Quantum321

Koti. No gravity is not a separate force. Gravity wave A is the strong nuclear force and gravity wave b is the weak force. Scientists have know this for some time now but keep it under wraps.

Where is the gravity in space that interacts with the gravity of matter? Gravity is the weak and strong atomic forces. How does space interact with these forces?

studiot I understand that space is expanding using the process you described. But there is no friction in space. When space expands and encounters the atoms in a galaxy what pushes the atoms. Now I am sure you will say that in the current understanding of cosmological models that its intrinsic. But from a physical perspective I don't get it. Let's look at it this way. Where ever I am in the universe everything appears to be moving away from everything else. There is no preferred place. So if space is expanding what why are the galaxies moving?

Well, all of space is space time according to Einstein. My question is simple. Space is expanding. What force carries galaxies along with the expanding space. One would think that space would just flow around the galaxies. I know that atoms and molecules are locked together in galaxies and do not expand. I tried to look this up on the internet but no one addresses this question. Mr. Hanke " The tendency for the spatial part of it to expand is intrinsic in this type of spacetime geometry" This is where I have a problem. I look at this as an assumption. What is the mechanism?

It's difficult for me to get my head around this. What force moves the galaxies along with space time? One would think that space time would just flow around the galaxies. Are galaxies moving with space time because of dark energy?

I Exactly. I am saying it is possible that DM could be released in the experiments and no one would ever know it because the detectors are designed to detect the subatomic particles we can detect. If in the early universe the amount of matter and antimatter were nearly equal then how much DM was present at that time? As strange correctly points out DM has been around at least as long as matter. There are seven new telescopes that are being produced. One of their tasks will be to try to see dark matter. If any are successful then it may be possible to adjust the LHC to detect DM.

There is no question it is well worth the time, effort and money. Its opened up a whole new world. I am questioning if it will ever detect DM.

The justification for the LHC was it could recreate the conditions and produce all the particles present just after the BB. Here is the problem. Dark mater. If you believe like I do that everything in our universe was created during the BB (what ever that was) then it also created Dark matter. With the current detectors in the LHC we won't detect Dark matter. How can you detect something you don't know exists. Of course you detect the gravity. However, with the enormous abundance of Dark matter in the universe one would surly think the Dark matter particle (if that's what it is) would have been detected by now. But it hasn't. It also hasn't detected mini black holes would indicate the existence of extra dimensions, which would support string theory and related models as well as parallel universes. Its possible that physics as we know it can't explain all of our observations. I am not saying throw out physics, I am saying it isn't going to do us much good in the world the LHC has created. "The next few years may tell us whether we'll be able to continue to increase our understanding of nature or whether maybe, for the first time in the history of science, we could be facing questions that we cannot answer," Harry Cliff, a particle physicist at the European Organization for Nuclear Research — better known as CERN — said during a recent TED talk in Geneva, Switzerland. http://www.businessinsider.com/the-end-of-physics-as-we-know-it-2016-1

I heard the increase rate of expansion of the universe began 3 Billion years ago. I think the hunt for a single particle as the cause will prove to be fruitless. Until scientists unravel the mysteries of quantum Vacuum Fluctuations and Virtual Particles and Annihilation's I don't see any answers to Dark energy. There is so much going on in space-time and so far its pretty much a mystery. I am exploring the possibility that Cosmic rays may be accelerating the expansion...My thinking is expansion is everywhere..cosmic rays are everywhere. An extreme-energy cosmic ray (EECR) is an UHECR possess energy exceeding 5×1019 eV about 8 joules. That's a lot of energy. Where these cosmic rays (nucleus of atoms) come from is really unknown. How they would exchange their energy with space-time is also unknown...any thoughts?

It has been my understanding that the prominent force with protons etc. are static charges not waves as such.

Very interesting comments. Strange you are just to damn smart. A compliment...but you need more imagination..M theory..strings vibrate different frequencies......I know all waves possess momentum..Momentum carries energy. Waves can be electromagnetic or gluons. Are there other types of waves. Here is what I am thinking...the universe is not complicated. Back to basics. We can't know how it all began. All what we can do is explain what we know now. Since the LHC has not detected any particles smaller than quarks....can we assume quarks are the smallest particle?

The micro-universe is comprised only of waves of energy...different frequencies...and charges...please contribute to this thread... I can find nothing else that contributes to out understanding of the atom...

My comments regarding hypothesis being guesses is in no way in no way contrary to everything you and strange have said. I consider the advancement of our world to be directly attributed to outstanding work of our scientists.

I just had one of my threads shut down by a monitor. Essentially it said a hypothesis was a guess. I just remembered one of Richard Feynmans quotes I loved. It was ""First you guess. Don't laugh, this is the most important step." I was just about to post it when the thread was closed. Pity.

I disagree. Physics gives names to countless things they don't understand like dark energy and dark matter.

A virtual particle is a transient fluctuation that exhibits many of the characteristics of an ordinary particle, but that exists for a limited time. Isn't this really saying ' something is going on we just don't understand?'

Quantum theory is the theoretical basis of modern physics that explains the nature and behavior of matter and energy on the atomic and subatomic level. Lets discuss virtual photons and how they are exchanged by electrons. Virtual particles are an accepted particle in physics. Exactly what are virtual particles?

Another hard line text book comment from a physicist wanna be.

LOL I am discussing certain aspects of current theory. I don't need a theory or model for that. Lets get you theories on record...what is gravity?

"All theories are incomplete" LOL What a cop out! And a typical strange comment way of saying "we don't know" Please explain this ridiculous comment and how it relates to my comments regarding alternated theories. That doesn't mean you can just make stuff up I discuss theories here. It is easy to sit on your wallet and regenerate the current physics dogma, which is neither right or wrong than come up with ANY creative or new ideas of your own?? You are an encyclopedia...with no original thought. Go to you desk and learn how to create new ideas that solve current problems in physics.

Shall we discuss gluon waves. They are waves and act just as photons do and as all quantum objects do. They have momenta, and since they are massless, their frequency/wavelength/energy/momentum relations are the same as for photons. I come from an amateur radio background and because I am familiar with electromagnetic waves propagate endlessly my thoughts were confined to these types of waves. However, gluons exhibit particle duality. The strong force has no theoretical limit to its range, as gluons have no mass. They travels at the speed of light when created and annihilated in their exchange within the nucleons. I want to discuss gluons outside the atom. They can't be isolated and remain quite elusive much like the virtual photons exchanged by electrons. IMHO gravity is a wave like any other wave. A wave that propagates endlessly. Could that also not be the gluon? LOL and you think that the scientific statement that "the theory is incomplete" is any less absurd? Right. However, it doesn't explain all aspects of the quantum world does it? So its an incomplete theory, isn't it? It's funny that when I am right..no one acknowledges this fact ...but when I am perceived as wrong everyone jumps on the bandwagon and discredits my posts. This is not an honest forum...face the facts..

I stated that a hypothesis is a guess and you removed my reference links. You are wrong this pill will be hard for you to swallow. I invite you to check out EVERY LINK https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/hypothesis http://www.livescience.com/21490-what-is-a-scientific-hypothesis-definition-of-hypothesis.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothesis http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~pyo22/students/hypothesis.html Scientific hypothesisPeople refer to a trial solution to a problem as a hypothesis, often called an "educated guess"[12][13] because it provides a suggested solution based on the evidence. However, some scientists reject the term "educated guess" as incorrect. Experimenters may test and reject several hypotheses before solving the problem.

Deleting verified comments are not science. When any forum deletes verified comments it ceases to be a science forum

Tough room. Please tell me in what forum are the exchange of ideas regarding QT, GR and M theory allowed? Before you can have a theory you have a hypothesis which starts with an educated guess based on prior knowledge and research.

Thank you for reminding this. You are correct the strong and weak force binds protons and neutrons. IMHO the binding is through electromagnetic waves which are not detectable outside the atoms we have in our solar system. Thank you for your assistance. Many of the things I talk about are theoretical. I can't bring proof. I will use IMHO to clarify this