Quantum Physics and Dark Matter

[Zxen]

Here is a comment I wrote on a YouTube video, but I wanted to check with a science forum to see if there is any merit in my fictional imaginings of

 

HOW THE DOUBLE SLIT EXPERIMENT WORKS:

 

It turns out that subatomic particles are contained within an external bubble of thicker spacetime fabric, which is temporarily borrowed from any area surrounding it within the continuum. This fabric bubble prevents particles from disintegrating in slight friction. Fabric bubble surface tension is more repulsive with certain particles, so will allow some particle types to travel directly through dense matter (consisting of particles with their own bubbles of spacetime fabric). Bubbles are often much larger than the particles they contain, and will pass through other bubbles of spacetime fabric without colliding. Upon impact with particles (matter) that are dense or fast moving enough to disperse the bubble (or more importantly the density of the spacetime fabric surrounding it), the bubble will break and the particle will be free to integrate with or bounce off the impact material. Bubbles can be much larger than the particles they hold.

 

You know how copper wire needs to have a thin layer of insulation when you wind it around a bar of iron to create an electromagnet? Padding is required to avoid conflict. We can put it there ourselves to make things work, but padding occurs naturally too. Things smash together to create or destroy other things, but there are puddles of lucky calm, such as Earth's magnetic field protecting delicate life from solar winds. The primary padding of the universe is an assortment of radiations that are collectively known as 'the fabric of spacetime' at this point in history. This padding allows certain things not to touch.

 

[ The fabric itself is not able to be isolated for examination of its components without ripping it - this requires creating a sub-universe to achieve. Sub-universes are created by tearing a sphole (spherical hole) in the fabric using either gravity or by stretching a sphole open with anti-radiation. The gravitational method begins (in nature) as a black hole until it reaches a threshold exceeding the stretch limit (minimum density) of the fabric. After this point, a permanent sphole is left in the original universe that does not exert a gravitational pull because the sub-universe has torn away, allowing the matter that was inside to decompress instantly. This current universe we're in is a sub-universe of a previous universe. There is a way to find your way back out, but its as elusive as touching a rainbow using any technology homo sapiens will ever invent. ]

 

The density of the Fabric thickens around matter like a bubble. In the double slit experiment, firstly trillions of photons are sent through the slits creating a wave pattern, then secondly the photons are fired individually to disambiguate interference and still create a wave pattern over time, and thirdly, a sensor is placed over one of the slits and the outcome is two clear lines, mysteriously affected by the very act of observation. This has resulted in the theory of probability / uncertainty. So what is happening? Why do individual photons land on the detection wall in a wave pattern when they are not observed, and yet land in two straight lines when they are observed? What difference should observation make? Is MIND the fifth fundamental force? This led theoretical physicists to believe that galaxies only appear when someone views them through a telescope for the first time (nobody ever seems to find a giant face or a red gumboot among the stars, and if the human observer was unable to conjure imaginary objects and this theory were true, it would stand to reason that minds other than human minds had already observed these galaxies to make them exist), or that a cat is in a superposition inside a box of both simultaneously dead and alive until it is observed (they seem to have forgotten that the cat would be able to determine this via es own observation). So is a photon a wave or a particle or a string (rubber band)?

 

The answer is that time can run backwards for very fast particles, and our observations slow them down a bit. Why? Einstein did not have the technology to measure the varying speeds of electromagnetism. He did not know about the nature of the fabric except to say that it was displaced by gravity (stars directly behind our sun are visible during an eclipse). He spoke about relativity in an important way, but overlooked undetectable things. The fabric densens around subatomic and therefore all particles compared to empty space, cushioning matter from collision, but also warping its time signature depending on density. Photons and all electromagnetism can slow down from traveling backwards in time to traveling uniformly with us. Does it do this to be polite so we can observe it?

