Physicists are continually searching for the elusive dark matter, which is far more abundant than the visible matter in the universe. In the couple of weeks, there has been some intriguing talk about the Cryogenic Dark Matter Search (CDMS) experiment in Minnesota, which announced that two pulses were detected that may be the result of dark matter candidates known as weakly interacting massive particles (WIMPs).
Physicist Lawrence Krauss (author of Hiding in the Mirror and the upcoming Quantum Man) has a great opinion piece on this in the Wall Street Journal, and Paul Davies wrote a similarly compelling piece for The Guardian. These are very balanced looks at the situation, and none are going overboard the way the mainstream media has been. For a very somber look at the results, there is Peter Woit's pessimistic take in his Not Even Wrong blog, and this very even-handed Scientific American article does a good job.
While all the attention over the last year has been focused on the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), is it possible that the next major discovery in particle physics will come out of the CDMS? Will 2010, perhaps, be the year where we actually detect dark matter ... or at least get the first run of solid evidence that will be confirmed in years to come? (As I've said before, science is a process that takes time.) Only time will tell.
Comments
there is a standard model, already found with enough particles to explain it all, when you accept the limits and laws of the scientific method, which many quantum physicists deny.
This means imaginary particles that do not follow the laws of balance, simplicity and efficiency that define the Universe do not exist.
For example, there are no ‘SUSYS’, which are inverse particles physicists obtain ‘theoretically’ by changing ‘ad hoc’, just because they like it, the mass parameters of particles.
It also means that abnormal particles such as antiparticles die very soon. Since it would be like creating animals with the head under the stomach to continue the comparison.
All those facts of the scientific method limit our analysis of what can be dark matter to ‘real particles’ with efficient forms. There are not mutational monsters, parallel Universes, etc.
As Einstein put it and Godel proved ‘while I know when a mathematical equation is truth, it doesn’t mean it will be real’. And so we must distinguish what is real and should happen in search for new particles in places like CERN under the totalitarian principle of Nobel Prize Gell-mann (quark condensates; quark stars, strange matter, nova-reactions, top quarks and quark dark matter) and what has a very low probability of happening (black hole evaporation, SUSYs, neutralinos, Axons, Higgs, extra-dimensions and parallel Universes.)
So what we know or consider possible about dark matter?
We know dark matter is hyper-dense. We know dark matter is hyper-cold. We know dark matter only can emit the background, very low, hyper-abundant radiation of the Universe or doesn’t emit radiation at all.
In the first case, dark matter will be made of small black holes, which by gravitational lensing, due to their enormous attractive power, bend and ‘redshift’=cool down light, extracting its energy. This process delivers a ‘blackbody’ radiation that accounts in fractal theories of the Universe for the radiation that big bang theories consider a remain of the original explosion. Again, when judging both possibilities standard science precludes that the background radiation should be the ’signature’ of small black holes; since when a phenomenon can be explained by a ‘direct, present’ cause or inferred from a past, remote cause, we shall, according to the laws of truth of the scientific method, choose, the present cause.
All this would mean that the Universe is full of MACHOS, quark holes that radiate at 2.7 K and the Earth can easily become another black hole MACHO if the quark cannon (the LHC) starts to produce them at CERN this ‘new year’. The word macho, which means, Massive Halo Object, and was chosen by the agressivity of those black holes say it all: In the universe, black holes and quark matter is the dominant species. There might be other ’substances’ that could be dark matter, but they are not known, never observed and most seem to be ‘mathematical errors’, fantasies built by mathematicians, as writers can build characters and painters invent images that do not exist. since the Universe is efficient, and there are 6 quarks of which only the 2 weakest ones have a role in our world of electroweak matter, the Universe must have a leading role for the 4 heavier quarks; they must therefore be dominant in the Universe, as they can easily absorb the lighter quarks and so they must be dark matter. Hence the enormous danger of the factory of quarks built by CERN. For the same reason politicians, guided by standard science should take seriously this potential genocide of mankind and stop the quark cannon, the nuclear weapon of the future, instead of talking only about nuclear weapons of the past, even if is ‘our machine’ (see a documentary on this at http://www.lhcdefence.org)
there is a standard model, already found with enough particles to explain it all, when you accept the limits and laws of the scientific method, which many quantum physicists deny.
This means imaginary particles that do not follow the laws of balance, simplicity and efficiency that define the Universe do not exist.
For example, there are no ‘SUSYS’, which are inverse particles physicists obtain ‘theoretically’ by changing ‘ad hoc’, just because they like it, the mass parameters of particles.
It also means that abnormal particles such as antiparticles die very soon. Since it would be like creating animals with the head under the stomach to continue the comparison.
All those facts of the scientific method limit our analysis of what can be dark matter to ‘real particles’ with efficient forms. There are not mutational monsters, parallel Universes, etc.
As Einstein put it and Godel proved ‘while I know when a mathematical equation is truth, it doesn’t mean it will be real’. And so we must distinguish what is real and should happen in search for new particles in places like CERN under the totalitarian principle of Nobel Prize Gell-mann (quark condensates; quark stars, strange matter, nova-reactions, top quarks and quark dark matter) and what has a very low probability of happening (black hole evaporation, SUSYs, neutralinos, Axons, Higgs, extra-dimensions and parallel Universes.)
So what we know or consider possible about dark matter?
We know dark matter is hyper-dense. We know dark matter is hyper-cold. We know dark matter only can emit the background, very low, hyper-abundant radiation of the Universe or doesn’t emit radiation at all.
In the first case, dark matter will be made of small black holes, which by gravitational lensing, due to their enormous attractive power, bend and ‘redshift’=cool down light, extracting its energy. This process delivers a ‘blackbody’ radiation that accounts in fractal theories of the Universe for the radiation that big bang theories consider a remain of the original explosion. Again, when judging both possibilities standard science precludes that the background radiation should be the ’signature’ of small black holes; since when a phenomenon can be explained by a ‘direct, present’ cause or inferred from a past, remote cause, we shall, according to the laws of truth of the scientific method, choose, the present cause.
All this would mean that the Universe is full of MACHOS, quark holes that radiate at 2.7 K and the Earth can easily become another black hole MACHO if the quark cannon (the LHC) starts to produce them at CERN this ‘new year’. The word macho, which means, Massive Halo Object, and was chosen by the agressivity of those black holes say it all: In the universe, black holes and quark matter is the dominant species. There might be other ’substances’ that could be dark matter, but they are not known, never observed and most seem to be ‘mathematical errors’, fantasies built by mathematicians, as writers can build characters and painters invent images that do not exist. since the Universe is efficient, and there are 6 quarks of which only the 2 weakest ones have a role in our world of electroweak matter, the Universe must have a leading role for the 4 heavier quarks; they must therefore be dominant in the Universe, as they can easily absorb the lighter quarks and so they must be dark matter. Hence the enormous danger of the factory of quarks built by CERN. For the same reason politicians, guided by standard science should take seriously this potential genocide of mankind and stop the quark cannon, the nuclear weapon of the future, instead of talking only about nuclear weapons of the past, even if is ‘our machine’ (see a documentary on this at http://www.lhcdefence.org)
Isn’t there red matter too??
According to H particle-paths hypothesis H-particles.com/, the Universe is made of single stuff nominating H particle-paths of type R & L (analogous to 0, 1 bits in computers). These counter-current H particle-paths have SM configuration in case of dark matter. The dark matter is converting by normal particles to counter-current H particle-paths of SNr configuration, i.e. right-handedly expanding expandons, nominating dark energy in spatial medium, and left-handedly contracting contractons of SPl configuration that travel towards mass medium and ultimately irreversibly absorbed by the supermassif black hole of the host galaxies and clusters based on path-constancy. Noteworthy, In normal matter there are a slight preference of type R H particle-paths over type L ones in spatial medium, and slight preference of type L over type R ones in mass medium, e.g. electron, proton. Conversely, in case of antimatter, there is a slight preference of type L over type R in spatial medium and slight preference of type R H particle-paths over type L in mass medium, e.g. positron, at equal magnitude and opposite sign based on path-constancy