Black matter - Illusion and futility

Black matter - Illusion and futility

Background and actual explanation

Although earlier Jan Hendrik Oort had observed that the stars in our galactic neighborhood are moving faster than predicted, main texts about this topic credit Fritz Zwicky and later Vera Rubin as main protagonists.

Arround 1930, Fritz Zwicky analyzing the motion of galaxies in the Coma cluster, arrived to an astonishing conclusion: the observed matter was not enough to explain the motion of galaxies inside the cluster. He deduced that many of them were moving so fast, that they should have been able to escape the gravitational pull of the other galaxies. If this were to be true, the cluster should not be stable or such structure should not exist, but this is not the case. In order to reconcile this situation, he supposed a lot of matter is not visible and it can be accounted for the observed motion. He named it missing matter.

Since then, similar data from other galaxy clusters gave us the same picture – motion in such structures appear as these galaxies have masses tens of times larger than their luminous matter content.

Much later, Vera Rubin during her studies about our neighboring galaxies, observed a curios feature: stars at the edge of the galaxy were moving with quite similar speeds as stars in the vicinity of galaxy nucleus. According to law of gravity corroborated with Newton second law, objects on the farthest edges of galaxies should have lower velocities than objects near the center. But rotation curves (plots of velocity vs. distance) of stars in spiral galaxies show that the rotational velocities remain quite constant up to the edge of visible disk.

In a common example of a galactic rotation curve (fig. 1) when we plot the measured rotational velocities of stars against their distance from the center of a galaxy we obtain the curve B. The blue dashed line A shows what we would expect if quite all the mass was concentrated in the center of the galaxy; according to Kepler laws the velocities should decrease further from the center.

As far the velocities stay flat this should be an indication that mass increases with distance or the gravitation theory needs a revision at this scale.

In absence of a plausible explanation, it was accepted that something we cannot see generates this effect. This strange and unknown matter was called “dark matter” since it is not visible.

It is already accepted that most of the mass of the Milky Way galaxy is not located in the luminous central region, as we previously assumed. These pieces of observational evidence lead to the idea of a dark matter halo approximated as a sphere surrounding the visible galaxy with a density distribution proportional to the radius squared, and contributing circa 90% of the galactic mass.

 

Figure 1. Example of a galactic rotation curve ( A –expected, B- measured)

Rotation curves of satellite galaxies indicate that the distribution of dark matter extends far beyond the edges of the host galaxy. For instance, from the motions of the Magellanic Clouds, two satellite galaxies visible in the Southern Hemisphere that orbit within the Milky Way galaxy’s halo, we can infer that the halo continues beyond the clouds, spanning a distance of almost 300,000 light-years as in fig. 2. In fact, after Vera Rubin, motions of our galaxy’s most distant satellites suggest that its halo may extend twice as far—to 600,000 light-years.

The same situation is observed in clusters of galaxies. So, the larger the scale on which we sample the universe, the greater the proportion of dark matter seems to be.

The most interesting thing about dark matter is not simply that we can't see it, it's that we know dark matter is not made of the same stuff as normal matter.

In the past decades, cosmologists have proposed that 'regular' matter – the stuff we can see and that makes up stars, planets, rocks, gas clouds and dust – only accounts for a small fraction of the total mass in our Universe. Particle physicists call this 'regular' matter baryonic matter, so called because it is made up of particles called baryons. As far baryons interact with each other through gravity, nuclear forces and the electrostatic force, these interactions allow baryonic matter to emit light. Baryonic matter forms stars, planets, moons, and even the interstellar gas and dust from which new stars are born.

 

Figure 2. Halo of black matter around Milky Way Galaxy – picture not at real scale

Dark matter, however, only interacts through gravity. This is why we see its effects on the motions of galaxies and stars, but it does not emit or absorb light. Dark matter particles can also pass through regular matter almost completely undetected since they don't interact electrostatically. As consequence astronomers believe dark matter is non-baryonic in nature. Neutrino is a well known particle which was classified as non-baryonic, first was considered mass less but now is accepting having less than a millionth the mass of the already diminutive electron. Neutrinos were once regarded as likely candidates for dark matter because they exist in such prodigious numbers, but they have been excluded later.

