I’m truly captivated by these notions and wonder what it would mean for our speck of existence?
My question begins with if we can’t really even gauge or measure DM/DE (yet we’ve its mass)
How can we differentiate DM from DE? It implies a basis of fact.
I would appreciate any feedback greatly. I am three days young to this site also
In this context “dark” means that it can’t be seen in the common ways but can be deduced to exist by virtue of the behavior of other things that can be seen.
The distinction between mass and energy is merely the property and concept of inertia. Other than that, they are the same thing.
Dark matter can be observed to have the property of inertia due to the observable gravimetric and impedance effects it has on the speed of light and/or other objects in the vicinity. Dark energy is merely the energy of which the dark matter is made.
So may we respectfully speculate?
First, what kind of impedance does it have, does DM not pass right through light as if it were unaffected?
Does this support or deny the theory of multidimensions?
And lastly, if all the physical matter in our known Universe now only occupies approximately 20% of the mass (It might be closer to 10% ) what can we really claim to know having had to of thought before we had accounted for all matter. Does it or does it not spit in the face of previous scientific conclusions.
Mikio kaku already stated that all of our textbooks are wrong…atoms aren’t the smallest particles, nor quirks. Science thinks it’s grounded in fact. But the #1 fact we seem to forget. We are so limited in our sensory perception that we observe things obscured from actual reality. Reality filters down to a comprehendable level…then we get a recognizable flutter of truth then entitle ourselves to any conclusion and demand it be accepted
Light is made of the very same energy as the DM and helps to constitute it. Realize that between your eyes and anything you look at, there are countless photons traveling at alternate angles from your line of sight. The only photons you see are the minuscule number that happen to be reflecting straight into your eyes. For every one that actually hits your eye, a trillion were headed in a different direction and are invisible to you yet are passing right in front of you. Each of those other photons is a part of the collective “dark mass/energy”. The impedance comes from the fact that the space that looks empty and invisible to you is filled with EM noise much of which is in the form of photons. There is no such thing as empty space.
No.
And physical existence has no multiple dimensions beyond the 3 orthogonal directions.
I’m not really sure what you were asking with that. But physics develops by presuming to know all things until proven wrong, then updating and presuming to know all things until proven wrong, then updating and presuming to now all things until proven wrong, then…
I am seriously unimpressed with Mikiko kaku. He is just a talking bot for public display.
He has become a lil more of a puppet hasn’t he? Always showin up to warn the public about another possible apocolyptic cataclysm. He still doesn’t completely give into their motives though- and he is among the most astute in his field…anyone you think trumps him?
Dark matter does not interact with photons very much, perhaps not at all. That’s why it was called “dark”.
Essentially unrelated.
Nope.
Most of the scientific investigations that we’ve done in the past has had nothing to do with dark matter. Dark matter simply doesn’t have a significant impact within our solar system. Dark energy (not directly related to dark matter) has even less impact.
And the matter that we know of and use comprises about 4% of the mass and energy density of the universe, with dark matter taking up about 20% and dark energy taking up the rest.
We know what we do about dark matter and dark energy because of what we know about ordinary matter. Without the advances we already had, we wouldn’t know about either of these. That we could discover them is a sign that our physics has been on the right track, not that it’s been mistaken.
James is 100% right on everything here. Explanations a little light but meh. 
Meh trumps is such an odd way of saying things. For example Michio “My next idea includes something other than speculation” Kaku does have a lot to say about more mundane things in his papers. So if you take away the bs, he’s still a fine Scientist. He’s also like Hawking, a bit of a way out merchant, but he bought physics to the public consciousness likewise, which is never a bad thing considering how few people chose to study it these days. Be wary though of comparing the mainstream to the real research in the field I guess. A physics journal paper is never the same as a speculative article in What Physics…
That said who trumps Bohr, Heisenberg, Pauli, Dirac? The mighty Quinn, Alah al Akhbar! Well they were in an age where the science was new, impressively clever people, but then now we are refining their work so as always it’s standing on the shoulders of titans.
Hunh? James is in this thread, as I usually find him, far from right on the specifics of the science.
For example, dark matter and dark energy are definitely not the same as the density of photons as James writes. The density of photons is quite well known and is essentially negligible compared to the density of dark matter.
I don’t see where he said they were the same. I took it to mean that all energy and all matter are fundamentally related to photons.
But that’s only true in the sense that, at very high energies, there is unification of the various forces. At the level of the energies and densities of our ordinary world and of the cosmos, there are energies that have pretty much nothing to do with photons.
Certainly, the following is dead wrong: 'The only photons you see are the minuscule number that happen to be reflecting straight into your eyes. For every one that actually hits your eye, a trillion were headed in a different direction and are invisible to you yet are passing right in front of you. Each of those other photons is a part of the collective “dark mass/energy”. ’
Which is the way I read it, you’d have to ask him what he meant…
Ok I agree that was complete speculation. Since no one knows what dark matter or energy is though, although I think he’s wrong, I don’t know for sure. 
Interesting if purely speculative article on dark matter in NS this week AAMOI.
Vacuum energy has been suggested as dark energy, which is photons albeit very briefly.