Dark Physics: Resurfacing the universe point by point

41
Dark Physics Resurfacing the universe point by point James E. Beichler OSAPS Fall Meeting 8-9 October 2010 Marietta College, Ohio

Transcript of Dark Physics: Resurfacing the universe point by point

Dark Physics Resurfacing the universe point by point

James E. Beichler

OSAPS Fall Meeting 8-9 October 2010 Marietta College, Ohio

In the past few decades two new ‘crises’ for fundamental physics have emerged by the observation of phenomena that indicate the existence of

Dark Matter and Dark Energy. These are not problems which can be solved by quantum theory, but rather problems that are related to gravity theory as

expressed by the general theory of relativity. Numerous ideas and hypotheses have been suggested to explain these problems, but no particular hypothesis or resulting model has yet proven satisfactory. No model proposed within the framework of the present paradigms seems to be able to explain either DM or

DE even though most physicists agree that the two should have a single common explanation. However, a new model has been developed to explain both DM and DE by reinterpreting and unifying the present paradigms. This

model includes a fundamental change in Newtonian gravity theory that expands three-dimensional space to four dimensions and thus forces the

acceptance of an extrinsically curved four-dimensional space-time in relativity. The extra gravity term can then be equated to the Lambda-CDM that has already been added to Einstein’s equation describing the surface

curvature of the universe and leads to a unification with the quantum. Yet this new model is not without consequences for the rest of physics and science.

Accepting this new model would mean accepting the reality of a macroscopically extended fourth space-like dimension.

10/09/2010 James E. Beichler 2

The source and nature of both Dark Matter and Dark Energy are the ‘crises’ in physics of our day. It

is generally assumed that explaining either one will lead to a

scientific revolution

06/12/2010 3 James E. Beichler

2006 Report of the DETF

Dark energy appears to be the dominant component of the physical Universe, yet there is no persuasive theoretical

explanation for its existence or magnitude. The acceleration of the Universe is, along with dark matter, the observed phenomenon that most directly demonstrates that our

theories of fundamental particles and gravity are either incorrect or incomplete. Most experts believe that nothing short of a revolution in our understanding of fundamental physics will be required to achieve a full understanding of the cosmic acceleration. For these reasons, the nature of dark energy ranks among the very most compelling of all

outstanding problems in physical science. These circumstances demand an ambitious observational program to determine the dark energy properties as well as possible.

06/12/2010 4 James E. Beichler

Numerous suggestions and hypotheses have been put forward to explain DM and DE, but no particular

hypothesis or resulting model has proven satisfactory and no model yet proposed in mainstream physics is

able to explain both DM, in either let alone both of its forms of CDM or HDM, and DE even though most physicists agree that the two should have a single

common explanation.

Having said that, DM and DE can be easily explained by thinking outside the box of mainstream physics.

06/12/2010 5 James E. Beichler

As each star or star system is added to the galaxy and orbits the

galactic core, it has a component of gravitationally derived velocity as well as an extra component that

corresponds to the four-dimensionality of the galactic plane

06/12/2010 6 James E. Beichler

The more stars added to the galactic plane, the greater the four-dimensionality and

variation from the average curvature of the universe as a whole

06/12/2010 7 James E. Beichler

The halo forms around the galaxy to maintain three-dimensional continuity with

the rest of the universe

We ‘observe’ galaxies as part of our three-

dimensional surface with the added ‘halos’

Quantum and other restrictions limit our commonly perceived

material reality to three-dimensions so what we ‘observe’ is

the actual three-dimensional material reality of our existence

06/12/2010 James E. Beichler 10

Since ‘observed’ material reality is restricted to three-dimensionality, the stars in the galactic rim cannot

‘really’ stick out into the fourth dimension of space and thus pick up DE to increase their speed to a

constant value

06/12/2010 James E. Beichler 11

The ‘Classical’ Paradigm

FEM = qE + qv ⊗ B Scalar Potential field Vector Potential field

FGr = mg Scalar Potential field

General Relativity

Intrinsic space-time curvature

06/12/2010 12 James E. Beichler

Gravity has a centripetal component to it as well as the

normal radial component directed toward the center of mass of the

system.

06/12/2010 James E. Beichler 13

However, unlike normal centripetal forces whereby ‘r’ remains constant

at constant ‘v’ when the object is restricted to remain in circular motion by some physical means, the galactic situation is reverse and the DM halo

restricts the motion which causes constant ‘v’

06/12/2010 James E. Beichler 14

A higher than gravity-normal ‘v’ should cause the stars systems in the rim to spin out of the galaxy, but the extra

component of gravity is directed in the fourth direction while the actual motion is constricted to three-

dimensional space - the inertia (mv) of the star systems compensates with a

constant v in what can be called a reversal of normal centripetal situation 06/12/2010 James E. Beichler 15

We ‘observe’ galaxies as part of our three-

dimensional surface with the added ‘halos’

The New Paradigm

FEM = qE + qv ⊗ B Scalar Potential field Vector Potential field

FGr = mg + mv ⊗ Γ

Scalar Potential field Vector Potential field

General Relativity

Extrinsic space-time curvature 3-D 4-D

06/12/2010 17 James E. Beichler

The New Paradigm

FEM = qE + qv ⊗ B Scalar Potential field Vector Potential field

FGr = mg + mv ⊗ Γ

Scalar Potential field Mach’s Principle Vector Potential field

General Relativity

Extrinsic space-time curvature 3-D 4-D

06/12/2010 18 James E. Beichler

DM and DE explained

FEM = qE + qv ⊗ B Scalar Potential field Vector Potential field

FGr = mg + mv ⊗ Γ

Scalar Potential field Mach’s Principle

Vector Potential field

(is Dark Energy)

General Relativity

Extrinsic space-time curvature 3-D 4-D (is Dark Matter)

06/12/2010 19 James E. Beichler

The momentum mv is three-dimensional or what the gravity normal would be ‘if’ the galactic plane protruded tangentially into

the fourth dimension, but the cross product throws it into the

fourth dimension

06/12/2010 James E. Beichler 20

mvrel

mg

06/12/2010 21 James E. Beichler

06/12/2010 22 James E. Beichler

06/12/2010 23 James E. Beichler

Newtonian space with a separate time has now been

four-dimensionalized

06/12/2010 James E. Beichler 24

06/12/2010 25 James E. Beichler

Now we can move to an equivalent relativistic model of a five-dimensional space-

time continuum

06/12/2010 James E. Beichler 26

06/12/2010 27 James E. Beichler

The New Paradigm

FGr = mg + mv ⊗ Γ

Tμν = G μν + λ 3-D space/4-D space-time 4-D space/5-D space-time

06/12/2010 28 James E. Beichler

The basic equations of SOFT

Einstein 4-D space-time

5-D space-time

4-D space-time with anti-symmetric portion

Quantum gravity

T G

T G g

F m g

hrgr g ( )

T

06/12/2010 29 James E. Beichler

The component x5, a distance in the fourth direction of the four-dimensional space, is

additive for each succeeding gravitational mass orbiting or moving around a central mass, thus causing the plane of a galaxy to grow tangentially to the overall space

curvature of the universe

F m g m

d

dtxgr 0 0 5( )

F m g m

d

dtxgr 0 0 5( ) sin

F m g pgr g F

F m g m vgr g I rel

06/12/2010 30 James E. Beichler

The Flint momentum

06/12/2010 31 James E. Beichler

n.d.

• Flint relates the basic fundamental electric charge to a 5-D momentum

• The quantity Π5 = g/αc (α = constant in KK theory of the EM field) is a component of momentum with the conjugate coordinate u5

• Flint regards the electron, photon and positron as “aspects of the same thing”

• and etc – Here flint defines the quantum with regard to 5-D space-time

5

5

du nh

06/12/2010 32 James E. Beichler

‘Particles’ - n.d.

• “It seems implied that the simple assumption of a fundamental particle is not possible – the limit must result from a relativistic assumption. The only way seems to be a relativistic limit to measurement.”

• So he is using the quantum as a limiting factor within the 5-D continuous field

• “Instead of a fundamental particle would mean a limit exists, but the particle would be available for Lorentz rule of change of length in motion. The introduction would mean that a limit exists.”

06/12/2010 33 James E. Beichler

Flint’s final unification - 1966 • The Quantum Equation and the Theory of Fields

Methuen’s Monographs of Physical Subjects – 1. The Theory of Relativity

– 2. Theory of Kaluza and Klein

– 3. Field Theories

– 4. The Symmetric Energy tensor and the Tensor of Moment of Momentum

– 5. The Derivation of the First Order Quantum Equation

– 6. Continuation of the Field Theories

– 7. The Basis of the Theory in Accordance with the Principles and Notation of the General Theory of Relativity

06/12/2010 34 James E. Beichler

Other contributors • 1928 - W. Wilson derived the Klein-Gordon equation

assuming a 5-D volume equal to Schrodinger's wave function

• 1926-1966 - H.T. Flint incorporated the Yukawa Potential, Dirac equation and other quantum features into the 5-D field model

• 1995 - Vu B. Ho derives the Yukawa Potential directly from the General Relativistic 4-D model of curved space-time

• 2008 - Shifflett shows that the Einstein-Schrödinger skew-symmetric form of the Einstein equation with Λ-CDM implies a 5-D structure for space-time

06/12/2010 35 James E. Beichler

Working backwards from Shifflett - If the Einstein curvature tensor is 5-D with both 4-D symmetric and anti-symmetric parts, both gravity

(symmetric) and Λ-CDM (anti-symmetric) are accounted for

06/12/2010 James E. Beichler 36

What can this explain? Almost Everything!

It is absolutely impossible for particle physicists to depict

quarks in any logical manner – Why? – Because there are no physical particles called

quarks, they are just mathematical entities

06/12/2010 38 James E. Beichler

Quarks are really dimensions

06/12/2010 39 James E. Beichler

The quantum of electrical charge ‘e’ is just a strain in the surrounding space

due to an internal stress in real extended particles and a quark is just how that stress is redistributed along

the 3-Ds of space within a particle (according to a quantized Pascal's Principle) during a collision with another real extended particle

06/12/2010 40 James E. Beichler

What does this theory predict? • Existence of DM halos around all material objects –

Galaxies, Stars, Planets (Titus-Bode Law?)

• The shape of these DM halos would be spherical around individual objects but elliptical around galaxies

• An additional velocity for the slingshot effect

• The existence of ultra-high speed ionized particles (cosmic rays) exiting galaxies

• An increasing rate of expansion of the universe as well as a corresponding decrease in earlier times

• The existence of a proton dominated universe

• The amount of DE in any 3-D volume of empty space

• Galactic diameters are slightly less than predicted by normal gravity theory

06/12/2010 41 James E. Beichler