It is accepted that a ratio between baryonic and non baryonic matter can be predicted based on hidrogen/deuterium ratio. By measuring the ratio of hydrogen, the most common element in the Universe, and its heavier isotope deuterium, astronomers have been able to work out how much baryonic matter there must be. This is because deuterium is very difficult to produce, and almost all the deuterium in existence today was formed in the Big Bang.

Those results, now confirmed by detailed studies of the cosmic background radiation, lead to a very surprising conclusion. Baryonic matter—some of it in stars, but much more in diffuse interstellar gas - forms no more than a only 4% of the mass-energy content of the Universe. We know from other observations that all the matter in the Universe makes up around 23% of the mass-energy content, so the discrepancy is due to the existence of non-baryonic dark matter.

Another possibility for explaining the accelerated motion in galaxies and clusters is that our understanding of gravity needs a major revision. Many other alternative theories were proposed, but most physicists did not take this option seriously.

In consequence the hunt for dark matter has been considered one of the main objectives of latest decades in astronomy. There are many approaches for this hunt of dark matter.

In Universe, there is a search for other cosmic structures which emit or reflect too little radiation for our instruments to detect. Among the possible candidates are so-called MACHOs (short for MAssive Compact Halo Objects), such as small brown and black dwarf stars, cold unattached planets, comet-like lumps of frozen hydrogen, tiny black holes, possibly even mini dark galaxies or dark sectors of matter. The large galaxy-sized black holes are ruled out on the basis of how many gravitational lenses we see. High concentrations of matter bend light passing near them from objects further away, but we do not see enough lensing events to suggest that such objects to make up the required 25% dark matter contribution.

Theoreticians, on the other hand, have a lot of work to do and they are inventing new exotic, unfamiliar particles for this dark matter or attribute it to all kind of strange particles they have in their particles-zoo. The favored dark matter candidate particle is considered the Weakly Interacting Massive Particle (WIMP). WIMPs interact with baryonic matter through gravity (as we know dark matter does), and are also expected to interact very slightly through a force known as the weak nuclear force. One WIMP is equal in mass to as much as 10,000 protons. Since the Sun and, therefore, the Solar System is in motion around the center of the Galaxy, it is expected that the Earth should experience a so-called 'WIMP wind' that is detectable as fluctuations in the magnitude and direction of a WIMP signal. Experiments to look for WIMPs are being carried out in highly-shielded, super-cooled facilities deep down in rocky mines where other interfering cosmic rays cannot penetrate. There must be many dark matter particles passing through the Earth all the time, and although most pass unimpeded occasionally one may interact with a molecule, producing a tiny flash of light and new decay particles.

Other candidate particle were invented by theoreticians, for explaining dark matter: one example is the Axion. In contrast to the WIMP, Axion is an ,,extremely light particle”.

Gravitational lensing and cosmic background radiation are considered emerging ways of detecting dark matter.

For instance, when a cluster of galaxies or a galaxy blocks our view of another galaxy behind it, the cluster's gravity bends light passing by, creating rings or arcs, depending on the geometry involved.

In fig. 3, the gravitational pull of the dark matter deflects the light in such a way that an observer on Earth sees two additional images of the object. The diagram is highly idealized; the distances and angles are not drawn to scale. Careful analysis of the light's variations can tease out the mass of the dark foreground lensing object.

 

 

Figure 3. Gravitational lensing

Still another way to assess the existence and amount of dark matter is to look at the cosmic microwave background (CMB), which is considered the light left over from a time when the Universe was about 380,000 years old after big bang.

CMB is a huge filed of research and now the information is mapped with satellite telescope as Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP). The CMB ,,reflects” the contents of the universe at the time it formed, but also the fluctuations in density, which express themselves in tiny temperature variations. It is accepted that small fluctuations in the temperature of the CMB are what gave rise to the structures—galaxies and clusters—we see today. By examining how large the fluctuations are in temperature and in physical size, we can figure out how much ordinary matter, dark matter, and so forth comprise the Universe today. If there had been no fluctuations, we would not be here at all.

These fluctuations are very tiny, ussualy the difference between the hottest spot and the coldest is on the order of one in a thousand or even less.

By analysing the CMB power spectrum, i.e. the three ,,peaks” which appear in this spectrum, actual scientists draw some conclusions about amount of matter, in the form of baryonic and non baryonic form present in Universe. The first peak contains information about the total amount of stuff in the universe: ordinary matter, dark matter, photons, neutrinos, dark energy, and anything else we might not yet know about. The second peak tells us exactly how much ordinary matter there is in the universe. The third peak takes into account both the ordinary and dark matter. Combining this with the second peak therefore gives us the amount of dark matter.

In consequence, by taking the three peaks together, we have the total amount of matter, the total amount of ordinary matter, and all the stuff together.

It is considered that CMB and gravitational lensing have added further confirmations, if any were needed, and have allowed the creation of a kind of "map"of dark matter which shows how galaxies and clusters of stars tend to form around, and within, the largest blobs of dark matter, which forms a kind of all-pervading halo around the visible objects of the universe. In this way, Carlos Frenk has produced a 3D simulation of the dark matter throughout the whole visible universe, showing what he calls the "skeleton" of the universe, or the "scaffolding" around which galaxies and clusters of galaxies have formed. It seems that everything we know is ultimately dependent on dark matter – without dark matter there would be no galaxies; without galaxies there would be no stars; without stars there would be no planets, and therefore no life. What a dramatic scenario !!!!

Further on, according to NASA, based on the observation of Chandra X-ray Observatory and other telescopes, it was possible to obtain a ,,direct evidence” for the existence of dark matter based on the the galaxy cluster 1E0657-56, i.e. so called bullet cluster. According to the formulated explanation, the Bullet Cluster is actually two galaxy clusters in the process of colliding. During the collision, the gas heated up, but most of the mass—in the form of dark matter—was unaffected by the collision. This produced the separation of the dark and normal matter seen in the ,,data” as in fig. 4.

Dark matter has always been a slippery concept, with plenty of evidence for it, yet enough ambiguity to leave many open questions; after decades of work, we still lack directevidence for it either on Earth or in Cosmos.

Astronomers have found less dark matter at the centers of galaxies than what WIMP models suggest, therefore they have reasons to look for alternatives to WIMPs. The discrepancy is even worse at the cores of the universe’s tiny dwarf galaxies, which have few ordinary stars but lots of dark matter.

James Bullock, from University of California, Irvine, proposed a new view for dark matter: dark matter might instead be complex, something that interacts with itself strongly in the way that ordinary matter interacts with itself to form intricate structures like atoms and atomic elements. Such a self-interacting dark matter, could exist in a “dark sector,” somewhat parallel to our own light sector, but detectable only through the way it affects gravity.

It is worth to remind some papers having a bit of ,,common sense” at least in their approach and conclusion. The first study (by C. Moni Bidin, G. Carraro, R. A. Méndez, and R. Smith) looked for the gravitational effects of dark matter in the galactic neighborhood near the Solar System, and failed to find any. They studied the motion of about 400 red giant stars within the Milky Way’s disc. Even with generous error estimates, they found that none of the usual dark matter distribution models work with their data; this means either the density of dark matter is much lower than expected from halo models, or…there is no dark matter at all.

Figure 4. Colliding cluster dynamic after NASA

The second study (by M. S. Pawlowski, J. Pflamm-Altenburg, and P. Kroupa) examined the distribution of satellite galaxies orbiting the Milky Way, and found they lie nearly in a plane, where dark matter models predict the satellites should be distributed in a more-or-less spherical pattern. They found a significant deviation from the expected results: instead of equal distribution, they found two clumps of satellites, with streams of matter (gas and stars) appearing to connect them. Based on their analysis, the researchers conclude the dark matter structure formation scenario cannot produce a distribution of satellites like that.

 

 

Why the entire concept of dark matter is absurd?

and useless for the interpretation of observed phenomena….

 

 

It seems that physicists have no sense of history at all. Although the case of ether was buried last century, with the first ,,occasion” they encountered, other cases have been opened. Dark matter and dark energy are indigo copy of the ether case; the only difference is the unjustified expenses they have been making for justifying some futile research.

