Quark Stars and a New State of Matter?

Alan,

I agree. Although there's little evidence for it either, and plenty of evidence supporting a distribution of low EM profile matter like fermions and free protons in space, (it mainly needs to be outside large massive bodies, i.e. between the clusters) and equally no evidence against.

Yes, I like the video, excellent work. I posted it everywhere I could think of last year, and also one with Helene Cortois' commentary; Video of the Universe.

I haven't yet seen evidence it has to be 'exotic', but do post any. I agree 'dark energy' is as much as a mystery as 'matter'! (probably the same stuff but in vortices).

Best wishes

Peter

Peter,

I would say that there's more evidence for anisotropic dark matter at the center of planets, stars and galaxies:

(i) It solves the many problems of current ice age theory

(ii) It solves the 1,800yr cycle in climate data

(ii) It solves the devolution of spiral -> lenticular -> elliptical

What is the "evidence supporting a distribution of low EM profile matter like fermions and free protons in space, (it mainly needs to be outside large massive bodies, i.e. between the clusters)" relative to this hypothesis, because I haven't seen any.

Alan

Alan,

The 26.8% dark matter (22.7% pre Planck) must be most significant in the 'voids' between the bodies to recreate the gravitational effects found. That is the whole basis of the calculations and the simulations that work. But It seems mostly pretty thinly spread, but concentrated in the extended haloes of galaxies and clusters decreasing gently out hundreds of parsecs. There ain't many stars out there!

If you don't have access to the MNRAS or ApJ you can still find a lot of info on the arXiv. i.e. Simple fermionic dark matter models and Higgs boson couplings. or; The core-cusp problem in cold dark matter halos and supernova feedback: Effects of Mass Loss or such more simplistic ones as as; Density of Dark Matter in Galaxy Clusters

then also piles of local hardcore stuff like; Telecommunications expert suggests Earth may have dark matter disc.

You seem to have the evolution of galaxies the wrong way round, discs ("elliptical") come after spiral and before lenticulars. Did you find that somewhere? I thought you'd read my paper on evolution. The sequence seems simple and exceptionally well evidenced (if not generally understood) without the 'solution' you suggest. What is it?

Best wishes

Peter

Peter,

There is an abundance of stars out in the darkness:

The second WISE study, which concentrated on objects beyond our solar system, found 3,525 stars and brown dwarfs within 500 light-years of our sun.

The simulation modellers haven't thought of anisotropic dark matter at the center of stars. If they did, then I'm saying they'd get much better results.

Here's the Wikipedia entry on Lenticular Galaxies

Formation theories

The morphology and kinematics of lenticular galaxies each, to a degree, suggest a mode of galaxy formation. Their disk-like, possibly dusty, appearance suggests they come from faded spiral galaxies, whose arm features disappeared. Alternatively, as lenticular galaxies are likely to be more luminous than spiral galaxies, which suggests that they are not merely the faded remnants of spiral galaxies. Rather, lenticular galaxies might result from galaxy merger, which increase the total stellar mass and give the newly merged galaxy its disk-like, arm-less appearance

Their appearance suggest they come from faded spiral galaxies who's arm features have disappeared. According to my theory, they are often more luminous than spirals because only the galactic center exotic matter has lost it's spin and so lost it's higher anisotropic gravity on the galactic plane. The stars still have high spin exotic cores and so shine brightly. This scenario therefore gives the devolution of spiral to lenticular to elliptical. It requires a little thought and imagination but gives an elegant solution to the galaxy formation conundrum.

Alan

Peter,

The Cuspy halo problem actually fits my hypothesis:

The cuspy halo problem arises from cosmological simulations that seem to indicate cold dark matter (CDM) would form cuspy distributions -- that is, increasing sharply to a high value at a central point -- in the most dense areas of the universe. This would imply that the center of our galaxy, for example, should exhibit a higher dark-matter density than other areas

Observations can't see it, but that doesn't mean it isn't there:

One approach to solving the cusp-core problem in galactic halos is to consider models that modify the nature of dark matter; theorists have considered warm, fuzzy, self-interacting, and meta-cold dark matter, among other possibilities

Self-interacting dark matter is what I have been proposing in the form of strange quark matter which has a strong SQM to SQM gravitational interaction on the plane of core rotation. It's this interaction which gives additional large tidal forcing on Earth's 100ky inclination cycle and the moon's 1,800yr lunar tidal cycle.

Alan

Peter,

Take a look at this:

Observational evidence for self-interacting cold dark matter

Cosmological models with cold dark matter composed of weakly interacting particles predict overly dense cores in the centers of galaxies and clusters and an overly large number of halos within the Local Group compared to actual observations. We propose that the conflict can be resolved if the cold dark matter particles are self-interacting with a large scattering cross-section but negligible annihilation or dissipation. In this scenario, astronomical observations may enable us to study dark matter properties that are inaccessible in the laboratory

Strange quark matter is an excellent candidate.

