement that dark matter is not matter.

The more I think about it, the theory that Gravity propagating through time goes in hand with this theory. Maybe Dark Matter is Gravity, and it propagates through Time and Space via the Higgs Boson.

Critiques? Criticism? Tell me what you think.

This would imply that the Higgs field exists outside of time, if it exists at all. The implications of this are potentially interesting.
Cobalt - You could be scum too.
Matt - I suppose. But I also might not be.

Kiri - Yeah, I don't know what DD is doing.
Vaarka - He's doin'a thingy do

DD - The best advice most often goes unheeded.
Wise Man - KYS, DD.
DD - Case in point ^
Discipulus_Didicit
Posts: 3,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2015 4:14:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/7/2015 12:41:51 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 8/6/2015 4:36:41 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
At 8/6/2015 4:23:08 PM, tejretics wrote:

If gravity propagates to the fourth dimension, an inference to the best explanation would suggest that the passage of time is akin to passage through a spatial dimension, which confirms four dimensionalism and eternalism.[https://en.wikipedia.org...]

Do you think four dimensionalism is inconsistent with GBU/SBU models then?

Of course not. That would be utter nonsense. But abductive reasoning taking into account four-dimensionalism would suggest complete tenselessness and eternalism.

I can see why you would say that this is potentially anti-presentist, but I do not understand your reasoning for saying that it is necessarily pro-eternalist.
Cobalt - You could be scum too.
Matt - I suppose. But I also might not be.

Kiri - Yeah, I don't know what DD is doing.
Vaarka - He's doin'a thingy do

DD - The best advice most often goes unheeded.
Wise Man - KYS, DD.
DD - Case in point ^
The-Voice-of-Truth
Posts: 6,573
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2015 4:37:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/7/2015 4:11:16 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
At 8/7/2015 2:13:20 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:

I don't think Gravity propagating through Time would effect the actual interpretation of Time. To me, it makes sense that Time can still exist as one or can only exist presently while Gravity still propagates through it; I do not think that Gravitational propagation through Time would affect popular philosophical interpretations of TIme. Presently or eternally, everything still needs to be held together in some way or another, and Gravity propagating though Time would fulfill Dark Matter's supposed purpose of holding all particles in place. If you see any flaws in this, let me know and duly correct me if desire.

If I understand your thinking correctly, you are saying that the reason this theory, even if true, does not significantly undermine or impact any current philosophy of time such as, say, presentism is because gravities propagation through time could simply be worked into the presentist model. Is this right? As you can probably tell I do not know much about philosophical ideas regarding time, I am more of a science guy. Learning more about the philosophical side is part of the reason I made this thread in the first place.

You are close. It's not just with presentism, but eternalism as well.

Now, concerning my theory about Dark Matter:

This concerns the Higgs Boson. Now, you may think that I am going to bring up that "Dark Matter is, well, matter" -- but your suppositions are wrong. Maybe, just maybe, the Higgs Boson (or possibly bosons as a whole) are channels for Dark Matter to propagate through. It is somewhat like the electrical signals and impulses that travel across our nervous systems or through wires; they are just channels for a force to move through.

I don't know how much you know about the Higgs Boson theory, but you seem to at least have the basics. Essentially there is a universal Higgs Boson 'field' overlapping with spacetime, and Higgs Boson virtual particles are the intermediaries between the Higgs field and all the matter in the universe. The Higgs 'particles' can interact with spacetime and the Higgs field, but the field itself cannot interact with spacetime. Because the Higgs is a virtual particle and not actually 'real' per se, this is perfectly consistent with the statement that dark matter is not matter.

Yeah, just really the basics. I knew about the field and the "particle." I haven't though about this until now, but maybe the Higgs Field is Dark Matter (or Gravity, even)? And the actual Boson "Particle" is the intermediary channel between physical matter and Dark Matter, since it interacts with both the Higgs Field and actual matter?

The more I think about it, the theory that Gravity propagating through time goes in hand with this theory. Maybe Dark Matter is Gravity, and it propagates through Time and Space via the Higgs Boson.

Critiques? Criticism? Tell me what you think.

This would imply that the Higgs field exists outside of time, if it exists at all. The implications of this are potentially interesting.

True. Correct me if I am wrong, but do the laws of the Universe not exist outside of time? You know, since they govern not just time, but everything in all dimensions? So, if this were to be held true, then perhaps the Higgs Field (if it exists) could very well exist outside of time. I would like to see where this would lead in the research field. Perhaps we could petition CERN to take a look into this (probably not, though)?
Suh dude

"Because we all know who the most important snowflake in the wasteland is... It's YOU, champ! You're a special snowflake." -Vaarka, 01:30 in the hangouts

"Screw laying siege to Korea. That usually takes an hour or so." -Vaarka

"Crap, what is my religion again?" -Vaarka

I'm Rick Harrison and this is my pawn shop. I work here with my old man and my son, Big Hoss, and in 23 years I've learned one thing. You never know what is gonna come through that door.
tejretics
Posts: 6,094
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2015 6:30:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/7/2015 2:13:20 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:

Please stop capitalizing, it's hurting my eyes, lol. "Dark matter" is not "Dark Matter," and "Higgs boson" is not "Higgs Boson."