I would like to start with some old things, probably already forgotten, from the classical theory of gravitation, i.e the shell theorem. Although it is well known that this theorem has particular application to astronomy, it seems that none had the ,,common sense” to see what are the consequences of this old known theorem for dark matter.

Isaac Newton proved the shell theorem and said that:

1. A spherically symmetric body affects external objects gravitationally as though all of its mass were concentrated at a point at its center.

2. If the body is a spherically symmetric shell, no net gravitational force is exerted by the shell on any object inside, regardless of the object's location within the shell.

Let us see how this theorem applies to dark matter. Dark matter is supposed to form a halo with maximum concentration outside visible disk matter of galaxy, so we can consider that entire visible galaxy is situated inside this shell of dark matter. After Vera Rubin data, published in American Scientific, based on the effect of dark matter over Milky Way dwarf satellites, the halo of dark matter could extend up to 600000 light years and the visible disk of our galaxy has only 100000 light years. Other astronomers consider this hallo up to 300000 light years so triple the size of the visible part.

The oppinion of scientist about a possible motion of dark matter arround galaxy center is divided. There are some who admit dark matter rotates arround galaxy center and other consider it stationary. In fact both these motions should lead to characteristic efects which are not observed and both these motions would rule out the concept of dark matter for a ,,common sense” mind.

If dark matter halo is stationary related to the arms of the galaxy then tidal effects should slow the galaxy rotation. If it rotates with the normal matter in the galaxy then it should flatten out into a disk.

The spherical distribution of dark matter arround visible disk of galaxies, can be ruled out in a elegant way using the shell theorem.

Let us consider a star S situated in the galactic plane, at the edge of visible disk, as in fig. 5.

The visible disk is surrounded by a sphere of dark matter which is considered to represent 90% of the galaxy mass; an approximate plot of the halo of dark matter is made, but the picture is not at scale.

Due to the spherical symmetry, the situation is quite similar if this dark matter is in rotation around galactic center or is stationary. From mathematical point of view we can substitute the sphere of dark matter with a series of lots of hollow spheres nested together.

Therefore, the gravitational field generated at the level of orbit S star is the same as if all the dark matter mass interior to S, were concentrated at the center.

All the mass exterior to orbit of star S, in our example quite all black matter, i.e 90% of the mass of galaxy, does not contribute at all to the gravitational field at S. This is true not only for a sphere of uniform density, but of any sphere in which the density depends only of the distance from the center – i.e., any spherically symmetric distribution of matter.

Figure 5. Dark matter influence on a peripheral star

As consequence with or without black matter, the motion of the star S arround the center of force is governed by the matter inside its orbit, or inside a sphere with diameter equal with size of its orbit.

In order to explain the galactic rotation curve, all the dark matter has to be crowded inside the visible disk of the considered galaxy. But this supplementary addition of mass, will perturb the motion of all stars in the visible part of galaxy and therefore this possibility has to be ruled out;

This was only a reminder for those theoreticians which missed some lessons of basic astronomy ….

 

Although a lot of scientists argue that gravitational lensing is a proof for existence of dark matter, the opposite is true. Such halo of dark matter should perturb images of other objects in universe so strong that astronomy will became a non science. If 90 % of matter in galaxies or clusters of galaxies is concentrated in halo as dark matter, the deviation of photon by this halo is so strong and effective that all we can observe in Universe will be only false images. It is impossible for a bunch of photons coming from the far away distances to not pass through a halo of dark matter of a galaxy or a cluster of galaxies.

Let us take a simple example as in fig 6, where a distant object is seen outside the halo of the foreground galaxy. The image appears normal for an Earth observer and he can make a correlation between the position of this far away galaxy and position of other cosmic systems in his field of view.

Figure 6 Path of a photon outside a dark matter hallo

The background galaxy has a transverse motion and therefore, after a period of time, the photons coming from this distant galaxy intersect the halo of dark matter of foreground galaxy and as consequence, the image disappears from observer field of view situated on Earth. As far the 90% of mass of the foreground galaxy is concentrated in halo of dark matter, photons are deviated and the image forms somewhere in the lateral of the observer and maybe it will be visible for an observer on Mars, Saturn or maybe farther.........as in fig 7.

