4 ms·

Clickbait title, but interesting article. I Am Not a Physicist, so I need a real one to explain why I'm wrong, but I've thought for a while the cleanest explan

Clickbait title, but interesting article. I Am Not a Physicist, so I need a real one to explain why I'm wrong, but I've thought for a while the cleanest explanation for dark matter is 1. The universe is inside a black hole. 2. Dark matter is matter which is outside the black hole, which explains why it has mass but no other observable properties.

contravariant 9y ago
Why would we then detect dark matter inside our universe?
- smitherfield 9y ago
  We're at the very edge of the event horizon and so is dark matter, just on the other side.
  - gnaritas 9y ago
    No, we see evidence of dark matter everywhere inside the universe, around galaxies; you may be confusing dark matter with dark energy.
    - smitherfield 9y ago
      I am almost certainly just talking nonsense, but it seems to me if the light-emitting universe is on one side of a flat plane and dark matter is on the other, the physical distance between the light-emitting universe and dark matter could be 0.
      - manyoso 9y ago
        You are indeed talking nonsense.
      - gnaritas 9y ago
        Yea, total nonsense, the universe isn't 2d, and like I said, see the bullet cluster. Dark matter is here, in our 3d universe, mixed with normal matter.
gnaritas 9y ago
See the bullet cluster; you misunderstand the evidence for dark matter.
kobeya 9y ago
> The universe is inside a black hole. This is trivially true, btw. The Schwarzschild radius of the observable universe is less than the presumed plausible size of the universe as a whole. Or alternatively, a "black hole" is a region of space that nothing can escape, not even light, and ongoing and accelerating spatial inflation causes that to be true on an even smaller scale -- most of the universe is unreachable by light emitted today. > Dark matter is matter which is outside the black hole, which explains why it has mass but no other observable properties Except that it interacts as if it was superimposed over objects in this universe, not from outside of it.
- brador 9y ago
  If the universe is inside a black hole what's outside the black hole?
  - officialjunk 9y ago
    another universe. and inside black holes in our universe are different universes. goes both directions, who knows how deep. black holes all the way down and up.
  - losteric 9y ago
    Our part of the universe*... The presumption is that neutron stars are the results of gravity overcoming nuclear forces, and black holes are the results of some other force being overcome, and therefore our visible universe is the inside of a greater collapse... Or the explosive eventual death of a black holes... It's a novel idea, but it's just turtles all the way down
    - kobeya 9y ago
      No, that's not really what I'm saying. A black hole is a just a region that light can't escape from. It is entirely possible for the inside of the black hole to be composed of normal, everyday matter, non-singularity matter. The Schwartzchild radius scales linearly with mass, an unusual relationship that means that for any density the O(r^3) volume will eventually be overtaken by the O(r) Schwartzchild radius.
acqq 9y ago
You confuse dark matter and dark energy. The later is the name for the energy that accelerates the expansion of the universe. The rest of your hypothesis also has no sense, given what we know today. The big "black hole" can't be "outside" of our universe as our universe is all that is, including the space in which it is. The universe doesn't expand inside of its own space, there is actually more space between the galaxies appearing, that is, the new space is appearing, according to what we observe. So the mechanism can't be easily explained by imagining some mass "outside" as the mass must be in the very space we talk about. What we see we call the "observable universe" and because of the finite speed of light, observing the stuff in the distance we see the past! What we see in the farthest distance is actually just a glow of the so-called "big bang," a phase of the universe when there were no stars, no galaxies, just the elementary particles, specifically, we see the moment in which that state became "visible", that is, allowed the photons to travel long enough. So the farthest everywhere we look is just the glow. It is all around because around the point where we are now, just like any other point, there was much less space early enough. The glow is called the CMB: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background It was first time measured in 1964, and the scientists received 1978 Nobel Prize in Physics for that. We see the big bang in the distance, even if the big bang ended around 14 billion years ago. I hope you see why we can't explain what we actually observe by imagining the "black hole outside."
diegoperini 9y ago
> The universe is inside a black hole. More like it is itself an inside out black hole, or acts like one. I suggest Leonard Susskind's talks/lectures on Youtube for a clear explanation.
justin_vanw 9y ago
Leonard Susskind said in his book that "the universe is the inside of a black hole" is the #1 theory of cranks that reach out to contact him. The stuff written to popularize physics really has almost no correlation to the real thing, it's all analogies and stuff, so I would be careful.
- ttctciyf 9y ago
  See also: http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2010/04/28/the-universe-is-not-a-black-hole/ http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2010/04/28/the-univ... > You may have noticed that the universe is actually expanding, rather than contracting as you might expect the interior of a black hole to be. That’s because, if anything, our universe bears a passing resemblance to a white hole. Our universe (according to conventional general relativity) has a singularity in the past, out of which everything emerged, not a singularity in the future into which everything is crashing. We call that singularity the Big Bang, but it’s very similar to what we would expect from a white hole, which is just a time-reversed version of a black hole. > That insight, plus four dollars or so, will get you a grande latte at Starbucks.

contravariant 9y ago

Why would we then detect dark matter inside our universe?

smitherfield 9y ago
We're at the very edge of the event horizon and so is dark matter, just on the other side.
- gnaritas 9y ago
  No, we see evidence of dark matter everywhere inside the universe, around galaxies; you may be confusing dark matter with dark energy.
  - smitherfield 9y ago
    I am almost certainly just talking nonsense, but it seems to me if the light-emitting universe is on one side of a flat plane and dark matter is on the other, the physical distance between the light-emitting universe and dark matter could be 0.
    - manyoso 9y ago
      You are indeed talking nonsense.
    - gnaritas 9y ago
      Yea, total nonsense, the universe isn't 2d, and like I said, see the bullet cluster. Dark matter is here, in our 3d universe, mixed with normal matter.

gnaritas 9y ago

See the bullet cluster; you misunderstand the evidence for dark matter.

kobeya 9y ago

> The universe is inside a black hole. This is trivially true, btw. The Schwarzschild radius of the observable universe is less than the presumed plausible size of the universe as a whole. Or alternatively, a "black hole" is a region of space that nothing can escape, not even light, and ongoing and accelerating spatial inflation causes that to be true on an even smaller scale -- most of the universe is unreachable by light emitted today. > Dark matter is matter which is outside the black hole, which explains why it has mass but no other observable properties Except that it interacts as if it was superimposed over objects in this universe, not from outside of it.

brador 9y ago
If the universe is inside a black hole what's outside the black hole?
- officialjunk 9y ago
  another universe. and inside black holes in our universe are different universes. goes both directions, who knows how deep. black holes all the way down and up.
- losteric 9y ago
  Our part of the universe*... The presumption is that neutron stars are the results of gravity overcoming nuclear forces, and black holes are the results of some other force being overcome, and therefore our visible universe is the inside of a greater collapse... Or the explosive eventual death of a black holes... It's a novel idea, but it's just turtles all the way down
  - kobeya 9y ago
    No, that's not really what I'm saying. A black hole is a just a region that light can't escape from. It is entirely possible for the inside of the black hole to be composed of normal, everyday matter, non-singularity matter. The Schwartzchild radius scales linearly with mass, an unusual relationship that means that for any density the O(r^3) volume will eventually be overtaken by the O(r) Schwartzchild radius.

acqq 9y ago

You confuse dark matter and dark energy. The later is the name for the energy that accelerates the expansion of the universe. The rest of your hypothesis also has no sense, given what we know today. The big "black hole" can't be "outside" of our universe as our universe is all that is, including the space in which it is. The universe doesn't expand inside of its own space, there is actually more space between the galaxies appearing, that is, the new space is appearing, according to what we observe. So the mechanism can't be easily explained by imagining some mass "outside" as the mass must be in the very space we talk about. What we see we call the "observable universe" and because of the finite speed of light, observing the stuff in the distance we see the past! What we see in the farthest distance is actually just a glow of the so-called "big bang," a phase of the universe when there were no stars, no galaxies, just the elementary particles, specifically, we see the moment in which that state became "visible", that is, allowed the photons to travel long enough. So the farthest everywhere we look is just the glow. It is all around because around the point where we are now, just like any other point, there was much less space early enough. The glow is called the CMB: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background It was first time measured in 1964, and the scientists received 1978 Nobel Prize in Physics for that. We see the big bang in the distance, even if the big bang ended around 14 billion years ago. I hope you see why we can't explain what we actually observe by imagining the "black hole outside."

diegoperini 9y ago

> The universe is inside a black hole. More like it is itself an inside out black hole, or acts like one. I suggest Leonard Susskind's talks/lectures on Youtube for a clear explanation.

justin_vanw 9y ago

Leonard Susskind said in his book that "the universe is the inside of a black hole" is the #1 theory of cranks that reach out to contact him. The stuff written to popularize physics really has almost no correlation to the real thing, it's all analogies and stuff, so I would be careful.

ttctciyf 9y ago
See also: http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2010/04/28/the-universe-is-not-a-black-hole/ http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2010/04/28/the-univ... > You may have noticed that the universe is actually expanding, rather than contracting as you might expect the interior of a black hole to be. That’s because, if anything, our universe bears a passing resemblance to a white hole. Our universe (according to conventional general relativity) has a singularity in the past, out of which everything emerged, not a singularity in the future into which everything is crashing. We call that singularity the Big Bang, but it’s very similar to what we would expect from a white hole, which is just a time-reversed version of a black hole. > That insight, plus four dollars or so, will get you a grande latte at Starbucks.