"The Matter of"Dark Matter"
Rohtau
(See also our sister website reticsessays.com)
There have been many postings about the mysterious "Dark Matter" which
is alleged to constitute 90 to 95% of the mass(energy) content of the
Universe. The presence of this "Dark Matter" is indicated by the observed
gravitational behavior of galaxies and clusters of galaxies. A large effort
is apparently underway to detect this "Dark Matter" and to determine its
nature. In all of the discussions there seems to be little attention to the
3 - 3.5 degree K background radiation known for decades to be present. If
one examined the energy represented by this radiation, he finds that it is
10 to 20 times the energy represented by the mass of conventional matter.
Obviously, however, there is no need to pay attention to this radiation
because, as everyone knows, electromagnetic radiation does not possess
inertial or gravitational mass.
Since everyone "knows" that electromagnetic radiation does not possess
inertial or gravitational mass, it behooves us to examine the validity of
that belief. It has long been known that electromagnetic radiation
transports momentum as witnessed by the pressure of Solar radiation which
causes comets to have "tails". In addition, mainstream physicists have
discussed the feasibility of using "light sails" for the propulsion of long
distance space ships. Mainstream physics tells us that the momentum
transported by a photon is identical to the momentum which would be
transported by a material particle of the same total energy (rest mass plus
kinetic energy). - I know that the rest mass of a material particle
traveling at the velocity of light must be zero. But lets not quibble,
divide that zero by the zero represented by the Lorentz Transformation for
mass and the inertial mass of the material particle can have any value
between the limits of +/- infinity. Since momentum is equal to the product
of inertial mass and velocity, and the momentum of a photon is given by its
energy divided by the velocity of light, then dividing the equation which
provides the momentum of a photon by C shows that the photon behaves as if
its inertial mass were equal to its energy divided by the square of the
velocity of light. Maybe photons do not possess inertial mass in spite of
observation, but as far as the writer is concerned, if it looks like a duck,
walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, he is willing to accept that it
is a duck. The inertial mass of photons meet this test and if the current
state of physical knowledge teaches otherwise it is time for physicists to
rethink the subject.
Since photons act as if they possess inertial mass traveling at the
velocity of light, the background radiation of space must exert a pressure
which acting to cause the Universe to attempt to expand. Let us examine
whether those same photons possess a gravitational mass. This is best done
by considering an ideal thought experiment along the lines of those used by
Dr. Einstein. Consider a cold gravitationally massive planet in
intergalactic space (to eliminate spurious disturbances). Attached to
opposite sides of this planet are infinitely rigid and massless columns each
of which support an ideal retro reflector having 100% efficiency. (I know
that these assumptions are physically unrealizable but that does not
interfere with there use in this though experimant.) A beam of photons is
sent from one of the retroreflectors, is bent by the planet's gravitational
field as required by General Relativity, and strikes the retroreflector on
the other side of the planet. Because these are ideal retroreflectors, the
photons are constrained to continuously travel bask and forth past the
planets surface. It is a simple calculation (not involving relativity) to
show that as a result of the gravitational "refraction" of the photon's path
the process will cause a net force to be exerted on the retroreflectors in a
direction which is "down" at the point where the photons pass the surface.
If we are to accept that the "Laws of Conservation of Energy and Momentum"
are valid, then there must be an upward pull on the planet equal to the
downward push on the retroreflectors. If these two forces are not equal, the
entire system could be used as a "space tug" in violation of Newton's Second
Law and/or a source of limitless energy in violation of the First Law of
Thermodynamics. The thought experiment is diagrammed below. Its validity
does not depend upon relativistic considerations. This thought experiment
shows that, if light is observed to be "refracted" by a gravitational field,
that "refraction" must result not from the 'curvature" of space but from a
gravitational force. The magnitude of that force must result from the
photons having a "gravitational mass" equal to twice their inertial mass.
For a more detained discussion see paragraphs 8.8 and 8.9 of
http://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm and http://einsteinhoax.com/gf421.gif.
When one combines the effects of the gravitational and inertial
"masses" the photons which are observed to propagate through our Universe
one finds that the inertial mass tends to act as a gas to expand the
Universe while the gravitational mass acts like any other gravitational mass
and acts to contract the Universe. The size of the Universe at any one time
is determined primarily by the balance between these two effects. Once the
"big bang" state had been reached, the pressure of photons acted to produce
the observed expansion which will go on forever. All of these conclusions
are derived and discussed in http://einsteinhoax.com.
The source material for this posting may be found in
http://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm (1997); http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm
(1987); and http://einsteinhoax.com/relcor.htm (1997). EVERYTHING WHICH WE
ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING ELSE WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS
TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBSERVATIONS, AND IT MUST BE
MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS MEET THIS
REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP FROM
THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.
All of the Newsposts made by this site may be viewed at the
http://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm.
Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not monitored on
a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same courtesy
as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our parts,
please do not raise objections that are not related to material that you
have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary.
E-mail:- einste...@verizon.net. If you wish a reply, be sure that
your mail reception is not blocked.
The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 8
years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE
MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by
individuals who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without
questioning it. If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be
objectively answered, the material at the Website will be withdrawn.
Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's inadequacy with one
exception for which a correction was provided.
KONCHOK.PENDAY
> "The Matter of"Dark Matter"
>
> (See also our sister website reticsessays.com)
>
> There have been many postings about the mysterious "Dark Matter" which
> is alleged to constitute 90 to 95% of the mass(energy) content of the
> Universe.
"Dark Matter" is just a NEW NAME for aether!
Read Faraday and Maxwell!
> The presence of this "Dark Matter" is indicated by the
> observed gravitational behavior of galaxies and clusters of galaxies.
I'm not famaliar with that argument,
but there are many compelling ones.
> A large effort is apparently underway to detect this "Dark Matter" and
> to determine its nature.
Happily, Rado has figured it out!
> In all of the discussions there seems to be
> little attention to the 3 - 3.5 degree K background
> radiation known for decades to be present.
Which may or may not be critical
to a wholistic understanding.
> If one examined the energy represented by
> this radiation, he finds that it is 10 to 20 times the energy
> represented by the mass of conventional matter.
I don't follow that argument,
but I agree the universe is
mostly made of aether, with
a bit of "matter" thrown in.
Of course, matter is
just condensed aether!
> Obviously, however, there is no need to pay attention to this
> radiation because, as everyone knows, electromagnetic radiation
> does not possess inertial or gravitational mass.
Not true!
We proved that in high school
with a simple light-driven toy.
Turn the light on, IT SPINS!
Turn the light off, it stops!
Simple, incontrovertible proof!
> Since everyone "knows" that electromagnetic radiation does
> not possess inertial or gravitational mass, it behooves us to examine
> the validity of that belief.
And the "expertise" of anyone
suggesting light is massless!
> It has long been known that electromagnetic radiation
> transports momentum as witnessed by the pressure of Solar radiation
> which causes comets to have "tails".
YES!
ANOTHER OBVIOUS EXAMPLE!
> In addition, mainstream physicists have discussed
> the feasibility of using "light sails" for the
> propulsion of long distance space ships.
YES!
> Mainstream physics tells us that the momentum
> transported by a photon is identical to the momentum
> which would be transported by a material particle of
> the same total energy (rest mass plus kinetic energy).
And Mainstream Media gave us guided tours of
Saddam's horrific Weapons of Mass Destruction!
> - I know that the rest mass of a material particle
> traveling at the velocity of light must be zero.
???? How do you figure that?
> But lets not quibble, divide that zero by the zero
> represented by the Lorentz Transformation for
> mass and the inertial mass of the material particle
> can have any value between the limits of +/- infinity.
Fantastic!
I was right all the time!
> Since momentum is equal to the product of inertial mass
> and velocity, and the momentum of a photon is given by its
> energy divided by the velocity of light, then dividing the
> equation which provides the momentum of a photon by C
> shows that the photon behaves as if
> its inertial mass were equal to its energy
> divided by the square of the velocity of light.
???? I'll take your word for that.
> Maybe photons do not possess inertial mass in spite of
> observation, but as far as the writer is concerned, if
> it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like
> a duck, he is willing to accept that it is a duck.
I'll second your assertion
THAT LIGHT HAS MASS!
> The inertial mass of photons meet this test and if the current
> state of physical knowledge teaches otherwise it is time for
> physicists to rethink the subject.
OR, get out of physics!
> Since photons act as if they possess inertial mass traveling at the
> velocity of light, the background radiation of space must exert a
> pressure which acting to cause the Universe to attempt to expand.
Sounds sensible,
but is it ENOUGH?
The farther light goes,
the weaker it gets.
Even this close to our sun,
light does NOT knock me down
and crush me wnen I step
outside into it.
But it's exploding
the entire universe?
I can't even feel it!
> Let us examine whether those same photons possess
> a gravitational mass.
Gravitational Mass and
Inertial Mass are like
Republicrats and
Demublicans.
IT'S THE SAME THING!
> This is best done
BY FLUSHING TWICE?
> by considering an ideal thought experiment along the lines of those
> used by Dr. Einstein. Consider a cold gravitationally massive planet
> in intergalactic space (to eliminate spurious disturbances).
> Attached to opposite sides of this planet are infinitely rigid and
> massless columns each of which support an ideal retro reflector
> having 100% efficiency. (I know that these assumptions are physically
> unrealizable but that does not interfere with there use in this
> thougt experimant.) A beam of photons is sent from one of the
> retroreflectors, is bent by the planet's gravitational
> field as required by General Relativity, and strikes the
> retroreflector on the other side of the planet.
> Because these are ideal retroreflectors, the
> photons are constrained to continuously travel bask and forth past the
> planets surface. It is a simple calculation (not involving relativity)
> to show that as a result of the gravitational "refraction" of the
> photon's path the process will cause a net force to be exerted on the
> retroreflectors in a direction which is "down" at the point where the
> photons pass the surface.
I'll have to trust you on that.
> If we are to accept that the "Laws of Conservation of Energy and
> Momentum" are valid, then there must be an upward pull on the planet
> equal to the downward push on the retroreflectors. If these two forces
> are not equal, the entire system could be used as a "space tug" in
> violation of Newton's Second Law and/or a source of limitless energy
> in violation of the First Law of Thermodynamics. The thought
> experiment is diagrammed below. Its validity
> does not depend upon relativistic considerations. This thought
> experiment shows that, if light is observed to be "refracted" by a
> gravitational field, that "refraction" must result not from the
> 'curvature" of space but from a gravitational force.
If you can wrap your head around
that one, space MUST be curved!
> The magnitude of that force must result from the photons having
> a "gravitational mass" equal to twice their inertial mass.
> For a more detained discussion see paragraphs 8.8 and 8.9 of
> http://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm and http://einsteinhoax.com/gf421.gif.
I'll pass for now.
I feel a headache
coming on!
> When one combines the effects of the gravitational and inertial
> "masses" the photons which are observed to propagate through our
> Universe one finds that the inertial mass tends to act as a gas to
> expand the Universe while the gravitational mass acts like any other
> gravitational mass and acts to contract the Universe. The size of the
> Universe at any one time is determined primarily by the balance
> between these two effects. Once the "big bang" state had been reached,
????
> the pressure of photons acted to produce
> the observed expansion which will go on forever.
???? OK.
> All of these conclusions are derived
> and discussed in http://einsteinhoax.com.
>
> The source material for this posting may be found in
> http://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm (1997);
http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm
> (1987); and http://einsteinhoax.com/relcor.htm (1997).
> EVERYTHING WHICH WE ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT
> WITH EVERYTHING ELSE WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS TRUE,
> IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBSERVATIONS, AND IT MUST BE
> MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS MEET THIS
> REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF
> WORKMANSHIP FROM THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.
100% AGREEMENT ON THAT!
> All of the Newsposts made by this site may be viewed at the
> http://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm.
>
> Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not
> monitored on a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated
> with the same courtesy as they are presented. To prevent the wastage
> of time on both of our parts, please do not raise objections that are
> not related to material that you have read at the Website.
> This posting is merely a summary.
> E-mail:- einste...@verizon.net. If you wish a reply, be sure that
> your mail reception is not blocked.
>
> The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 8
> years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF
> THE MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by
> individuals who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without
> questioning it. If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot
> be objectively answered, the material at the Website will be
> withdrawn. Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's
> inadequacy with one exception for which a correction was provided.
I like you.
You see crap all
around you and
are not afraid to
call a turd a turd!
READ RADO!
BY FAR the BEST book on physics EVER written:
=============================================
AETHRO-KINEMATICS IS THE MAIN RADO TEXT
It�s 527 pages of tightly-reasoned analysis
by the greatest physicist of all time!
http://net-prophet.net/rado-ak/aethro_3.pdf
=============================================
NO BULLSHIT!
I GUARANTEE IT!
JUST HARD-NOSED
SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY!
It�s also the best
history of physics
ever written!
Even better than
Richard McKeon!
But Rado perfectly
illustrates both
McKeon's analysis
AND PREDICTIONS!
HIS "LEAST PARTICLES"
ANALYSIS IS ONE OF MCKEON'S
FOUR PRIMARY MODES OF THOUGHT!
THE ONE THAT PERFECTLY
HEXPLAINS AND CONSTRUCTS
THE PHYSICAL UNIVERSE.
THAT'S A BIG
DOUBLE WOW-WOW!
CAUTION: *NOT* FOR
the faint of heart!
May be dangerous to
preconceived prejudices!
Steve�s site is:
http://www.aethro-kinematics.com/
My intro to Steve�s work is:
http://net-prophet.net/nobul/rado/rado.htm
See �05* AETHER PHYSICS� in the
right-hand column of my blog at:
http://net-prophet.net/blog/
AND the �PHYSICS� CATEGORY
in the left-hand column!
Also see the "AETHER PHYSICS" TOPIC
under the "2-FORUMS" in the blog PAGES.
That�s the reading list for now,
but "Aethro-dynamics" will be
released ANY DAY NOW!
O
--- )
\
NEWSGROUPS:
alt.ucp,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci.physics,
PERMALINK: http://net-prophet.net/blog/?p=1367
Bart
>
> When one combines the effects of the gravitational and inertial
> "masses" the photons which are observed to propagate through our Universe
> one finds that the inertial mass tends to act as a gas to expand the
> Universe while the gravitational mass acts like any other gravitational mass
> and acts to contract the Universe. The size of the Universe at any one time
> is determined primarily by the balance between these two effects. Once the
> "big bang" state had been reached, the pressure of photons acted to produce
> the observed expansion which will go on forever. All of these conclusions
>
> The source material for this posting may be found inhttp://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm(1997);http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm
> ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH EVERYTHING ELSE WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS
> TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBSERVATIONS, AND IT MUST BE
> MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT ALWAYS MEET THIS
> REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF WORKMANSHIP FROM
> THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.
>
>
> Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not monitored on
> a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same courtesy
> as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our parts,
> please do not raise objections that are not related to material that you
> have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary.
>
> your mail reception is not blocked.
>
> The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 8
> years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE
> MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by
> individuals who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without
> questioning it. If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be
> objectively answered, the material at the Website will be withdrawn.
> Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's inadequacy with one
> exception for which a correction was provided.
We're in perfect agreement. Not only light pressure cause the
universal expansion (the so called "Dark Energy"), but also the
shielding of light has the effect of attraction (ie, gravity/binding
forces). When integrated over the light sphere, this is a tremendous
weight which is transfered by a zero frequency light wave (ie, the
great wave/background radiation) since the beginning of time. Of
course space does not emit energy (the so called Aether) which would
voilate COE. The "energy" simply oscillates between condensed
(matter) and uncondensed (light) states.
--Bart