Figure 7 Deviation of photon due to the interaction with dark matter halo

 

Someone must take these gravitational lensing effects with a pinch of salt...:)

 

The correlation of dark matter with cosmic background radiation (CMB) will make the subject of the next article and it will be published online in few weeks. In any case, as general idea, it is preposterous to think that a variation of a million part of a degree of temperature can decide the fate of a galaxy or even of the entire Universe as the actual interpretation of CMB says. Any strange idea in a science fiction book seems more realistic than this possibility.

 

 

Further on, solely on the 1E0657-56 (bullet cluster) collision interpretation, a ,,common sense” mind will rule out the dark matter concept as internally inconsistent and contradictory.

On one hand it was already accepted that dark matter does not interact with itself and therefore we have the distribution after collision as in fig. 4, where blue color is dark matter.

On the other hand, from a wide variety of observations, we see that big galaxies form by merging, smaller galaxies collide and lump together etc.

The most classical example is the colision of two large galaxies with the formation of a new bigger galaxy. During this collision some stars are expulsed out in space, some direct colisions are feroceous, but for the most part of visible matter, we have only a proces of reorganisation and a new galaxy forms. For simplicity let us consider two similar galaxies having the same speeds, in a simple proces of colision after an angle of about 45 degree, as in fig. 8

Of course the motion of new formed visible galaxy is completely different from motions of colliding galaxies (regarding its speed value and direction, revolution period, etc).

And what about the dark matter? According to the prediction of theoreticiens we sould see how the initial dark matter coming from initial galaxies does not interact between them and continues their initial path as in fig 8. Where would this dark matter goig to? I dont know, but maybe there is a cunning theroretician able to trick me with a inteligent answer to this question!?.....

In consequence at least the new formed galaxy ,,is free “ of dark matter. When a statistical study about spiral galaxies, as example, is made, we should have at least few percent of large galaxies without dark matter; and these galaxies must respect the Kepler laws.

Figure 8. Movement of dark matter after a collision took place

The lump of two small galaxies is even more dreadful for the concept of dark matter. For this case is there a mixing of dark matter coming from initial components? If yes how is this possible, when dark matter from a coliding galaxy does not interact with dark matter from the other ? If not, how dark matter from a initial galaxy take care of ,,its own” visible matter and avoid to influence the visible matter coming from another galaxy?

The series of qestions can continue and even a layman could understand the absurdity of situation...

 

Last but not least, I would like to draw the attention that dark matter concept can be ruled out with other simple facts which should be observed in our Solar System. Sun is situated toward periphery of the Milky Way, around 8.5 kpc from the galactic center and has an orbital velocity of about 220 km/s. According to the calculations, the expected speed should be only 160 km/s as in fig. 9. There is a consistent difference of 60 km/s which is attributed to the dark matter.

Figure 9. Sun case and dark matter

Have someone ever questioned what is the effect of this dark matter at least for some components situated at edge of Solar System like Kuiper belt and Oort cloud?

In fig. 10 a) are represented quite all the main components of our Solar system. Kuiper belt is quite in the same plane as planets (orbit of Pluto is not represented at an angle, but it is not so relevant) and it is accepted that Oort cloud has a spherical distribution around the Sun. The force Sun exerts on components of Kuiper belt and especially Oort cloud is insignificant. We are discussing the case when these objects are far away from Sun. From time to time these bodies are perturbed and they follow a trajectory around the Sun and in this case there is a consistent interaction between these objects and Sun.

 

Fig. 10. Dark matter effect on Kuiper belt and Oort cloud

In fig. 10. b) a representation of Solar System movement around galactic center is figured. The Earth's and other planets orbit (except Pluto) around the Sun is inclined at 60 degrees. Oort cloud is not figured because it will complicate the visualization.

So, If dark matter is able to drag Sun with a velocity of 60 km/s, what would happen with those lousy poor objects in Oort cloud and in Kuiper belt? They should have disappeared long time before live on Earth appeared...

Not only this, but this drag of dark matter should have modified the angle of each planet orbit.... and with a few calculations it can be proved that, after a short period of time, the Sun should have remained bald and alone......

As far even in actual theory, no comet has been observed with an orbit that indicates that it came from interstellar space, there is a strong tendency for aphelia of long period comet orbits to lie at a distance of about 50,000 AU, and there is no preferential direction from which comets come, than Kuiper belt and Oort cloud still exists there. Also the planets and other components of Solar System are at their places.... only dark matter not.

 

 

Proposed explanation

Someone will think that this crazy situation with ,,accelerated motion” is only valid for far away objects... but the reality is completely different.

I will advise gain astronomer to look again to our solar system, because first we have to resolve the problems at local scale and after that to go at larger scale.

In a universe dominated only by gravitational force, we should have quite always only linear motions between celestial structures in clusters, in galaxies, in solar systems etc.

This is because gravitational force acts along the radius which unites the center of mass of the celestial bodies considered and they have to fall one toward another.

If this were the case, the entire Universe will cease to exist and all the marvelous things we see in telescopes closer or farther away would be only imagination.....

In reality, in Universe, the linear motion is only an exception and in fact all celestial stable structures present a rotational motion. This is because at least in the first stage of existence, for any cosmic structure, another phenomena was making the ,,rule of the game” and this was by far more important than gravitational attraction. Any of such cosmic system started with a rotational motion around a center of force. Not all the time the center of force was or became a central massive object or a structure having quite all the mass of the considered system. In fact a vortex and a rotational motion in a fluid can exist with or without a central massive body.

Later on, in another stage of celestial system evolution and for some of them, gravitational force became stronger than vortex force. For some of the celestial structures although they developed a central nucleus, even in this moment the vortex force is comparable and even greater than gravitational force. A lot of galaxies and clusters of galaxies are in this later situation.

Therefore a new approach for study of all celestial systems is necessary based on the vortex theory of gravitation. This theory was formulated for our solar system and now is time to be applied to larger scale structures as galaxies and clusters of galaxies.

Coming back to the topic of black matter, it is relevant to analyze the comet motion.

In a theory published in 2007 with money from my pocket (Theory of gravitation), the strange situation of comets orbits was analyzed. Of course, the theory was ready for publishing in 1995, when I was still a student, but no one wanted to publish this theory or part of it, and after that the ,,official science” did anything to hinder the publication.

When the acceleration of comets is analyzed, they appears as ,,accelerated” and not as permanent members of solar system. Of course, General relativity did not dare to tackle with such problems so, even in present day all well known astronomical books present the comets motion based on Newtonian theory.

By comparison with Newtonian theory, in vortex theory we have a supplementary component for the acceleration of a certain body around the center of force. In the book there is complete mathematical description for this supplementary therm and how this therm can influence the motion.

Therefore in the new proposed theory, the distribution of comets orbits changes and more then 85% of them have elliptical orbits and this means they are permanent members of Solar system. For few orbits there is still an incertitude of data and of course for some of them their form can be or become parabolic or hyperbolic due to the various factors.

The discussion about comets orbits can be found also online on elkadot site.

http://pleistoros.com/index.php/en/books/gravitation/cometary-orbit-shape

Again, although for astronomers, the problem of planets masses in Solar system is a closed subject, in reality we have to start again from scratch. For long time astronomers worked hard to fit all planets masses in Solar System and they arrived to a compromise which was satisfactory for ,,observed phenomena”. Only Mercury did not fit with the calculation and therefore the general relativity came to rescue the situation. Of course all calculations were made based on Newtonian theory of gravitation.

As for comets, in the proposed theory, the Newtonian theory equation of motion for other celestial body in Solar system has a missing term and therefore an error is introduced in all results.....

If such corrections are needed to be made for the Solar system and these are consistent corrections because some planetary masses need to be adjusted with appreciable double digit percentages…. anyone can imagine why the classical physics collapses completely in its trial to make a description of galaxies motions.

Mathematical modeling (vortex with or without nucleus) and how this apply to galaxies motion will be presented in the book.