MSN Home  |  My MSN  |  Hotmail
Sign in to Windows Live ID Web Search:   
go to MSNGroups 
Free Forum Hosting
 
Important Announcement Important Announcement
The MSN Groups service will close in February 2009. You can move your group to Multiply, MSN’s partner for online groups. Learn More
The American ExperienceContains "mature" content, but not necessarily adult.[email protected] 
  
What's New
  
  General  
  Ask Management  
  Member's Place  
  Coffee Breaks  
  Members Recipes  
  Pictures  
    
  Backup Group  
  Links  
    
  
  
  Tools  
 
General : "Dark Matter"...the 700 pound celestial gorilla
Choose another message board
 
     
Reply
 Message 1 of 6 in Discussion 
From: Noserose  (Original Message)Sent: 11/20/2008 3:51 PM

Scientists spot hints of dark-matter blast

Balloon-borne instrument detects cosmic rays from unknown source

WASHINGTON - A balloon-borne instrument soaring high over Antarctica has found potential evidence of a large clump of mysterious dark matter relatively close to our solar system, scientists said Wednesday.

It detected an unexpected amount of very high energy cosmic-ray electrons coming from an unknown source within about 3,000 light-years of the solar system. A light-year is 6 trillion miles (10 trillion kilometers), the distance light travels in a year.

One explanation is that the electrons may have been spawned as dark matter particles collided with one another, triggering their mutual annihilation, according to Louisiana State University physics professor John Wefel.

Scientists think about 23 percent of the universe is made up of dark matter, which responds to gravity much the same as ordinary matter such as stars and planets. While the stuff is thought to be strewn throughout the cosmos, it is invisible and poorly understood. Scientists have struggled to find any solid evidence of dark matter, and the new study could represent a major step forward in that effort.

“This would be the first indirect detection of the annihilation signature of predicted dark matter particles,�?Wefel, who helped lead the research published in the journal Nature, said in a telephone interview.

Scientists think regular matter amounts to about 24 percent of the universe’s mass-energy content. The remaining 73 percent or so is thought to be composed of dark energy, a mysterious presence that may be making the universe expand at an accelerated pace.

Scientists think dark matter is distributed somewhat uniformly throughout the universe, with clumps forming around concentrations of regular matter �?for example, galaxies �?due to their gravitational pull.

The scientists think the electrons detected by the instrument may come from one of these clumps located relatively close in astronomical terms to our solar system.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27809937/

More information on "Dark Matter":

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3077833/

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

{ If you look up at the sky at night the visible universe alone looks vast and populated with billions of stars. Yet the vast majority of matter in the universe is invisible or "dark" and we don't even know what it is or where it came from. We do know it is effected by gravity and hangs around regular matter such as galaxies. It's the 700 pound gorilla in our celestial room.....a little hard to ignore. Whatever it is....it must have a purpose. It must be there for some reason....or is it? Is there any rhyme or reason to the universe? We know the universe follows certain well established rules of physic's but that only helps explain the "how" ....but not the "why". Why is it there? What purpose does it serve?

If God created the universe why did he do it? For us? It's way too big for our species. Just our solar system is a big enough challenge for us. Space is infinite.....why? Why do we or God need an infinite space? Some say the universe exists just because it exists. It is a "fact" and that's it. Well......is that any harder to fathom than a universe created by a god for purposes unknown?

Somewhere out there all the answers are hidden and waiting for us like Easter eggs stashed away around the house. Everything from the origins of the universe to the origins of God. All we have to do is find them and fill our basket. We are not infinate so we won't live long enough to find all the answers but our species should and generations yet unborn may someday know....all. Everything there is too know. Maybe that is our real purpose in life and the universe's as well.}



First  Previous  2-6 of 6  Next  Last 
Reply
 Message 2 of 6 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameTheJollyTrollSent: 11/20/2008 9:23 PM

Warning, warning, warning...

Danger Will Robertson...

Very mind bending concepts below...

 

This has something to do with the below mentioned article. Apparently the only difference between a electron and a neutrino is their spins. So what I am trying to figure out is... does that mean that every electron in the universe spin with the exact same axis??? So every electrons axis must be either all aligned in the four dimensions in the exact same direction, which is kind of hard with the warping of time and space. That is a really profound concept, because if they didn't, then when on galaxy collides into the other; they would both look like dark mater. Or there is another dimension that they spin in.

So that leaves a few possibilities...

  1. The electrons and neutrinos are spinning in other dimensions
  2. Electrons are most like weebles.
  3. Or our entire concept of particle physics is wrong.


Electroweak interaction

In particle physics, the electroweak interaction is the unified description of two of the four fundamental interactions of nature: electromagnetism and the weak interaction. Although these two forces appear very different at everyday low energies, the theory models them as two different aspects of the same force. Above the unification energy, on the order of 102 GeV, they would merge into a single electroweak force. Thus if the universe is hot enough (approximately 1015 K, a temperature reached shortly after the Big Bang) then the electromagnetic force and weak force will merge into a combined electroweak force.

For contributions to the unification of the weak and electromagnetic interaction between elementary particles, Abdus Salam, Sheldon Glashow and Steven Weinberg were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1979.[1] The existence of the electroweak interactions was experimentally established in two stages: the first being the discovery of neutral currents in neutrino scattering by the Gargamelle collaboration in 1973, and the second in 1983 by the UA1 and the UA2 collaborations that involved the discovery of the W and Z gauge bosons in proton-antiproton collisions at the converted Super Proton Synchrotron.

Formulation

Mathematically, the unification is accomplished under an SU(2) × U(1) gauge group. The corresponding gauge bosons are the photon of electromagnetism and the W and Z bosons of the weak force. In the Standard Model, the weak gauge bosons get their mass from the spontaneous symmetry breaking of the electroweak symmetry from SU(2) × U(1)Y to U(1)em, caused by the Higgs mechanism (see also Higgs boson). The subscripts are used to indicate that these are different copies of U(1); the generator of U(1)em is given by Q = Y/2 + I3, where Y is the generator of U(1)Y (called the weak hypercharge), and I3 is one of the SU(2) generators (a component of weak isospin). The distinction between electromagnetism and the weak force arises because there is a (nontrivial) linear combination of Y and I3 that vanishes for the Higgs boson (it is an eigenstate of both Y and I3, so the coefficients may be taken as �?I>I3 and Y): U(1)em is defined to be the group generated by this linear combination, and is unbroken because it doesn't interact with the Higgs.


Reply
 Message 3 of 6 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameTheJollyTrollSent: 11/20/2008 9:32 PM
 
Scientists think regular matter amounts to about 4 percent of the universe’s mass-energy content. The remaining 73 percent or so is thought to be composed of dark energy, a mysterious presence that may be making the universe expand at an accelerated pace.

Dark energy's criteria;

  1. It is extreemly weak.
  2. Evenly distributed. 
  3. Self correcting.
Honestly I think the most likely candidate for dark energy is the cosmic background radiation.

Reply
 Message 4 of 6 in Discussion 
From: NoseroseSent: 11/20/2008 9:50 PM
But gravity has effect on it?

Reply
 Message 5 of 6 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameTheJollyTrollSent: 11/20/2008 10:27 PM
Gravity is a very, very, very weak force. When we compare it to the electro-weak force it is about one billionth of power, the reason why we know it exists at all is because it far longer reach. "Dark Energy" is about that weak in contrast and has a reach we do not notice until about 100,000,000 light years.
 
The reality is that our universe started expanding originally because of the cosmic background energy; except it was a lot hotter back then. It is now less then 3 degrees above absolute zero; however at the big bang it was about 10,000,000,000 degrees and that type of heat will push matter apart.
 
From what we know, photons (energy) and electrons (mater) on the quantum level act exactly the same. If a photon hits a electron it will move it a very small distance. Now Cosmic Background radiation isn't really a photon it is more of a "Black Body" radiation that we can "See" with very sensitive sensors as photons and it consistently hits every electron in the universe at about the same rate. Furthermore in Great Voids there is slightly less and in Super Clusters it is slightly more and that would cause densely concentrated mater to move towards less dense voids. So it is quite possible that Cosmic Background Radiation is moving all mater and energy apart at a exponential rate, that isn't even discernable until very long distances.

Reply
 Message 6 of 6 in Discussion 
From: MSN NicknameTheJollyTrollSent: 11/20/2008 10:33 PM
From: Noserose
But gravity has effect on it?
 
Pssst... pssst... pssst... they really don't know; a very large part of what you read in science journals and web-sites, really isn't science it is the consensus of educated guesses. So the correct answer is that they think it would.

First  Previous  2-6 of 6  Next  Last 
Return to General