Firstly, if dark matter is made of Higgs bosons, then dark matter isn't even matter. The interaction with the Higgs field gives mass to *other* particles, therefore is massless. If the Higgs boson is massless, then it isn't dark matter.

Secondly, I don't see how Higgs bosons would explain *any* of the phenomena attributed to dark matter -- please expand.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
tejretics
Posts: 6,094
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2015 6:31:31 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/7/2015 4:14:12 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
At 8/7/2015 12:41:51 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 8/6/2015 4:36:41 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
At 8/6/2015 4:23:08 PM, tejretics wrote:

If gravity propagates to the fourth dimension, an inference to the best explanation would suggest that the passage of time is akin to passage through a spatial dimension, which confirms four dimensionalism and eternalism.[https://en.wikipedia.org...]

Do you think four dimensionalism is inconsistent with GBU/SBU models then?

Of course not. That would be utter nonsense. But abductive reasoning taking into account four-dimensionalism would suggest complete tenselessness and eternalism.

I can see why you would say that this is potentially anti-presentist, but I do not understand your reasoning for saying that it is necessarily pro-eternalist.

Not necessarily. *Abductively.*
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
tejretics
Posts: 6,094
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2015 6:33:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/7/2015 4:11:16 PM, Discipulus_Didicit wrote:
This would imply that the Higgs field exists outside of time, if it exists at all. The implications of this are potentially interesting.

The Standard Model posits that the Higgs field exists. That's also the best explanation for particle mass.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
The-Voice-of-Truth
Posts: 6,573
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2015 6:45:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/7/2015 6:30:55 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 8/7/2015 2:13:20 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:

Please stop capitalizing, it's hurting my eyes, lol. "Dark matter" is not "Dark Matter," and "Higgs boson" is not "Higgs Boson."

Firstly, if dark matter is made of Higgs bosons, then dark matter isn't even matter. The interaction with the Higgs field gives mass to *other* particles, therefore is massless. If the Higgs boson is massless, then it isn't dark matter.

But is that not the theory proposed by Mr.LatinSometing_Name? That maybe, just maybe, dark matter (Fix'd) is not matter at all, but the propagation of gravity through time? The Higgs field gives mass to other particles, so why can it not hold all particles together (which have mass), and thus fulfill the supposed role of Dark matter as well? If it gives mass (without which matter cannot exist, as matter takes up space, and anything that takes up space has mass), can it not hold together the matter (and thus the mass)?

Secondly, I don't see how Higgs bosons would explain *any* of the phenomena attributed to dark matter -- please expand.

I was saying that the Higgs boson could be the medium used by dark matter to hold all things together -- and why not? The Higgs field already gives mass to objects, why not relate it to matter, which cannot exist without mass? The Higgs field could be a side-effect of the propagation of gravity through a Higgs boson.

Sounds kinda out there; I know. I'm just really bored.
Suh dude

"Because we all know who the most important snowflake in the wasteland is... It's YOU, champ! You're a special snowflake." -Vaarka, 01:30 in the hangouts

"Screw laying siege to Korea. That usually takes an hour or so." -Vaarka

"Crap, what is my religion again?" -Vaarka

I'm Rick Harrison and this is my pawn shop. I work here with my old man and my son, Big Hoss, and in 23 years I've learned one thing. You never know what is gonna come through that door.
tejretics
Posts: 6,094
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2015 6:51:27 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/7/2015 6:45:48 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 8/7/2015 6:30:55 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 8/7/2015 2:13:20 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:

Please stop capitalizing, it's hurting my eyes, lol. "Dark matter" is not "Dark Matter," and "Higgs boson" is not "Higgs Boson."

Firstly, if dark matter is made of Higgs bosons, then dark matter isn't even matter. The interaction with the Higgs field gives mass to *other* particles, therefore is massless. If the Higgs boson is massless, then it isn't dark matter.

But is that not the theory proposed by Mr.LatinSometing_Name? That maybe, just maybe, dark matter (Fix'd) is not matter at all, but the propagation of gravity through time? The Higgs field gives mass to other particles, so why can it not hold all particles together (which have mass), and thus fulfill the supposed role of Dark matter as well? If it gives mass (without which matter cannot exist, as matter takes up space, and anything that takes up space has mass), can it not hold together the matter (and thus the mass)?

Dark matter = needs mass
Higgs boson = gives mass

I don't think it sounds that right. Neutrinos are a better option.


Secondly, I don't see how Higgs bosons would explain *any* of the phenomena attributed to dark matter -- please expand.

I was saying that the Higgs boson could be the medium used by dark matter to hold all things together -- and why not? The Higgs field already gives mass to objects, why not relate it to matter, which cannot exist without mass? The Higgs field could be a side-effect of the propagation of gravity through a Higgs boson.

But dark matter doesn't "hold all things together" . . .


Sounds kinda out there; I know. I'm just really bored.

Turn liberal
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
The-Voice-of-Truth
Posts: 6,573
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2015 6:56:21 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/7/2015 6:51:27 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 8/7/2015 6:45:48 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 8/7/2015 6:30:55 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 8/7/2015 2:13:20 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:

Please stop capitalizing, it's hurting my eyes, lol. "Dark matter" is not "Dark Matter," and "Higgs boson" is not "Higgs Boson."

Firstly, if dark matter is made of Higgs bosons, then dark matter isn't even matter. The interaction with the Higgs field gives mass to *other* particles, therefore is massless. If the Higgs boson is massless, then it isn't dark matter.

But is that not the theory proposed by Mr.LatinSometing_Name? That maybe, just maybe, dark matter (Fix'd) is not matter at all, but the propagation of gravity through time? The Higgs field gives mass to other particles, so why can it not hold all particles together (which have mass), and thus fulfill the supposed role of Dark matter as well? If it gives mass (without which matter cannot exist, as matter takes up space, and anything that takes up space has mass), can it not hold together the matter (and thus the mass)?

Dark matter = needs mass

I would think that if dark matter was matter, then we would feel it, don't you think?

Higgs boson = gives mass

Why, then, does the Higgs boson not give mass to dark matter?


I don't think it sounds that right. Neutrinos are a better option.

Maybe.



Secondly, I don't see how Higgs bosons would explain *any* of the phenomena attributed to dark matter -- please expand.

I was saying that the Higgs boson could be the medium used by dark matter to hold all things together -- and why not? The Higgs field already gives mass to objects, why not relate it to matter, which cannot exist without mass? The Higgs field could be a side-effect of the propagation of gravity through a Higgs boson.

But dark matter doesn't "hold all things together" . . .

I've heard different... I guess my source (though I don't remember: this was like a year ago) was off.



Sounds kinda out there; I know. I'm just really bored.

Turn liberal

NEVER. lol
Suh dude

"Because we all know who the most important snowflake in the wasteland is... It's YOU, champ! You're a special snowflake." -Vaarka, 01:30 in the hangouts

"Screw laying siege to Korea. That usually takes an hour or so." -Vaarka

"Crap, what is my religion again?" -Vaarka

I'm Rick Harrison and this is my pawn shop. I work here with my old man and my son, Big Hoss, and in 23 years I've learned one thing. You never know what is gonna come through that door.
tejretics
Posts: 6,094
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2015 6:58:25 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/7/2015 6:56:21 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 8/7/2015 6:51:27 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 8/7/2015 6:45:48 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:
At 8/7/2015 6:30:55 PM, tejretics wrote:
At 8/7/2015 2:13:20 PM, The-Voice-of-Truth wrote:

Please stop capitalizing, it's hurting my eyes, lol. "Dark matter" is not "Dark Matter," and "Higgs boson" is not "Higgs Boson."

Firstly, if dark matter is made of Higgs bosons, then dark matter isn't even matter. The interaction with the Higgs field gives mass to *other* particles, therefore is massless. If the Higgs boson is massless, then it isn't dark matter.

But is that not the theory proposed by Mr.LatinSometing_Name? That maybe, just maybe, dark matter (Fix'd) is not matter at all, but the propagation of gravity through time? The Higgs field gives mass to other particles, so why can it not hold all particles together (which have mass), and thus fulfill the supposed role of Dark matter as well? If it gives mass (without which matter cannot exist, as matter takes up space, and anything that takes up space has mass), can it not hold together the matter (and thus the mass)?

Dark matter = needs mass

I would think that if dark matter was matter, then we would feel it, don't you think?

No.


Higgs boson = gives mass

Why, then, does the Higgs boson not give mass to dark matter?

Of course it gives mass to dark matter. It gives mass to everything. If X has mass, it interacts with the Higgs field.



I don't think it sounds that right. Neutrinos are a better option.

Maybe.



Secondly, I don't see how Higgs bosons would explain *any* of the phenomena attributed to dark matter -- please expand.

I was saying that the Higgs boson could be the medium used by dark matter to hold all things together -- and why not? The Higgs field already gives mass to objects, why not relate it to matter, which cannot exist without mass? The Higgs field could be a side-effect of the propagation of gravity through a Higgs boson.

But dark matter doesn't "hold all things together" . . .

I've heard different... I guess my source (though I don't remember: this was like a year ago) was off.



Sounds kinda out there; I know. I'm just really bored.

Turn liberal

NEVER. lol

I mean, I'd support cutting tax rates anyway, but my Big Issues are largely liberal(ish).
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass