GRAVITY SUCK

[transmitterdan]

Originally Posted by er9

thanks GordMay i had not been following recently and heard of this discovery of these new particles. thats also pretty exciting tech potential for air pollution. i was watching an interview with Brian Cox last night and he mentioned they are using mini particle colliders now in hospitals to focus on and bombard brain cancer tumors. and politicians think its money poorly spent building these large science experiments.

Fermilab has used a big accelerator to treat certain brain cancers with a neutron beam. I am proud to have had a hand in helping build a part of that system. Not sure if they still do that therapy or not.

https://www-bd.fnal.gov/ntf/what_is/index.html

[transmitterdan]

Dark matter may be related to how much mass Neutrinos have.

https://www.popularmechanics.com/spa...are-neutrinos/

[GordMay]

“Who Really Found the Higgs Boson” ~ by Neal Hartman
“... Scientific breakthroughs often seem to be driven by individual genius, but this perception belies the increasingly collaborative nature of modern science. Perhaps nothing captures this dichotomy better than the story of the Higgs discovery, which presents a stark contrast between the fame awarded to a few on the one hand, and the institutionalized anonymity of the experiments that made the discovery possible on the other ...”
More ➥ https://getpocket.com/explore/item/w...he-higgs-boson

[CatNewBee]

You have to look at the right places to find dark energy and dark matter. You don't need to build a large hadron collider, just buy the NYT or watch CNN, a lot of dark energy and dark matter there.

[Mike OReilly]

It’s unfortunate that physicists refer to these two unknowns in such similar language: dark matter and dark energy. Despite the same “dark”, they really have nothing to do with each other, and are completely different mysteries.

Dark matter is by far the easier problem. There’s just a whole lot of matter out there that we can’t seem to measure. Could be neutrinos (with mass), could be a crap load of inter-galactic ‘jupiters’, or could be a form of matter we just haven’t been able to directly measure yet. It’s a mystery, but a manageable one.

Dark energy is a completely different beast. It is the result of the unexpected observation that the universe is not only expanding, but accelerating in its expansion. There is no known force or explanation for this within standard cosmology. Therefore, it is something completely new — a new force, or a new energy that permeates everything (whatever that means), or…

Dark energy really is just the physics way of saying “We don’t know what the heck this is.”

[cyan]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

It’s unfortunate that physicists refer to these two unknowns in such similar language: dark matter and dark energy. Despite the same “dark”, they really have nothing to do with each other, and are completely different mysteries.

Dark matter is by far the easier problem. There’s just a whole lot of matter out there that we can’t seem to measure. Could be neutrinos (with mass), could be a crap load of inter-galactic ‘jupiters’, or could be a form of matter we just haven’t been able to directly measure yet. It’s a mystery, but a manageable one.

Dark energy is a completely different beast. It is the result of the unexpected observation that the universe is not only expanding, but accelerating in its expansion. There is no known force or explanation for this within standard cosmology. Therefore, it is something completely new — a new force, or a new energy that permeates everything (whatever that means), or…

Dark energy really is just the physics way of saying “We don’t know what the heck this is.”

Ah, but a popular model has dark matter decreasing in density with the expanding universe while dark energy stays almost constant in density, eventually causing the end of the universe in a heat death. (thus connecting the two concepts in a very dark sort of way.)

[GordMay]

“How Black Holes Nearly Ruined Time”
Quantum mechanics rescued our understanding of past and future from the black hole. ~ by Andrew Turner & Alex Tinguely
➥ https://getpocket.com/explore/item/h...ly-ruined-time

[er9]

Originally Posted by transmitterdan

Fermilab has used a big accelerator to treat certain brain cancers with a neutron beam. I am proud to have had a hand in helping build a part of that system. Not sure if they still do that therapy or not.

https://www-bd.fnal.gov/ntf/what_is/index.html

Wow! where you working at Fermilab? Did you work with Brian Cox? I think he was there before moving to the LHC. Sounds like exciting work. your a nuclear engineer?

[transmitterdan]

Originally Posted by er9

Wow! where you working at Fermilab? Did you work with Brian Cox? I think he was there before moving to the LHC. Sounds like exciting work. your a nuclear engineer?

I am a contractor. We built some of the multi-megawatt RF power systems used to drive the Fermi linac.

Yes, I know Brian but it was many years ago.

[GordMay]

New spin on galaxy rotation saves controversial gravity theory

A new study [1], looking at the ultra-diffuse dwarf galaxy, “AGC 114905", has revived a controversial theory (or more accurately a hypothesis) of gravity, and given us more questions than answers, about what's making our galaxies tick.

It all starts with dark matter – or in this case, no dark matter. Although most cosmologists agree there's something out there called 'dark matter', causing spiral galaxies to rotate faster than they should, even dark matter doesn't answer all the questions we need it to.

So, it's not a bad idea to look at some alternative options. You know, just in case we are never able to find the stuff.

One alternative hypothesis to dark matter is called Modified Newtonian dynamics (MOND)[2] or Milgromian dynamics framework. This hypothesis – first published in 1983 by physicist Mordehai Milgrom – suggests that we don't need dark matter to fill in the Universe's gravity gaps, if we calculate the gravitational forces experienced by stars in outer galactic regions in a different manner to how Newtonian laws suggest.

To test this idea, which involves working with proportionality to the star's radius or centripetal acceleration, we need to be looking at the speeds of galaxies – specifically weird ones like ultra-diffuse galaxies.

These very faint, ugly ducklings of the galaxy world have a habit of not acting like a galaxy should. For example, some ultra diffuse galaxies seem to be made almost entirely of dark matter, whilst others are almost completely dark matter-less.

This is where AGC 114905 comes in. This ultra-diffuse dwarf galaxy around 250 million light years away had recently been looked at in detail, in a paper published in 2021[3], investigating how fast it spins.

The new paper [1] has 'un-debunked' the 2021 finding [3], suggesting that the issue isn't with MOND, but instead with the inclination of the galaxy itself.

The paper [1], ‘Overestimated inclinations of Milgromian disc galaxies: the case of the ultradiffuse galaxy AGC 114905’, is published in Publication Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, and is available online.

More about ➥ https://news.st-andrews.ac.uk/archiv...ravity-theory/

[1] “Overestimated inclinations of Milgromian disc galaxies: the case of the ultradiffuse galaxy AGC 114905"~ by Indranil Banik et al [April 19/22]
➥ https://academic.oup.com/mnras/artic...3/3541/6570911

[2] Modified Newtonian dynamics ➥ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modifi...onian_dynamics

[3] “ No need for dark matter: resolved kinematics of the ultra-diffuse galaxy AGC 114905" ~ by Pavel E Mancera Piña et al
➥ https://academic.oup.com/mnras/artic...3/3230/6461100