Dark matter

[Nokton]

Just suppose a scenario like this. Socrates on his deathbed, his followers
around him, described what he thought of death, and described to them
his theory of opposites, that everything has an opposite, so does death,
and that is life.
Gravity is so little understood, but in Socrates law, antigravity is implied.
Gravity is not seen or understood, only felt or seen as an effect determined by the mass of an object. Where there is no mass, as in space
between galaxies, could it be that gravity reverses itself, and pushes space apart, so resulting in the expansion of spacetime and a prime candidate for a theory of dark matter?
Nokton.

[sunofsky]

the dark matter and the gravity both are invisible but their presence is much true in this universe. the whole universe is tide within the great magnetic stretch, the matter is revolving, some matter is visible some are not.

[Blue Fire]

Originally Posted by Nokton

. . . could it be that gravity reverses itself, and pushes space apart, so resulting in the expansion of spacetime and a prime candidate for a theory of dark matter?
Nokton.

Do you mean dark Energy? Dark matter so far appears to be a "something" with mass regardless of where it is at the moment. Seems like dark Energy would be a candidate for spacetime expansion.

[Nokton]

Originally Posted by Blue Fire

Do you mean dark Energy? Dark matter so far appears to be a "something" with mass regardless of where it is at the moment. Seems like dark Energy would be a candidate for spacetime expansion.

Hi Blue, thanx your post. If I may, Albert contended that matter and energy were interchangable, that both aspects of the same thing, so to speak. Would suggest that dark matter has a force comparable with its dark energy equivalent....... But, Blue, am still not entirely convinced we can measure expansion reasonably with just one reference, our time frame. Does the observed cosmological constant change when one is moving much faster than us? Or if we existed in a stronger gravitational
field. Time is dynamic, and variable, how can we base our conclusions of expansion on our observations in just the time frame we experience, when intelligent life in a different time frame get a different result from us.....
Enjoy converse with you Blue,
Nokton

[Blue Fire]

Originally Posted by Nokton

[snip...] Time is dynamic, and variable, ...[snip]
Nokton

This implies that time is a "something". That in itself is quite debatable. Many great minds have contended that time is nothing more than a bookmarking technique with which to describe the relationships between objects in spacetime (note: NOT space And time, but spacetime). Popular theories posit that all of spacetime exists. In this scenario, time has no real meaning beyond helping us to order and arrange events and changes in the slices of the "loaf" of spacetime - with "past", "present", and "future" all being part of the the whole loaf and only with respect to our perception of our own position in that spacetime loaf. I'd highly recommend Brian Greene's The Fabric Of The Cosmos for an enjoyable read about what time may or may not be. It was an eye opener for me.

Regards,
Blue Fire

[Nokton]

Originally Posted by Blue Fire

This implies that time is a "something". That in itself is quite debatable. Many great minds have contended that time is nothing more than a bookmarking technique with which to describe the relationships between objects in spacetime (note: NOT space And time, but spacetime). Popular theories posit that all of spacetime exists. In this scenario, time has no real meaning beyond helping us to order and arrange events and changes in the slices of the "loaf" of spacetime - with "past", "present", and "future" all being part of the the whole loaf and only with respect to our perception of our own position in that spacetime loaf. I'd highly recommend Brian Greene's The Fabric Of The Cosmos for an enjoyable read about what time may or may not be. It was an eye opener for me.

Regards,
Blue Fire

Hi Blue, really enjoy contact with you, but, if you will, stay a while.
Time is a variable, and has a dynamic structure. The flow of time
depends on local conditions, gravity and speed.
Albert proved this in special relativity theory.
My point, dear friend, was, and is, how can we evaluate the age or
expansion of the universe within our present time frame.
Think of it like this Blue, we evaluate all in our time as a solid frame
of reference, suppose that was challenged by a different reference frame, hope you understand.
Peter