The Dark Side of Science


Although I have touched on this subject before, I recently watched a documentary attempting to explain what Dark Matter, Dark Energy and now Dark Flow are.

Since mankind began to think and reason, the question of what lies beyond our own world has arisen. In history it appeared to be part of the human psyche that the knowledge vacuum created by what could not be explained or understood at a particular moment of time, was rapidly filled with superstition or religious dogma. This approach often temporarily satisfied the human psyche by filing such thoughts under the “Things mankind is not meant to know” section of the human excuse filing cabinet.

During the passage of history, individuals would appear, capable of thinking outside the constraints of mankind’s self-imposed dogmatic boxes. Such people with independent thoughts often caused fear and alarm in those who preferred to remain in a comfort zone of blithe unawareness. The independent thinking of such people was often perceived to be a challenge to authority figures and many lost their lives for committing heresy by daring to dispute approved thinking and belief. Bit by bit, individual human determination has slowly thrown off the shackles of constraining superstitious or religious dogma.

In the ever unslaked thirst for knowledge on the creation of the universe, the theory of ‘Big Bang’ emerged. It is a theory with which I have no problem and one I believe is correct even though the causes of Big Bang are as yet unknown. According to this theory, our entire universe was created at the same time and point in space which has been expanding and evolving ever since. However scientists noticed that the temperature throughout the universe is almost constant as is the distribution of matter in galaxies. Scientists say such even distributions of heat and matter would not occur naturally in a real explosion and consequently created the concept of missing Dark Matter to help smooth out this anomaly in the Big Bang theory. Dark Matter is believed to have helped dampen out expected temperature differences throughout the universe.

I firmly believe Dark Matter is proving to be an inhibitive new shackle to original thought. The problem arises according to calculations that this mysterious invisible ‘something’ dubbed Dark Matter would comprise 23% of the theoretical matter of the universe. Huge sums of money have been spent seeking or attempting to detect this missing quarter of the universe and despite what appears to be a few false alarms, so far without success. I suspect Dark Matter will never be found because it simply does not exist.

I cannot help but think that Dark Matter is nothing more than a theory created as a stop-gap measure to smooth out an apparent anomaly in the theory of Big Bang.

It was also further noticed that the universe was continuing to expand at an ever accelerating rate. In the vacuum of space, even in the unknown space which lies beyond the boundaries of the universe, the rate of expansion should remain constant. Some theorise that internal gravitational forces from the remainder of the universe, would eventually cause the expansion of the universe to slow before coming to a halt and eventually collapsing on itself. A form of Big Bang in reverse. Because it appeared some unknown and invisible force within the universe was pushing the universe apart with ever-increasing speed, another theory was created to explain this further anomaly to Big Bang theory. Thus was Dark Energy created as a reasonable explanation to this irregularity in Big Bang theory. As far as I am aware, no one has yet found or detected Dark Energy either.

Like Dark Matter, I believe that Dark Energy is yet another inhibitive shackle the scientific community has created for itself and one that is constraining thought to other possibilities.

While Dark Matter and Dark Energy may have temporarily papered over what appeared cracks in Big Bang theory along comes a further observation in the universe creating yet another anomaly. It has been observed that clusters of galaxies between the Vela and Centaurus constellations are racing towards and apparently converging on a point in space which is beyond our sight due to speed of light limitations. This effect has been named Dark Flow, as the cause as yet is unknown. It appears like water draining towards an unseen plug-hole. Unlike Dark Matter and Dark Energy, Dark Flow is not a theory, it is something that can be detected.

The word Universe implies that only one such singularity exists. Others including myself have long believed other universes exist beyond our own. Such universes, if they exist, have been named multiverses as the prefix UNI would no longer be appropriate. It would not be possible to see such multiverses once again due to speed of light limitations but Dark Flow may well prove to be a physical indication that they do exist and are exerting gravitational forces on a section of our own universe.

Although mankind has long moved beyond believing the world is the centre of the universe, difficulties are experienced by some in accepting that anything could exist beyond our universal boundaries. I find no such difficulty with such a concept. The forces that created our own universe are unknown, but would it not be of the unreasonable for mankind to assume that this event has only occurred once in the endless infinity of time and space? I do not know if the possibility of the existence of endless multiverses beyond our own has ever been named but if not, I would describe it as The Cosmoverse. A Cosmoverse would help explain why our own universe has been pulled into a regular shape, from external gravitational forces surrounding our own universe rather than the so far, undetected Dark Matter. A Cosmoverse would also help explain that external gravitational forces are causing our own universe to continue expanding at an ever accelerating speed. It could well be that Dark Flow is external gravitational forces drawing a section of our universe towards another multiverse. Such a Cosmoverse would eliminate the need for the theoretical and elusive Dark Energy.

In other words it would mean, our universe is gradually being pulled apart by natural external universal forces rather than pushed apart internally by force from a so far undetected Dark Energy. Although these gravitational forces would be on an awesome scale, they would still be a natural and easily understood phenomena of cause and effect.

It’s all a question of continuing to think outside those constraining boxes no matter what their origin.

It is unlikely within either my lifetime or those of anyone reading this article that my theory of a Cosmoverse will ever be proved. By the same token it is equally unlikely that such a theory will be disproved either. In the meantime those that believe in Dark Matter and Dark Energy will continue with what I believe to be a futile search. Who knows, but one day may arrive when if mankind has still not found what it seeks, maybe it will be tempted to think, What if?

“It’s not that I’m so smart, it’s just that I stay with problems longer.” Albert Einstein

Is mankind becoming too sophisticated to think?


I cannot but help but sometimes wonder if mankind is becoming too sophisticated in his knowledge to actually think through answers to the apparently unanswerable. Placing too greater a reliance on sophisticated knowledge that seems to dull minds into a lazy mode rather than going back to basic thinking to solve problems.

With the advance of technology ever pushing back the frontiers of science, discoveries often give rise to as yet unanswerable questions. Unanswerable questions that in turn give way to numerous theories that sometimes are no better than wild guesses. Some theories can gain greater prominence as more people satisfy their minds with that which sounds plausible irrelevant of whether there is any evidence to support the theory.

One such theory is that of Dark Matter. Physicists say they are able to measure the mass and energy of the observable universe and the mass of the visible universe does not equate with their calculations.  In simple terms it as if the visible universe could be placed in a set of balance weighing scales with the visible universe set in one of the scales and the theoretical weight of the universe placed in the opposite scale. The scales should balance but assuming the physicists are correct in their calculations, the observable universe and known energy only account for about 20% of the mass and the remaining 80% cannot be seen or as yet detected.

This undetectable mass has given rise to the theory of dark matter although invisible matter might be a better description. I have no idea whether the calculations for the mass of the universe are correct or not. While my own personal knowledge of mathematics is reasonable, I would not even begin to profess at understanding the esoteric levels of mathematics need to undertake such a calculation.

Simple but powerful logic however would dictate that either the calculations are incorrect and there is no missing universal mass or, the calculations are correct and the missing 80% of universal mass is as yet unexplained. I cannot help but think that the concept of dark matter is a form of convenient method for not allowing sufficient time for the mind to think through this apparent anomaly in universal mass to eventually find an answer. If this mysterious dark matter, (if it exists), is spread roughly evenly though the universe,  (no one knows as no one can see it), it would mean the room you are now sitting in contains four times as much mass as you can actually see or feel. Nor does this missing 80% of the universe appear to impede your movement as you walk about. Our body weight is determined by the pull of gravity of the celestial body we are standing on. The same person would weigh less standing on the surface of the moon than on the surface of the earth due to the difference size and mass of the two. If dark, (invisible), matter is all around us, should we not weigh four times as much as we do now unless to course, this dark matter is somehow gravity free too? It does seem to me that Dark Matter theory is a convenient way of providing a quick answer to the problem. It’s not surprising I am so sceptical about the dark matter concept. Einstein however when he encountered problems he could not immediately solve simply continued thinking, sometimes for years until he thought through the solution.

Physicists are aware the universe is expanding. However, the universe is not only growing bigger like an ever-expanding balloon but the rate expansion is also accelerating. Unknown Dark energy is attributed to this accelerating expansion rate of the universe working in an as yet unexplained way. I wonder why all these physicists assume the universe is being pushed outwards by unexplained internal universal forces? I wonder if they ever paused to think of the possibility of multiverses outside our own universe? Perhaps the universe is not being expanded, (pushed), by unexplained internal universal forces but rather being drawn, (pulled) outwards by external universal forces? I for one do not think such external forces, (possibly gravity), can be discounted as we simply cannot see outside our universe due to the distance and time it takes light to reach us. It was mankind’s own arrogance that initially assumed the world was the center of the universe with everything revolving around us. Perhaps it is that same inborn arrogance that is preventing mankind from thinking outside our own universe. Literally a case of thinking outside the box.