Alan

Peter,

Thinking about it more, my model only requires self-interacting dark matter at the center of moons, planets and stars. Therefore the 'cuspy halo problem' is resolved. My model for the spiral galaxy devolution would have to be revised though. Either that, or perhaps exotic dark matter doesn't interact with light, so it's effects wouldn't be observed by gravitational lensing.

Here's another piece of the puzzle which features my telltale feature of strong tidal interactions:

Dwarf galaxy problem

Other solutions may be that dwarf galaxies tend to be gobbled up or tidally stripped apart by larger galaxies due to complex interactions. This tidal stripping has been part of the problem in identifying dwarf galaxies in the first place, which is an extremely difficult task since these objects have low surface brightness and are highly diffused, so much that they are virtually unnoticeable even in our own backyard.

Alan

I've just read that "Dark matter's existence is inferred from gravitational effects on visible matter and gravitational lensing of background radiation" which makes me come back to the simplicity of self-interacting anisotropic dark matter at the center of moons, planets and stars.

If only simulation modellers would try this scenario it would resolve the cuspy halo problem.

Perhaps there is rapid annihilation at galactic cores.

Alan,

I agree your model is novel but take care about selective interpretation bias, one of the biggest problems in astrophysics. I must admit as an astronomer I also cringe a lot when people quote wikiscience at me! Having said that I'll never dismiss ANY proposition out of hand.

There may well be some exotic DM within bodies, but the DM spread in the extended haloes (NOT in visible bodies) can not only account for all the gravitational effects on it's own (that's not to say it actually 'does', but also requires to be where it is to have the effects it does, NOT significantly within massive visible bodies, or even the 'dust'. The G potential of the bodies is well calculated, it's the 'other' potentials (not focussed locally on the bodies) that are most 'poorly understood'.

I have a current paper on galaxy evolution, including constraining DM, which has just passed peer review (subject to some minor improvements) which should go up on arXiv later this month. It rigorously derives the findings you suggest other causes for. I'll send you a link, IF you too have an open mind!.

It also identifies the reasons the DM and ionized gas haloes counter rotate ("kinetic decoupling") from the stellar disc.

In the interim another of many related papers I cite, giving the evidence it's happening not the solution;

">Decoupled gas kinematics in isolated S0 galaxies](https://arxiv.org/list/astro-ph/recent

)

Best wishes

Peter

Peter,

Yes, I am prone to interpretation bias due to my working hypothesis but I think the idea of the devolution of spirals to lenticular to ellipticals has merit, with annihilation occurring at galactic centers. I'd be interested to read your paper on galaxy evolution though and I promise to keep as open a mind as I can.

I greatly appreciate your consideration that "There may well be some exotic DM within bodies". I haven't been able to find anyone else who's made the suggestion. Maybe I'm the first, who knows?

A couple of links didn't work but I googled "Filament Dark Matter spin orientation". I suspect this is something like spirals being arranged like beads on a string, which I've read somewhere recently. I'm still thinking very conceptually at the moment and can find these kind of papers quite presumptuous about so called established facts. There's so much that will become clear in our lifetimes, I'm sure. What a relief when some real progress is finally made on the nature and locality of dark matter.

Alan

Peter,

Following a host of conflicting reports in the wake of the mysterious disappearance of Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 last Saturday, representatives from the Kuala Lumpur-based carrier acknowledged they had widened their investigation into the vanished Boeing 777 aircraft today to encompass not only the possibilities of mechanical failure, pilot error, terrorist activity, or a botched hijacking, but also the overarching scope of space, time, and humankind's place in the universe.

I've always been interested in all elements of the unexplained with mystery ship and aircraft incidents included. I suspect that the fate of the 777 could have been due to an ultra brief high energy beam emanating from the Earth's exotic core. Believe it or not, there's been other famous cases where radar tracking information from different locations has given conflicting reports of last location.

Source: MH370: Malaysia Airlines plane search continues amid signals mystery

Alan

Peter,

Dense Disk and Torus Funnel at the Centre of the Circinus Galaxy (13 Mar 2014)

Although there is now a much clearer picture of a torus than before, there are some puzzles remaining: For example, both the dust disk and the polar dust have a temperature of about 300K (~30°C, i.e. about room temperature). Surprisingly, there is no evidence for hotter dust towards the centre as would be expected for a centrally heated dust distribution.

"The presence of both a bright disk-like component and a more extended polar dust component at a similar temperature were not predicted by the present models of active galactic nuclei", concludes Gerd Weigelt, director at the MPIfR and head of the research group for infrared astronomy.

Your galaxy evolution theory will need to incorporate the latest findings.

Alan

Alan,

It doesn't 'incorporate' but rather 'predicts', and has been for some time. I have pointed this out, but nobody seems terribly interested.

The reason nobody else has predicted exotic dark matter within stars and planets is that it's gravitational effects put is around not 'in' such bodies. Unless it has some other kind of gravity!

Fermions (vortices, as your 'corkscrews') have almost zero EM profile (are 'dark' to spectroscopy) but very high coupling co-efficient (refract light effectively), so are ideal. (strictly also positrons and protons, making the 'pure space-plasma' actually found). We also find a lot out there, and know the Higgs process and moving mass produces them. What's wrong with those looking I really can't imagine!

I agree there are many assumptions, but the trick is picking the RIGHT ones to discard!

Best wishes

Peter

PS. Early short paper here, now vastly expanded and evidenced; Cyclic evolution.

Peter,

We have considerably differing world-views but with the common feature of helical structures. I'm convinced of self-interacting dark matter at the center of moons, planets and stars.

Good luck with your work.

Alan

Gravity investigated with a binary pulsar

The first pulsar was discovered in 1967 at the radioastronomy laboratory in Cambridge, England (Nobel Prize 1974 to Antony Hewish). What was new about the Hulse-Taylor pulsar was that, from the behaviour of the beacon signal, it could be deduced that it was accompanied by an approximately equally heavy companion at a distance corresponding to only a few times the distance of the moon from the earth. The behaviour of this astronomical system deviates greatly from what can be calculated for a pair of heavenly bodies using Newton's theory. Here a new, revolutionary "space laboratory" has been obtained for testing Einstein's general theory of relativity and alternative theories of gravity. So far, Einstein's theory has passed the tests with flying colours. Of particular interest has been the possibility of verifying with great precision the theory's prediction that the system should lose energy by emitting gravitational waves in about the same way that a system of moving electrical charges emits electromagnetic waves.

This Hulse-Taylor pulsar could be used to test for the anisotropic graviton model of gravitation as an alternative to Einstein's relativity.

Alan

Notice how the explanation for the large difference in precession between the binary pulsar and mercury is comparable to my explanation for mercury's anomalous precession relative to the other planets. (See post Feb 28)

The discovery of the binary pulsar

Hulse's and Taylor's discovery in 1974 of the first binary pulsar, called PSR 1913 16 (PSR stands for pulsar, and 1913 16 specifies the pulsar's position in the sky) thus brought about a revolution in the field. We have here two very small astronomical bodies, each with a radius of some ten kilometres but with a mass comparable with that of the sun, and at a short distance from each other, only several times the moon's distance from the earth. Here the deviations from Newton's gravitational physics are large. As an example may be mentioned that the periastron shift, the rotation of the elliptical orbit that the pulsar (according to Kepler's first law from the beginning of the 17th century) follows in this system, is 4 degrees per year. The corresponding relativistic shift for the most favourable example in our solar system, the above-mentioned perihelion motion of Mercury, is 43 seconds of arc per century (this is less than a tenth of the very much larger contributions to the perihelion motion caused by perturbations from other planets, chiefly Venus and Jupiter). The difference in size between the shifts is partly due to the orbital speed in the binary pulsar, which is almost five times greater than Mercury's, and partly due to the pulsar performing about 250 times more orbits a year than Mercury. The orbiting time of the binary pulsar is less than eight hours, which can be compared with the one month our moon takes to orbit the earth.

An asteroid with rings and likely shepherd moon is only 250km across and the new dwarf planet 450km across is described as:

Trujllio and colleagues estimate that the new dwarf planet is relatively small -- about 450 kilometers (280 miles) in diameter, which less than the driving distance from Philadelphia to Boston. It's probably ball-shaped, he said.

So why is this not a major planet such as Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars? Trujillo explains that a bona fide planet is big enough that other objects in its orbit will be sucked into it gravitationally. A dwarf planet is not big enough to become gravitationally dominant; it's too small to pull in objects in the area of its path.

There's a discrepancy here.

Also, the similar inclinations of the two distant objects could be due to the exotic dark matter hypothesis rather than a 10x super-earth planet:

In the most speculative part of today's announcement the astronomers noted that 2012 VP113 shares a similar inclination in its orbit to the previously discovered Sedna,which Trujillo also had a hand in discovering, and which was originally termed 2003 VB12. They suggest that a much larger planet's gravity could be corralling both objects.

They suggest that this as yet unseen gravitational sheep dog would be huge: perhaps 10 times the mass of the Earth, and orbiting a few hundred times further from the sun than our planet. Such 'Super Earths' are now routinely found around other stars. To find one in our solar system would constitute as much of a shake up as the discovery of Uranus, Neptune or Pluto did back in 1781, 1846, 1930 respectively.

A really interesting discovery.