RE: Dark blobs as stealthy dark matter
glad to have you back on the frontier, sensei :p
Moreover, provided the typical mass of the dark blobs is smaller than 1000 tons, the dark matter density is such that at least one blob passes through Earth each year. There are thus ways to detect it.
in theory, that is ... but from all i read (you know i have about zero formal education other than basic algebra, lol) its more than highly unlikely since , if neutrinos can shoot through a lightyear of matter ( lead in specific ) and dark matter should (in theory) be more elusive since it hasnt been actually observed yet then a detector the size of the earth would STILL have a near to zero chance on a cosmic scale ?
Then again if it accounts for 96% of everything it should be everywhere so that might up the chances again .
And from all i read the data on the matter does not completely corellate with the observations on the matter either so i still don't understand why its considered more likely than alternating gravity (maybe it's easier /grin i dont know )
you know my logic comes without numbers here but as far as i know so does the rest because it hasnt been proven, which makes all numbers hypothetical, doesn't it.
Seeing as, if i understand correctly , it's assumed for the sake of hypothesis that there's alternating interaction then even more so i dont understand why alternating gravity would be frowned upon like that.
Then again, i'm not the physicist ofcourse, i come to learn, not to discern but it sometimes makes no sense to me and it hasnt been proven yet i fear its sometimes wishful thinking to selffulfilling prophecy. Im not being negative here, im just being straight about the drive of the human mind.
It's slightly strange how the amount of dark matter corellates with the amount of "invisible internet too", i think that's also 94-96% ... all nodes "below the surface" no standard user will ever get to see so maybe its all back to fibonacci hahah, sorry there i go again mixing it up in my metaverse.
What i WANTED to ask before i got lost in my head : since dark matter packs in these blobs there should be more mass to observe, and if it interacts with its own kind but not with standard matter AND is subject to gravity it also stands to reason (in my head) that these blobs would act like everything acted in the beginning, they would meld together and become more massive over time (at least thats my simplified view of the origin of the cosmos here) so the more time passes as they stick together more and more, driven by the fact they're subject to gravity, you would have bigger blobs that become more massive so over time they would have to be easier to detect since
... mass bends light ? right ? i mean the presence of it, that's Einsteins representation of spacetime , its specifically about fotons and pathways where massive objects lead to dents and bends,
which can be observed so
what places would be more likely to find more massive blobs or superblobs (lol) of dark matter then ?
would it be more likely to find them closer "to the point of origin" where all started from that marble sized dot or would it be more likely to find more condensed/bigger blobs (over time as we are a few billion years later now) on the outskirts as it keeps expanding (i do believe i'm right in my assumption dark matter is similar to everything that did not condense into the current/light matter in the first 10-20 minutes of the universe, no?) but if its blobs and if its subject to gravity, even if only interacting with itself, it should condense from small blob to bigger blobs over the course of billions of years ? (do correct me if my gedanken go out of line here, lol) so there must be areas where its more likely to find bigger blobs, even if current methods of detection might not have the resolution it takes to detect a shift that small due to the severe lack of mass over volume it might be able to theorize where its more likely ?
(yea thats a question mark, lol) so i think i need to do some housechore stuff ... sadly the gnomes are still on strike :p
i hope i'm making sense, i know i split myself over the course of several paragraphs into a few different people usually
and as always , thanks for the post, much appreciated
Thanks for the nice and detailed comment, as usual. Yes I am finally back :)
Neutrinos form a background in such experiments. We however have not excluded the fact that dark matter interaction rates are larger than the neutrino ones. As long a this option is still viable, we have a long way to go.
They coalesces by virtue of the dark matter self-interactions. Gravity is still too weak at that scale (we are talking ab out tons and not solar masses).
and
how close am i to the theory ? :p
hm , something odd with the markdown numbering system 1) 2)
No, this means that dark matter may interact more, just because the interaction strength is stronger.
Yes, indeed. Except that with a few tons, you don't bend much so that this would not be noticeable.
okay, so i had question two right, does that mean i pass ? :) cos in most unis you dont pass on 50% , right ?
when i started OU for psychology i think the required score was about 70% or no bach lol
but part 1 leaves me hanging for a moment there
what exactly do you mean by interaction strenght ? i thought gravity pulled depending on mass, so a more massive object will be more subject to it ? thats why the moon revolves and a comet just slings by ?
or is there something else at work ? because right now variable interaction strength sounds to me a lot like variable gravity (ooh dont shoot me hhahah)
no really what i read is (please do correct me) the same amount of mass in a blob of dark matter or a zone of neutrinos will interact differently with the gravitational pull and therefor make a different "dent" in spacetime (thats regardless of volume ofcourse, that far i got already :)
When there is a dark sector, they may come with their own set of interactions that are different from the fundamental ones we know. Those interactions may have different strength. Not electromagnetic, not weak, not strong. Just a different one.
I hope this short answer clarifies.
yes, it actually does , thanks , its an unknown variable