Do Strings = Dark Matter?

[Pinch Paxton]

I see mention of strings, and mention of Dark Matter, but why are they kept seperate. To me, they are the same thing.

 

Pincho.

[JaKiri]

Good for you.

 

For science, if asked the questions 'Are strings equivilent to dark matter?', I'm afraid the answer is 'No, those things are not equivilent'

[Guest wiyaka]

I have some interest in this topic. Even though dark matter and strings are not the same thing, interestingly there is a possibility that a link does indeed exist between them.

 

Since the 1930's evidence has been growing that a substantial amount of the matter in the universe cannot be seen or detected through current observational methods because it does not emit or absorb electromagnetic radiation at any known wavelengths. This was dubbed "dark matter"

 

The evidence for this initially came from Jan Oort and Fritz Zwicky but the strongest initial evidence came from Vera Rubin and collegues in the 70's from discrepancies between the predicted theoretical estimates and the actual observational results of galactic rotation curves.

 

To date no expirement has directly confirmed the existence of dark matter but there has been strong evidence it does exist probably the most promising of which (apart from galactic rotation curves) is the phenomenon known as gravitational lensing, which have enabled us to observed distortions of the way distant objects appear due to some unknown matter (presumably dark matter) acting as a lens to distort our picture.

 

There are 3 main candidates for dark matter, MACHOS (massive compact halo objects) WIMPS (weakly interacting massive particles) and massive neutrinos yet to date every attempt by astronomers and physicists to detect this Dark Matter has failed, could they be looking in the wrong place? At around the same time as the search for Dark Matter was underway another idea in theoretical physics was blooming, the idea of extra dimensions. Extra dimensional theory predicts there could be as many as eleven dimensions of which only four we perceive directly. String theory is built on the premise that all matter is made up of tiny strings. In order for these strings to be able to vibrate in all the ways needed to give the full range of particles that we know exist, it has to be in 10 dimensions. Physicists said the extra six dimensions were so curled and compacted (around 10-35 metres) that we cannot detect them from our 3-D perspective. Stephen Hawking showed one example of how perspective can be limited by suggesting that if you were to look at a drinking straw in a glass from a given distance you would say it’s a one dimensional line. As you approached the straw and got a closer view you would clearly see it was in fact 3 dimensional.

 

Unfortunately string theory was thrown into scientific limbo when 5 different versions of it surfaced but this was resolved in a new theory called M-theory which postulated 11 dimensions. Dark matter may simply be a primordial matter or energy created and still contained within other spatial dimensions. Could this be the missing piece of the Dark Matter puzzle? If extra dimensions do indeed exist it follows they too could contain matter and from these dimensions that matter could still exert a gravitational force on all other dimensions within our universe. It should also be noted that when I refer to matter I am also referring to energy since they are theoretically interchangeable as expressed by Einsteins equation E = mc2. Therefore it is possible that a connection exists between dark matter and the old string theory

[Pinch Paxton]

I see that you have all of the general scientific knowledge to allow for the two things to cross over. I was hoping for a theory without the extra dimensions involved. My perception of strings is that they simply are not active to pass information that we can read in any form. Rather, they push everything around. They push light, they push atoms, molecules, everything. All things are surfers, surfing the waves produced by strings. That's how gravity is created, and magnetism, and that's how light can be both a particle, and a wave at the same time. The wave is the vibration of the string, and the particle is the photon travelling along the vibration. Anyhow, I make a statement, I am just using a hypothesis to generalise my own opinion. I was wondering how my hypothesis could be moulded to fit science.

 

Pincho.

[JaKiri]

Pinch Paxton said in post # :

I see that you have all of the general scientific knowledge to allow for the two things to cross over. I was hoping for a theory without the extra dimensions involved. My perception of strings is that they simply are not active to pass information that we can read in any form. Rather, they push everything around. They push light, they push atoms, molecules, everything. All things are surfers, surfing the waves produced by strings. That's how gravity is created, and magnetism, and that's how light can be both a particle, and a wave at the same time. The wave is the vibration of the string, and the particle is the photon travelling along the vibration. Anyhow, I make a statement, I am just using a hypothesis to generalise my own opinion. I was wondering how my hypothesis could be moulded to fit science.

 

Pincho.

 

Dude, according to String Theory, Everything is a string, so you've gotten confused along the way.

 

ps

 

I remember seeing some mathematics that proved that the Casimir effect didn't propagate through any extra dimensions, I think it might apply for gravity as well.

[Pinch Paxton]

I haven't gotten confused, I just changed some of definitions. Gravity doesn't fit into the standard explenation.

 

Pincho.

[Radical Edward]

Changing the definitions of words is bad, especially in science. It is like Clinton changing the definition of "is" and leads to huge confusion and stained dresses.

[Pinch Paxton]

It must have been done before in the past, but I can't think of an example at the moment. I like the word string, and I don't want to change it for something else.

 

Pincho.

[Radical Edward]

you might not like to change it, but the problem is that it is the established word. In order to avoid confustion you really do need to think of somthing else, or convince the establishment to change, sorry.

[5614]

what is an actual defintion of WIMPS and MACHOS

i know what they stand for, but what could they be and are there any theories of how they are compiled, because if they contained neutrons/protons/electrons, surely it would reflect EM radiation?

[admiral_ju00]

http://www.eclipse.net/~cmmiller/DM/

[5614]

thnx, that website is well good, i understand MACHOs now, but surely WIMPS, no matter how small they are still reflect light, even if you needed a very powerful microscope to see them, surely it is possible, or do they absorb the light like MACHOs???

[admiral_ju00]

the idea is that if they interact with normal matter, the method of their interaction is currently beyond our comprehension. or as they say, they may not or seem not to interact with normal matter(that being protons, neutrons, electrons, photons, etc).

[geistkiesel]

[url']http://www.eclipse.net/~cmmiller/DM/[/url]

 

 

I think I found some of missing matter in a hot dog I bought at a baseball game years ago. There weren't any astronomers around so I just ate it.

 

Dark matter could be simply mass that is stellar stealth, who can tell?

 

A soldier's creed: "Kill em all. Let St Peter sort it out" Anon

[geistkiesel]

I have some interest in this topic. Even though dark matter and strings are not the same thing' date=' interestingly there is a possibility that a link does indeed exist between them.

 

Since the 1930's evidence has been growing that a substantial amount of the matter in the universe cannot be seen or detected through current observational methods because it does not emit or absorb electromagnetic radiation at any known wavelengths. This was dubbed "dark matter"

 

The evidence for this initially came from Jan Oort and Fritz Zwicky but the strongest initial evidence came from Vera Rubin and collegues in the 70's from discrepancies between the predicted theoretical estimates and the actual observational results of galactic rotation curves.

 

To date no expirement has directly confirmed the existence of dark matter but there has been strong evidence it does exist probably the most promising of which (apart from galactic rotation curves) is the phenomenon known as gravitational lensing, which have enabled us to observed distortions of the way distant objects appear due to some unknown matter (presumably dark matter) acting as a lens to distort our picture.

 

There are 3 main candidates for dark matter, MACHOS (massive compact halo objects) WIMPS (weakly interacting massive particles) and massive neutrinos yet to date every attempt by astronomers and physicists to detect this Dark Matter has failed, could they be looking in the wrong place? At around the same time as the search for Dark Matter was underway another idea in theoretical physics was blooming, the idea of extra dimensions. Extra dimensional theory predicts there could be as many as eleven dimensions of which only four we perceive directly. String theory is built on the premise that all matter is made up of tiny strings. In order for these strings to be able to vibrate in all the ways needed to give the full range of particles that we know exist, it has to be in 10 dimensions. Physicists said the extra six dimensions were so curled and compacted (around 10-35 metres) that we cannot detect them from our 3-D perspective. Stephen Hawking showed one example of how perspective can be limited by suggesting that if you were to look at a drinking straw in a glass from a given distance you would say it’s a one dimensional line. As you approached the straw and got a closer view you would clearly see it was in fact 3 dimensional.

 

Unfortunately string theory was thrown into scientific limbo when 5 different versions of it surfaced but this was resolved in a new theory called M-theory which postulated 11 dimensions. Dark matter may simply be a primordial matter or energy created and still contained within other spatial dimensions. Could this be the missing piece of the Dark Matter puzzle? If extra dimensions do indeed exist it follows they too could contain matter and from these dimensions that matter could still exert a gravitational force on all other dimensions within our universe. It should also be noted that when I refer to matter I am also referring to energy since they are theoretically interchangeable as expressed by Einsteins equation E = mc2. Therefore it is possible that a connection exists between dark matter and the old string theory[/quote']

 

 

You do recognize that your post is written with the implied assumption that the subject matter is physically accurate, or reasonably possible, as a rational description of nature, do you not? Are Strings, dark matter, 11-dimensions, M-theory, WIMPS, MACHOS verified, or even verifiable? Or is this all just thought fodder?

 

You said it is possible that dark matter is connected to string theory? Can you prove this possibility?

 

Einstein didn't originate the E = mc^2 equation, Einsteins "liberated the expression" from others to serve his own ends.

[TheProphet]

I'll have a go for that even massles particles have a affect on the universal mass aswell, energy must have some sort of effect on mass altough not direct.. ! But we shouldn't forget that Black holes surely can constitute a very large number too! Then there might be a whole lot of Unknown WHIMPS out there fillin upp that missin party =)

[PerpetualYnquisitive]

I see mention of strings' date=' and mention of Dark Matter, but why are they kept seperate. To me, they are the same thing.

 

Pincho.[/quote']

 

 

Dark Matter And Dark Energy May Be Different Aspects Of A Single Unknown Force

 

In the last few decades, scientists have discovered that there is a lot more to the universe than meets the eye: the cosmos appears to be filled with not just one, but two invisible constituents –dark matter and dark energy – whose existence has been proposed based solely on their gravitational effects on ordinary matter and energy.

 

Full article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/07/040702091545.htm

[ydoaPs]

stings and dark matter are connected in that dark matter is composed of strings. Strings are one dimensional loops that compose all matter (ex. quarks, photons, neutrinos, electrons, gravitons)

[TheProphet]

stings and dark matter are connected in that dark matter is composed of strings. Strings are one dimensional loops that compose all matter (ex. quarks, photons, neutrinos, electrons, gravitons)

 

Acording to string theory yes... but proof for this isn't anywhere near.. altough it can serve as a rather neat illustration....

[ydoaPs]

there are proving to be more and more planets and we aren't very good at looking for them yet so, maybe dark matter is planets, moons, asteroids, comets, ect.

[TheProphet]

there are proving to be more and more planets and we aren't very good at looking for them yet so, maybe dark matter is planets, moons, asteroids, comets, ect.

 

Oc course.. but then first the whole big bang theory more or less needs to get piked! And for the moment CMB and inflation is very much hand in hand with that theory... And CMB is acodring to me a very neat instrument to see mass in the universe...

[Severian]

As jaKiri said, in string theory everything is made out of strings - so if string theory is correct then yes, dark matter are strings.

 

But since string theory is only appropriate to use at very very high energies one has to ask what is the effective dark matter particle at low enrgies (ie what is the string theory low energy manifestation which provides so much of the mass in the universe). Most physicists seem to think dark matter is the lightest neutralino, and that would be my guess too.

[ydoaPs]

As jaKiri said' date=' in string theory everything is made out of strings - so if string theory is correct then yes, dark matter are strings.

 

But since string theory is only appropriate to use at very very high energies one has to ask what is the effective dark matter particle at low enrgies (ie what is the string theory low energy manifestation which provides so much of the mass in the universe). Most physicists seem to think dark matter is the lightest neutralino, and that would be my guess too.[/quote']

 

where did u get the idea that string theory is only at high energies?

[Sayonara]

where did u get the idea that string theory is only at high energies?

He didn't say that, he said that was the only appropriate use.

[ydoaPs]

ok, why is it only appropriate to use at high energies?