English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I was reading an article in Scientific American about he theory of Dark Energy. In the computer models that were generated regarding the impact of dark energy on galaxy formation and structure, they show what looks like a 3-d cobweb of energy streams flowing from point to point. I guess I don’t have a question but more of an observation I am hoping you can build on. Could it be possible that black holes as we know them are not an extreme gravitational force as opposed to a plasma energy conduit that takes in regular energy and converts it to dark energy which then flows along a preformed plasma path to the next, etc. So the black holes are actually the nexus for dark energy stream intersections. Perhaps the bending of light and appearance of gravity having this effect is an optical illusion created by dark energy plasma.

2007-02-09 04:55:11 · 4 answers · asked by dolphinparty13 2 in Science & Mathematics Astronomy & Space

To follow that up, if we could find a way to detect exactly where these dark energy streams are (imagine one of those glass balls with electricity inside that follows your hand, that is dark energy, and the empty space is dark matter with sprinklings of galaxies) perhaps we could use them as we use the currents in the sea for shipping. The only question becomes, what happens to our matter when we come in contact with dark energy, or is that even possible for us to interact with it as it may be a 4th or 5th dimension?

2007-02-09 04:55:33 · update #1

One more thing, I think the universes apparent expansion is an optical illusion caused by our galaxy being sucked toward a black hole. This gives the appearance that the universe is expanding when in fact it is only getting smaller for us. Like being sucked down a toilet bowl, the outside would look bigger and bigger and bigger until you finally got sucked down the pipe. Just a thought.

2007-02-09 04:58:05 · update #2

Thanks for the responses. I had contridicting theories in that one. I do not claim to be nor am I a phycisist, I just bounce these theories around as a wanna be sci fi writer

2007-02-10 07:47:45 · update #3

4 answers

You are confusing Dark Energy and Dark Matter. The 3-d cobweb of stuff is a picture of the response of Dark Matter to its own self-gravity. This is what makes galaxies and clusters of galaxies, which are primarily made of Dark Matter. Dark Energy is not really "stuff", it is more like a property of the vacuum (it is thought). Almost nothing is known about Dark Energy aside from its effect on matter at the largest scales.

There is no evidence that Black Holes are energy conduits of any sort. I don't want to rain on your parade, but quite a lot is known about Black Holes from theory and observation, and you should learn what is known and what has been observed before letting your imagination go on speculative theories. Speculation without knowledge is the way to kookdom.

2007-02-09 07:04:40 · answer #1 · answered by cosmo 7 · 0 0

a very interesting thought but dont by into the big bang falicy if a big bang occured all matter would be outwardly moving from the same point and its not as evidenced by coliding galixeis that have two different points of origen.dark matter and dark energy may very well exist but may not mirror visable energy or matter.i do not know if a connection exists between black holes and dark energy but the gravitational effects on light are a given.and if black holes act like a link in a circut for converting energy than we should have somthing also changing it back as if compleating the circut making a chemical change perhaps. all things seem to have a cycle of some kind so you first need to find the return pathways to acknowladge it as possable.keep in mind the laws of the known universe and they will aplly at least on this side of the black holes.

2007-02-09 06:10:10 · answer #2 · answered by Tony N 3 · 0 2

I am no cosmologist. I am no physicist. However, I will say this much: Stephen Hawking you are not.

If you come up with evidence that's good enough to make it into a peer-reviewed scientific journal, then I may sit up and take notice. Until then, your hypotheses sound about as reasonable as the notion that the earth is 6000 years old, and god just made things look billions of years older as a practical joke.

Hey, what can I say? Keep an open mind and the world will fill it with garbage.

2007-02-09 05:55:25 · answer #3 · answered by Bramblyspam 7 · 0 0

There's no reason to think that.

2007-02-09 10:39:44 · answer #4 · answered by Iridflare 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers