Dark Matter Engineering

Dark Matter Engineering L. Edgar Otto March 16, 2011

By the term "dark matter" I mean all notions and physical analogs associated with these essential or imagined anomalies within a unified physics of the observable and the "opaque" or transparent phenomena of symmetry, momenta, and energy in the search for new and standard methods of scientific enquiry.

A comment by Carl Brannen http://carlbrannen.wordpress.com/about/ suggests that in speculations as to the surplus of energy apparently from the core of some planets as if they contained a nuclear reactor of sorts amounts to the existence or explanation of the presence of Tritium. See his comment and follow links placed here : http://riofriospacetime.blogspot.com/2011/03/phd-phobos-and-deimos.html

When, in raw quantum theory, some idea like cold fusion is not forbidden the presence of Tritium is considered evident of such process that seem to be free of radiation from the process.

From the beginning our physicists have questioned, on the subatomic level at least, if there can be exceptions to conservation of energy (and in general the concept of how intimate it is to our ideas of averaged and global systems of momenta.) This also led to the amazing concept of a neutrino as a sort of particle that is there to balance the equation. A particle that carries momentum.

We further expand our theories to relate these to physical processes with the understanding that they may assume different states of their generation (a concept in itself not yet fully understood as fundamental in nature). In the formulation of theories concerning them our concepts can imply confusion as to their nature in the usual terms of spin, chirality, and so on. Where this happens the overall theoretical foundation as paradox is trying to tell us something.

The idea of supersymmetry is a perfectly good view and explanation, but it seems that such systems may exist which are themselves opaque and not necessarily directly observable in nature. In this sense, especially for those interested in a more material and reductionist view, whatever the case of the reality of such particle physics and cosmology, one theory on some level may seem to comprehensively exclude the other or as in the case of the unification of the modern physics, there is a degree of exclusion, a complementarity.

The idea of pair production in the vicinity of a "black hole" suggest that in the process of "evaporation" one of the pair can be adsorbed into it and the other that of a certain observable glow, an excess of useful information and energy but not considered that which is created outside the scope of energy, space structure, and vacuum.

Considering "neutrinos" may undergo a similar process we could imagine that some of them, perhaps fundamentally everywhere and not as a core of some material object or pressure in the vacuum, that these can be adsorbed into the internal structure of black holes (or other creative like objects, quasars, Ylem, or any other concrete instance of some intelligible singularity.) In a deep sense the concept of "black hole" free from concepts of scale is a spacious singularity that may have a foundation a little deeper than our present convictions of such grounding- it questions if as such, as if it a model of something like a neutrino, that such particles can have sub-structures unseen in its real or mirror internal space and vacuum symmetries. Singularities locally may be seen or not from some view that these have no limit as a point, or that they can be so seen.

The process of transfer of momenta in the vicinity of black holes is not understood and ideas of magnetism seem the only standard explanation left to expand upon and explore.

Let us not forget those notions, be they our intuition even for the foundation of certain myths in our day as a golden age of science fiction, seem to raise doubts and polarize what is science and mythology in how they use or allow what after all can be in principle hidden to experiment and experience.

As some have posted, and with this natural idea of shell structures around some well ordered physical object, or for that matter those that assume things like hyperspheres can be mapped in totality by compression to a singular point. Or that we can define the global symmetries of space structures in regions that contain or not such points, or that in the complex case we derive those values of the real as the properties of numbers an the half zeta and so on... That the internal and mirror like structures of atoms have a certain evolving complexity- namely the great difference between Hydrogen and Helium and all other atoms.

In a sense this only goes part way or half way to the available structure of any atom under our attainment or grounding of dimensions. We should think of a solar system as not simply a large center object with clouds of things that accumulate around it (although this is a perfectly intelligible idea and one that as all such general ideas may make a system that forms that way- but not as often, and in theoretically a measurable way, than system heretofore.

The momentum in a sense can be seen as something, confused with teleportaion or mysterious quantum jumping as notions and so on, as that which is transferred seemingly at a distance and with intelligible measure, anywhere in the multiple system of such singularities. It is not that at a certain distance from the assumed center of a "creative" field in Hoyle's sense that we have planets and moons with similar atmospheres and mineral content. Rather what we explain more deeply here is the natural process which creates thru the momentum like transfer the higher metals- we know recently that metals beyond a certain point cannot be explained by the powerful supernovas for such synthesis.

In this age of speculation, in our notions of the looking for sources of free energy or ideas of something like the zero point, the intuition gives second thoughts as a moral question derived from our notions of a pure multiverse. Just as in the science fiction, Fringe, we may tap such energy but it takes from parallel worlds. Of course from near working models I have seen from such tinker scientist their real source of energy and product were investors. Again, these notions and the reason we imagine them need explanation and may be telling us something.

Of course, this critical difference in the ground of the structure of atoms which places the first stars and the hydrogen-helium differences in a separate geometry than the other atoms- and my suggestion this occurs again at element 119 and 120 (certainly if true this relates intimately to current and deeper theories of the application of group symmetries and so on. This may be a useful tool by which we can engineer whole new and natural processes of physics.

While, if possible, we can utilize the knowledge of such internal and opaque processes of synthesis of matter from some region of space- one that may not necessarily require the conservation of such energies from other places but one that does not in fact amount to a deep creation from absolute nothingness- the knowledge of this idea of momentum transfer not only can make a limited range of instantaneous transfer of energy but an actual creation of planets and stars.

But as I have emphasized, the boundary between the finite and infinite when it comes to organizing our notions of particles and fields is not always as clear as we try to make it to be- especially as to what is internal or external in the depths and span of our notions of symmetry.

* * *