Capriccio Phisyco

If you look at the Multiverse theory, it would be possible. And that the same theory also implies that that could be more then just flat Universes. I think there can be as many types for instance, like types of Galaxies... So the one possible observable link to it is the positive gravity. Also that, without dark energy the big bang theory is not possible. So if just one exception rule changes the view of the known universe, like the positive gravity, ( I gainsay this) and can produce a closed "ecosystem" ,that "ecosystem" would be explorable if we prescribe theoretical rules for the positive gravity to go through the positive gravity and to observe that closed system. What fantastic things could be hidden there=). Of course I'm just dabbling. We could send a negative gravitron pulse to see what happens...But that would be stupid...without further examination

I was thinking since it has positive gravity, dark energy collects itself into dark matter, so i guess it has it own set of rules... I wonder what could the rules be? Maybe it has no forces at all... That would be interesting.... Imagine a big chunk of matter with no forces except positive gravity=) But does it need to collapse into it self? I think that is debatable... If the positive gravity has a distinct formulae dark matter doesn't need to collapse into itself. Sounds to me it could be a closed ecosystem

Is it possible that dark energy is the result of antimatter and matter interaction? Like electricity and magnetism, dark energy would by the byproduct of both antimatter and matter with it's 4 forces stupid question, forget about it....

What about dark energy and the Casimir effect? http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=575 and http://www.lsst.org/lsst/public/darkenergy2? Maybe this could explain the faster than light movement in the classic GR theory

Thank you for your support, i am not capable to search for it but i think that it is pretty logical that there cannot be a constant for speed, i don't want to be a philosopher or a priest searching for a new Aether, it just makes sense to me that not all particles have a pair, that the forces we know cannot be the only forces, after all, this is a young science, so it made sense to me that i write about an E that has a Cn2(or c^2) and hence the m is negative. And in search for that i thought that instead of putting a square on the negative mass, it would be an interesting twist to put just minus mass instead

Well, you make a lot of sense. I think that I am a seriously dabbling in physics... I thought that people would be open minded to the idea that antimatter is not the opposite of matter, that is to say, that they had a different creation, and, hence a different set of rules... Since the wording is too strong for me here I wont dabble any more. But c^2 is possible, if you know about the Casimir effect Can i ask something, then i will stop this thread? Does antimatter need to be charged? Is it proven? This is not an idiots reply, just a question, I understand I was dabbling

"I assume that's c^2, which is now imaginary. What's the interpretation of that?" It is still a constant though it has an imaginary c+2(+indicates that more constants(n) are inside the constant, not that the constant is imaginary, rather that it is a scale of constants)which I like to relate to negative mass, which is not represented as negative2 but rather as E/-m since it is an ongoing process into negative mass, which is similar to the Gauge theory in that way that both are hypothetical. I don't see the reason that it needs to obey Maxwell's equations since the hypothetical particles which obey this quazitheory don't need to have electromagnetic potential. The rest of my original post is a way of saying that the negative mass going to a massless state and vice versa is inherently possible since negative mass and a massless state have to have a correlation. To reason further; The rest of my original post is a way of saying that the negative mass going to a massless state and vice versa is inherently possible since negative mass and a massless state have to have a correlation and that correlation doesn't need to provide a pair of particles, but a correlating set of formulae. One minor proof would be the Casimir effect, which proves my original theory in a way. "Casimir effect and propulsion The Casimir effect has been linked to the possibility of faster-than-light travel because of the fact that the region inside a Casimir cavity has negative energy density. Zero energy density, by definition, is the energy density of normal "empty space." Since the energy density between the conductors of a Casimir cavity is less than normal, it must be negative. Regions of negative energy density are thought to be essential to a number of hypothetical faster-than-light propulsion schemes, including stable wormholes and the Alcubierre warp drive. There is another interesting possibility for breaking the light-barrier by an extension of the Casimir effect. Light in normal empty space is "slowed" by interactions with the unseen waves or particles with which the quantum vacuum seethes. But within the energy-depleted region of a Casimir cavity, light should travel slightly faster because there are fewer obstacles. A few years ago, K. Scharnhorst of the Alexander von Humboldt University in Berlin published calculations5 showing that, under the right conditions, light can be induced to break the usual light-speed barrier. Under normal laboratory conditions this increase in speed is incredibly small, but future technology may afford ways of producing a much greater Casimir effect in which light can travel much faster. If so, it might be possible to surround a space vehicle with a "bubble" of highly energy-depleted vacuum, in which the spacecraft could travel at FTL velocities, carrying the bubble along with it. References Casimir, H. G. B. "On the attraction between two perfectly conducting plates." Proc. Con. Ned. Akad. van Wetensch B51 (7): 793-796 (1948). Lamoreaux, S. K. "Demonstration of the Casimir force in the 0.6 to 6 mm range." Physical review Letters 78 (1): 5-8 (1997). Schwinger, J. "Casimir light: The source." Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 90: 2105-6 (1993). Munday, J. N., Capasso, F. & Parsegian, V. A. Nature 457, 170–173 (2009). Scharnhorst, K. Physics Letters B236: 354 (1990)."

If, lets say, the c in the theory is not considered a constant, the new angle on the theory would be (c+)2=E/-m. It is a new angle derived from a thesis that antimatter cannot be limited to the speed of light, and that therefore it is confined to intertwining between disintegration and integration in different forms.