 

Bubbles of spacetime fabric coat particles in such a way that they slip right by each other much of the time, and it doesn't matter if they travel quickly or slowly as far as we're concerned - they are already there by the time we arrive to meet them. The fabric of spacetime not only displaces space, but also time. The more particles, the more dense the spacetime fabric, creating pockets of slower time. The density of a spacetime fabric bubble alters its relative speed - if particles overtake us then they can swing back into alignment as required to meet the required laws of physics, which exist for unknown reasons. Most particles traveling backwards in time are undetectable by us with current technology, although some other animals can see them. Perhaps the spacetime fabric is so dense around them that they are shielded as invisible. Sometimes they overshoot the present due to their speed and return from the future to boomerang back into our present, or they are affected by things yet to come for us, relatively speaking, and we need to wait until we get then to see them.

 

The reason the dual slit experiment produces two contradictory outcomes is due to the fabric density in each case: When the slits are NOT observed, the fabric density is low, allowing faster travel of the particles so they can overshoot the present, boomerang back from the future, and land in a supposed position according to it's predicted design of what is yet to come. When the slits ARE observed, the fabric density is high enough to slow the particle down to such a speed that it does not exceed our own observed timeline. By not traveling into the future and therefore not boomeranging back to a position that would have preempted what was yet to come, the particle acts as a single object that remains on par with our timeline.

 

This temporal relativity is a fundamental law of the universe. Without the radiations that make up 'the fabric of spacetime,' density would be universally non existent and all speeds would be the same. It is this variation of spacetime fabric densities that dictates the nature of what can pass by other objects with ease quickly, and what cannot. The smaller something is, the lower it's density. Subatomic particles ('quanta') have less of this 'glue', so they have the capacity to travel faster than our reaction times into the future. It must be reasoned that 'the future' is not infinitely laid out and set in stone like destiny, but rather imagine it this way: We are on an elevator (with all things, such as matter that moves at the same speed as us) traveling upwards. If things shoot up past us (faster through time than us), they are not traveling effortlessly into the void of tomorrow, but rather exiting the spacetime fabric and falling back down, like bubbles on champagne. This is what lies on the exterior of the universe. They therefore leave our universe (defined by the borders of the fabric of spacetime) due to their speed and boomerang back down, unless they slow down and we catch up. This is a theory.

 

It could also be that this elevator is traveling a path it has already traveled before, in the case of a torus shaped universe. Spacetime Fabric Radiations and their related density properties need to be measured and understood before we will be able to determine if one second into our future is outside of the universe, or somewhere we have been before. It might also be possible to monitor whether or not things appear momentarily for an instant, traveling quickly through our timeline on the way to our past from the future because they were either stationary in a timeline we will pass through, or are traveling quickly against our timeline. This might be possible to detect if we are fully aware of all detectable matter in our own timeline (in some kind of detection machine), and we observe all else, such as matter or energy that suddenly appears out of nowhere in a vacuum. It may also be possible to catch some of it, and conduct measurements that are the opposite of carbon dating - to discover how 'new' these things are, how far they have traveled and how fast. In this way, if the universe works in such a way that a lot of matter and energy is located in the future, we could develop the true science of fortune telling. We could see what was to come. It could even be possible that there are carriages in this elevator shaft, and we are detecting break off pieces of things that are always right in front of us, traveling at the same speed as our own. If there are beings in the future (or past) transmitting intelligible ideas to one another, it might be possible that such transmissible ideas could remain intact as they pass through synapses in our brain that are able to observe such things. The very nature of random future vision would also explain the non-random nature of some synchronistic and lucky events, if thoughts and telecommunications can indeed travel inter-temporally.

Edited May 27, 2015 by Zxen

[swansont]

The way you judge merit is by having a model that makes specific predictions, so the concept can be tested experimentally. If it works, it has merit. If you don't have a model, you can't judge merit, and have a grade of "incomplete".

[Zxen]

Does it need to be testable with present day technology? The best experiment I can suggest is to isolate a vacuum away from large gravity sources and compare unusual particle activity, looking for patterns over a long period of time, and fine tuning the measurements. Any experiment ideas seeking to provide instant empirical verification would discard the overall gist of the ideas described. If I were required to spend years devising experiments for this, I would likely not have posted this at all. My ambition here is to have this considered by professional physicists who may find something new and useful from my thoughts. I am not a physicist, but I have never heard these ideas told to me so I thought I'd better add them to the soup. At least now I know our robot successors will have it on file, and its been transmitted somewhen.

Edited May 28, 2015 by Zxen

[ajb]

Does it need to be testable with present day technology?

In general, so I am not speaking about your idea specifically, a theory does not need to be testable with current technology, but it must be testable in principle. If there is no way to rule a theory out, i.e. test it against nature, then the theory cannot be considered scientific.

[swansont]

Does it need to be testable with present day technology?

 

No. Bose and Einstein predicted the Bose-Einstein condensate ~90 years ago, and it was not realized until the 1990s. But the point is that they were able to make a specific prediction of what would happen. Also, they did not dictate what experiment would be carried out.

 

"subatomic particles are contained within an external bubble of thicker spacetime fabric" is a description of a theory, not the theory itself. The theory must describe, mathematically, how this behavior manifests itself.

[MigL]

Thicker or denser space-time implies that space-time is much more than a co-ordinate system.

 

So please tell us how it can have a 'thickness' or 'density'.

[Zxen]

The fabric of space time. This is the medium through which matter and energy transmit. It can be seen warping in the example of observing stars directly behind our sun (during an eclipse). Photons from the stars fly through the fabric and follow its curvature when it curves. Curves are created by things such as gravity. Lensing is also an effect of the curved fabric. I have theorised that any fabric that can curve can also condense into higher and lower pressures like gas, ie air. In my imagination I described the fabric as consisting of various 'radiations'. This is purely from my imagination, as is most of the original post. I also implied that it can be torn when the density is at a very low level, producing a sphole (a word I invented meaning spherical hole). I derived this from what Stephen Hawking wrote about - that black holes rip out of a universe and explode into a new sub universe when they reach a critical mass, or more importantly in relation to my theory, when the fabric rips. The void beyond the borders of the universe may potentially be described as the future and nothingness. I don't know how much resistance is there. I assume it would be black even with a flashlight, rather than lots of scaffolding or cherubs playing harps on fluffy pink clouds. According to my reasoning, a sphole does not have any gravity - it would either remain there for a long time if the fabric cannot heal itself, elastic back even bigger than when it started, or shrink itself healed, depending on the property of the fabric. I doubt that it would be a neat hole if a black hole rips the fabric - probably more like a torn trampoline after a tractor fell through it, or more three dimensionally, like a jaggedy air bubble trapped in fish tank of jelly.

 

In a way I guess I'm also implying that somewhere in our sky is the sphole from whence we came - the garbage chute from our parent universe - when we were a black hole. That sphole would have rips facing towards us if its still there, whereas spholes made in this universe would be caving in the opposite direction (this assumes several things, including the idea that when the blast from the big bang after the fabric netting of the black hole rips and the pressure of the contents explode outwards, that the blast does not come back into it's parent universe - it probably would come to think of it, but given that explosions don't seem to damage the fabric, the blast would jet out in a cone shape from the sphole - this would be the only entrance to the sub universe, and after millenia, the cone of debris would probably take on some other shape).

Edited May 30, 2015 by Zxen

[Strange]

The fabric of space time.

 

But it isn't actually a fabric. That is just a metaphor. It has no material properties and so cannot be more or less dense.

 

 

I also implied that it can be torn when the density is at a very low level, producing a sphole (a word I invented meaning spherical hole).

 

What is the difference between a "sphole" and a black hole?

[MigL]

While a co-ordinate system can be curved...

Take a sheet of graph paper and bend it.

...the only way to make that co-ordinate system 'thicker' or 'denser', is by altering the cell spacing ( scale ) of the graph paper.

 

The effect of mass-energy on space-time is usually modeled as curvature of the co-ordinate system.

But I'm sure it could also be modeled as varying scale on flat space-time.

 

It would yield the same results as GR, but be a lot more complex.

 

Is this what you mean by 'thicker' space-time ?

[swansont]

The fabric of space time. This is the medium through which matter and energy transmit.

 

What are the properties of this medium? Are we moving through it, or are we at rest with respect to it? How is it that light always travels at c with respect to it?

[Zxen]

 

But it isn't actually a fabric. That is just a metaphor. It has no material properties and so cannot be more or less dense.

 

 

What is the difference between a "sphole" and a black hole?

I use the word 'fabric' as a placeholder name, but given that it stretches it seems kind of fabric-like. I think the 'fabric of spacetime' does indeed have material properties.

 

A black hole is a type of sphole. Most of the time I mention spholes in my examples I'm talking about parts of a universe in which the spacetime fabric is missing, implying there is a subuniverse or the 'void' outside the universe on the other side of it. I theorised that these kind of ripped spholes would not have gravity.

While a co-ordinate system can be curved...

Take a sheet of graph paper and bend it.

...the only way to make that co-ordinate system 'thicker' or 'denser', is by altering the cell spacing ( scale ) of the graph paper.

 

The effect of mass-energy on space-time is usually modeled as curvature of the co-ordinate system.

But I'm sure it could also be modeled as varying scale on flat space-time.

 

It would yield the same results as GR, but be a lot more complex.

 

Is this what you mean by 'thicker' space-time ?

This 'property-free' coordinate system you describe is also what I describe, but I theorise it has many properties, and could theoretically be isolated. The 'radiations' that I wildly guess make up it's composition can collectively bend and stretch and relax and compress and expand. A huge compression (high density) may result in the creation of matter, and a huge expansion (low density) may result in tearing the fabric. I also defined the limits of a universe as the presence of this 'spacetime fabric', meaning that there is a void outside of where it exists. You spoke about mass-energy having an effect on this spacetime fabric, but neither heat nor energy as we know it seem to distort it, whereas gravity does seem to. Thus we would need better tools or experiments to detect it. I have guessed that the properties of spacetime fabric affect the double slit experiment, and may also explain why some things in the universe are hidden - the fabric may be able to cloak things, large things. My theory is that if we knew how this spacetime fabric behaved properly, we would understand both quantum physics and the dark matter. In my imagination, this fabric behaves more similarly to jelly than water, probably because of the graph paper style graphics I've seen in documentaries when planets and stars create indents that bounce back. Jelly is thick and slows matter down, so I hesitate to use this analogy, but if the jelly weren't there, I do think that things would travel instantly - in the place outside the universe - the void. By this reasoning, thinner (less dense) spacetime jelly allows things to travel faster, and at maximum density things would not move at all. If this stuff exists, it would certainly be my prime suspect for universe expansion - maybe because the density is diminishing constantly.

Edited May 31, 2015 by Zxen

[Mordred]

I just finished writing a FAQ on "What is space time made of "

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/89395-what-is-space-made-of/#entry869949

 

You might want to read it as treating space time as some form of fabric, medium etc is a common misconception. Thanks to pop media articles primarily.

[Travis Hallet]

If you think about what you are saying 3D. Your theory doesn't seem to make sense. If space-time could rip the blast would not be coned shaped. Infact it wouldn't have a blast. You would have created a universe with nothing but matter particles in it. Causing either the whole parent universe to lose gravitational pull or causing the child universe to have no gravitational pull at all. IMO space can be infinitely stretched. I do not think we can tear spacetime.

Edited May 31, 2015 by Travis Hallet

[ajb]

Space-times does have some properties in the sense that pure space-time configurations can carry energy and momentum; gravitational radiation for example. However, you should not really think of space-time as a 'rubber sheet', at best this is an analogy and unfortunately one that can lead to misdirecting your understanding. To do GR properly, and indeed any physics, one needs mathematics. Without mathematics it is not so easy to see if an idea has any foundations and offer real useful feedback.