*From:* Joseph Brenner <mailto:joe.bren...@bluewin.ch>
*To:* Stanley N Salthe <mailto:ssal...@binghamton.edu> ; fis 
<mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es>
*Sent:* Sunday, December 30, 2012 6:22 PM
*Subject:* Re: [Fis] dark matter

Dear Stan, Gordana, John, Bruno, Bob U., Yuri and All,
 
I think we have all been dancing around the obvious: Stan described the 
situation we are in as a "remnant continuing expansion", but this 
implies an expansion /relative/ to something or /against/ something, 
some constraint. The model of the universe would be cyclical, but this 
is accepted by some leading cosmologists.
 
For me therefore, we should not only be talking about what dark matter 
/is /or dark energy /is/ but see them as inherent relational properties 
which appear (already) to be in some sort of dynamic reciprocal 
relation, in which one form of energy is primarily potential and the 
other actual.
 
This is where Yuri and Bob U. come in: they both have some pretty 
sophisticated mathematical tools which I hope might be applied not to 
the theoretical entities but to the (equally theoretical, of course, for 
the time being) relations between them.
 
Happy Western New Year!
 
Joseph
 
 

    ----- Original Message -----
    *From:* Stanley N Salthe <mailto:ssal...@binghamton.edu>
    *To:* fis <mailto:fis@listas.unizar.es>
    *Sent:* Sunday, December 30, 2012 4:30 PM
    *Subject:* Re: [Fis] dark matter

    John -- You said:


    There is no other evidence for a change in G, though it has been
    postulated.


    What is the compelling evidence for stable G?  I would think that if
    galaxies at known distances would be resolved without dark matter
    using different values of G, that this would itself be the evidence
    for change that would be required.  But we would not be likely to
    discover this if we hold G constant by fiat, or simply because it
    simplifies calculations.


    The dynamics to be explained apply to both near and far galaxies,
    apparently in much the same way.


    The near galaxies would have G much closer to our own value in the
    case of evolving G.


    Perhaps most important, they apply to our local group of galaxies.


    These would be brought into the calculations as well, of course. 
    Overall we would expect that the most distant galaxies would require
    the greatest G in order to explain their configuration, with G
    getting smaller and smaller as we approach the present time.  If so,
    this would provide another evidence for the Big Bang.


    I note that the evidence for "dark energy" is much weaker.


    I have felt this as well.  I have been wondering why our recent
    discovery of current accelerating expansion could not simply be
    interpreted as a remnant continuing expansion. 


    STAN


    John Collier


    On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 3:49 PM, John Collier <colli...@ukzn.ac.za
    <mailto:colli...@ukzn.ac.za>> wrote:

        Stan,  there are several reasons that a change in gravity will
        not explain the effects of supposed dark matter. I list them below.

         

        *From:* fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es
        <mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es>
        [mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es
        <mailto:fis-boun...@listas.unizar.es>] *On Behalf Of *Stanley N
        Salthe
        *Sent:* 29 December 2012 04:52 PM
        *To:* fis
        *Subject:* [Fis] dark matter

         

        Gordana has said:

         


        Information and Energy/Matter

          What can we hope for from studies of information related to
        energy/matter (as it appears for us in space/time)? Information
        is a concept known for its ambiguity in both common, everyday
        use and in its specific technical applications throughout
        different fields of research and technology. However, most
        people are unaware that matter/energy today is also a concept
        surrounded by a disquieting uncertainty. What for Democritus
        were building blocks of the whole universe appear today to
        constitute only 4% of its observed content. (NASA 2012) [1] The
        rest is labeled “dark matter” (conjectured to explain
        gravitational effects otherwise unaccounted for) and “dark
        energy” (introduced to account for the expansion of the
        universe). We do not know what “dark matter” and “dark energy”
        actually are. This indicates that our present understanding of
        the structure of the physical world needs re-examination. [...]


        Information and Energy/Matter
        Gordana Dodig Crnkovic

        Information 2012, 3(4),
        751-755; 
http://unam.us4.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=0eb0ac9b4e8565f2967a8304b&id=ae24f18d1e&e=d38efa683e
        
<http://unam.us4.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=0eb0ac9b4e8565f2967a8304b&id=ae24f18d1e&e=d38efa683e>


        Special Issue "Information and Energy/Matter"

        
http://unam.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=0eb0ac9b4e8565f2967a8304b&id=ea193b9747&e=d38efa683e
        
<http://unam.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=0eb0ac9b4e8565f2967a8304b&id=ea193b9747&e=d38efa683e>

        See it on Scoop.it
        
(http://unam.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=0eb0ac9b4e8565f2967a8304b&id=cdfa764e97&e=d38efa683e
        
<http://unam.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=0eb0ac9b4e8565f2967a8304b&id=cdfa764e97&e=d38efa683e>)
        , via Papers
        
(http://unam.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=0eb0ac9b4e8565f2967a8304b&id=e23b9e2cd9&e=d38efa683e
        
<http://unam.us4.list-manage.com/track/click?u=0eb0ac9b4e8565f2967a8304b&id=e23b9e2cd9&e=d38efa683e>)


        I would like to inquire whether any fis'rs might react to the
        following notion:

         

        Dark matter is postulated because the amount of matter
        detectable in galaxies would be insufficient alone to explain
        how they hold together given the value of the gravitational
        constant.

         

        However, the information we glean from galaxies represents their
        condition as it was a very long time ago, in an earlier universe.

         

        Is it not possible to resolve this puzzle less radically than by
        inventing dark matter by supposing that the gravitational
        constant has not been constant but has instead been changing,
        and was much stronger in the past, which is when we detect these
        distant clusters of matter?  Perhaps G as been scaled to the
        rate of expansion of space?  Perhaps the rate of expansion was
        greater then than now, even with current acceleration?

         

         

        My response:

         

        1. There is no other evidence for a change in G, though it has
        been postulated.

         

        2. The dynamics to be explained apply to both near and far
        galaxies, apparently in much the same way.

         

        3. Perhaps most important, they apply to our local group of
        galaxies.

         

        I note that the evidence for "dark energy" is much weaker.

         

        John

        ======= Please find our Email Disclaimer here-->:
        http://www.ukzn.ac.za/disclaimer =======


    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    _______________________________________________
    fis mailing list
    fis@listas.unizar.es
    https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis


-- 
-------------------------------------------------
Pedro C. Marijuán
Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud
Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA)
Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta X
50009 Zaragoza, Spain
Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& 6818)
pcmarijuan.i...@aragon.es
http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
-------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
fis mailing list
fis@listas.unizar.es
https://webmail.unizar.es/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fis

Reply via email to