Evidence for Dark Matter In Common Physics

Recent astronomy has found that dark mattr not only exists, it also helps explain why the milky way has a warp caused by smaller dwarf galaxies. These dwarf galaxies act as much stronger sources of gravity than the visible mass, and it's inferred the otherwise unexplained missing dwarf galaxies the milky way should have like other galaxies. The milky way is much larger than most galaxies (I didn't know till I found out!"). The visable light from the missing dwarf galaxies is much smaller than the mass seen.

Dark matter seems common, and calculations with particles like gravitons account for most of the extra gravity, but not all. In my belief, the rest of the extra strength of the gravity if from the almost completely wavelike nature of the lower energy field. Although particles can explain why we feel no force when in free fall in the Earth's gravity because the particles are moving along with us and they are particles, when we are at rest after the fall the particles also then exert the pressure of gravity. I hold that the lightness of gravity would mean it was much faster, explaining such features as the two sides the universe has as found by the recent low energy maps of the universe, if there are large scale regular structures of the cosmos, there are just the two long range forces known gravity and electromagnetism, and light is too slow. Other problems as Van Flandern believed like no displacement of gravity of the Earth toward the sun like light has, as if gravity is much faster than light could be because gravity is lighter than light so faster than light. Click the link on the upper left for my Synopsis.

I believe dark matter (gravity) has two components a wavelike much faster field that unifies the other physics because waves are in union, not particles, that only radiate, not being in connection by waves otherwise!

But as we might expect if gravity is universal and all the other forces are waves and particles too, gravity must have a particulate component, or at least somewhat particulate to be the cause of the other particles it might energise up to.


About The Clepsydra

The clepsydra is an ancient device that has worth in our knowlege of gravity. The word is from grab or "clamp" water "hydra", and other uses of the clamp word are like in French where if you eat spinach, they say, "Ah la cledwah! Ah lah cledwah!" Eat with your hands! Without this method is thought bad in France! Not via your spoon. The clepsydra was used in ancient times to move water from the barrel to the jug. It has two parts, a hollow sphere at the bottom with small holes there and the sphere connected at the top to a narrow hollow tube by welding. To move the water the user only had to grab the tube which was welded brass to the sphere without his thumb over the top, then insert the sphere into the water. the water flows in the sphere. The user puts his thumb over the tube sealing the connection, and then lifts the water from the barrel to the cup or jug. But what's holding the water up when you lift it from the barrel to the cup? Einstein believed there was nothing there. But nothing has no ability to exert attractive force. And strong attractive force is needed here to lift the heavy mass of the water! Nothing has nothing. If there is a somewhat massive field here we can conclude in order to exert the force it must be mostly wavelike to exert the continuous attraction. Another observation here is that if you remove your hand from the top the water flows down. There must be a signal sent through the field. If you don't move your hand there is no change, if you do there is. Third, this isn't gravity, because the flow of gravity is inward to the earth. The field connecting the water and your hand isn't flowing downward like the gravity, if so the water would fall at the usual 32 feet per second.

If we take two masses say 2lb and 5 and balance them on a boom either l shaped or linear, we notice the usual point of the center of rotation if we spin them up and around in the air is also by science like Archimedes principles of the lever, more mass has the distance to the center of spin moved to it according to the distance, mass times distance to the center of both masses is the same. This seems to imply a field that is compressed by the mass is present also in attraction. Here too it can't be gravity because if the boom is removed, the masses don't spin around each other when we toss them up, gravity is just for like the Earth and moon, ect.

I believe this means that although gravity is an attraction there is also a higher energy "aurora" around all masses and this may be important to how gravity operates. A single particle has a weak field of gravity. If gravity was compressed to the size of the particle to act it would have the same or near wavelength and thus the same mass and energy and there would be no gravity. But the aurora would be an intermediate field. I had wondered how gravity seems to have reversed entropy from the other forces. It winds up continuously in implosion and the other forces radiate out in disconnection. I was wondering if gravity might do this by aligning its particles so fast it would overcome the radiant tendencies of its own particles, aligning them and winding them up before they had time to radiate, even though the particles as above are needed to explain part of how gravity might cause no force in your rest frame as your fall, and to explain particles in general.

There are those who hope to save relativity from the inconvenient observation of the galaxies moving away from us on both sides by the expansion of the cosmos. They are moving faster than light and this is saved by the use of empty space. To "create more space" for storage rooms and other business we presume, or for good intent to physics perhaps by those who say this, this superluminary motion is believed to be explained by the empty space being created out of nothing and being nothing. There is nothing there so nothing relative to which to move so there is no relative motion of the galaxys we see at faster than light. I certainly would hold that there is no way the light can move faster than light. My question is about gravity. Where there is gravity strong enough to influence like superclusters are the galaxys on both sides under the influence of faster than light gravity. Observations may sooner or later prove or disprove this, my ideas about what I call General Wave Dynamics, GWD.

If we have the particles around each mass and they are so low energy they more easly resonate with the waves to overcome the entropy, they also may solve the problem of the gravitational sling. If there are all these particles around the Earth and gravity operates by implosion of the particles to the sun, calculations show that by the friction of the particles the earth would fall into the sun in just a few million years. A mostly wavelike aura around the Earth could change phase more easily to overpower the entropy. The atmosphere of particles was invoked by Galileo to explain why if you throw a stone upward it falls radially inward to the earth. The atmosphere is at rest relative our motion with it.

Another problem with the particles is about motion through the field in special relativity, why no friction as we plough through the field slowing us down? The ability to overcome most of the friction by the same kind of entropy reversing reaction allows for all but the inertia for which I follow Maxwell's method of the balance of the two forces of the electric charges being proportional to the speed of light. The speed of light here is constant because in GWD the quanta of the charges are creating the density of the resilient media that's frozen in for constant frames of motion but that is always present and seen in acceleration when pressure on the field is exerted by rocket motors, ect. Note that the two forces in balance of the charges can be any two forces in general, and if the force is much smaller like gravity, the force might be much faster than light. If there are all these virtual particles, not mostly waves as some have believed there would be huge resistance to motion and no way to overcome the entropy by the more wavelike though still somewhat particulate lower energy physics of GWD.
..