It is not just modern problems that seem to baffle modern mind in a modern world, ancient engineering and construction wonders like Stonehenge and the Pyramids have equally baffled modern man. Many theories abound on how these structures were built, but to the Egyptians of the day with only basic construction knowledge and tools, they would have used simple pragmatic philosophy. The Egyptians would have said to themselves, this is the task we have been given, this is the structure we have to build, what is the easiest way of building this structure within the limits of our knowledge? They would then have worked out simple, practicable solutions and then undertaken the task.

One hears of stories of great external ramps built to haul huge blocks of stone up the ever-growing pyramid but again this is another untested theory of which I am deeply sceptical. Unfortunately there is not much demand today for pyramid building using only ancient skills to test these theories, but I strongly suspect if modern man did attempt such an undertaking, the external ramp theory would rapidly prove unworkable. The major problem with the external ramp is to keep the gradient sufficiently shallow to  allow stone blocks between 2.5 – 15 tons to be physically hauled to the required height, the structure of an external ramp would require constant and considerable lengthening and raising as the pyramid grew in height to maintain the correct gradient. Such an external ramp would have formed a structure as imposing as the pyramid itself yet as far as I am aware, no trace of it remains today.

I have thought for a long time, (another theory proposed by a Frenchman Jean Pierre-Houdin
),  it would be easier to build a more gentle slope winding around the inside of the pyramid rather like a helter-skelter enclosed in a tunnel. Such an internal tunnel ramp would eliminate the need for a constantly enlarged external ramp nearly as big a structure as the pyramid itself and would grow in height in tandem with the pyramid as it would be part of the internal pyramid structure. There is suggestive evidence to support this from photographs of the pyramids taken as the sun is setting where the contrast of light reveal lighter bands in the stone spiralling around the pyramid and at an angle just where such internal ramp tunnels should be. However this visual evidence coupled with the application a common sense philosophy of the practicable problems, and equally practicable solutions that faced the ancient  pyramid building Egyptians, never appears to have been considered in the past. Because someone came up with the impracticable massive external ramp theory, it was more easy for the modern sophisticated mind to accept this theory as gospel truth rather than say, this appears to be wrong, let’s think this problem through a bit more. The evidence of such a tunnel ramp, if it existed, would still be sealed inside the internal walls of the pyramids. My own personal guess is than one day modern history books on pyramid building methods will need to be drastically rewritten.

It is known that the Bluestones that form part of Stonehenge come from the Preseli Hills in Wales, a distance of about 240 miles. Again many theories propose all sorts of weird, wonderful and sometimes impracticable methods on how they were transported. Rafts and rollers are just some of the proposed methods transportation. Debates raged for years on the pros and cons of each method until finally geologists from the Open University looked at the problem and took a more practicable and simplistic view. They believe that no one other than Mother Nature transported the stones. Glaciers that covered most of Britain during the last Ice Age were more than capable of moving stones this size suspended within the frozen glacier. It may have taken hundreds of years for the glacier to cover this distance. As the Ice Age came to an end, the glacier gradually melted leaving the stones deposited on Salisbury Plain.

I suppose in a way theories are often excuses to fill in gaps in human knowledge. While I do accept that theories are frequently necessary, It should always be remembered that theories no matter how grandiose or plausible they may seem, are still just theories, not fact. However there is a danger that theories which appear to comfortably bridge a gap in human knowledge, can with the passage of time become regarded as fact.

The next time you hear someone propose a theory, what this really means is they cannot prove the answer.

“It’s not that I’m so smart, it’s just that I stay with problems longer.” Albert Einstein

Universe or Multiverse?

The Universe is so called due to mankind’s somewhat arrogant assumption that  there cannot be more than one universe and that the universe fills the heavens as far as the eye can see. I suppose that was not too unreasonable an assumption in times when mankind’s knowledge was more limited. Mankind however is rather like a worm in a hole whose knowledge about it’s surroundings is limited by what it can see through the top of the hole. As the worm gradually emerges from it’s hole, it can see more detailed surroundings that it never knew existed before. Mankind is in a not dissimilar position and as our knowledge of the universe expands, so do our thoughts on possibilities we had never considered before. Continue reading

%d bloggers like this: