Newton 2.0: The New Theory of Gravity That Could Solve the Mystery of Dark Matter

preview_player
Показать описание
In this video, we explore the fascinating idea of Newton 2.0, a new theory of gravity that challenges traditional scientific understanding of the universe. While Newtonian mechanics can explain the behaviour of objects at small cosmic scales, it falls short when it comes to larger galaxies. Dark matter was proposed to address this problem, but with no evidence for dark matter particles, Israeli scientist Mordehai Milgrom put forward a different approach: Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND). MOND suggests that gravity at lower accelerations is stronger than Newton’s model implies, introducing the concept of the "external field effect" which includes the gravitational pull from all other masses in the universe. Recent evidence of this external field has been detected in 153 disc galaxies, which suggests that MOND might be a new way forward. Tom Złosnik and Constantinos Skordis of the European Institute for Cosmology and Fundamental Physics have further developed this concept with RelMOND, a theory that adds an omnipresent field to general relativity that behaves differently depending on spatial conditions. In this video, we dive deep into the science behind Newton 2.0, RelMOND, and the possibilities it presents for our understanding of the universe.
Рекомендации по теме
Комментарии
Автор

Most people don't know that Einstein said that singularities are not possible. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" he wrote "the essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light."
He was referring to the phenomenon of dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. This is illustrated in a common 2 axis relativity graph with velocity on the horizontal line and dilation on the vertical. Even mass that exists at 75% light speed is partially dilated.
General relativity does not predict singularities when you factor in dilation. Einstein is known to have repeatedly spoken about this. Nobody believed in black holes when he was alive for this reason.
Wherever you have an astronomical quantity of mass, dilation will occur because high mass means high momentum. There is no place in the universe where mass is more concentrated than at the center of a galaxy.
According to Einstein's math, the mass at the center of our own galaxy must be dilated. In other words that mass is all around us. This is the explanation for the abnormally high rotation rates of stars in spiral galaxies, the missing mass is dilated mass.
According to Einstein's math, galaxies with very, very low mass would show no signs of dark matter because they do not have enough mass at the center to achieve relativistic velocities, therefore they are not infused with dilated mass. This has recently been confirmed with galaxy NGC 1052-DF2.
The shape of a galaxy is common in nature. From atoms to our solar system, the overwhelming majority of the mass is in the center. The same must be true for galaxies. Where there is mass there is energy. The night sky should be lit up from the galactic center but it isn't.
The modern explanation for this is because gravitational forces are so strong there that not even light can escape. Einstein's answer would be because the mass there is dilated relative to an Earthbound observer.
The reason why we cannot see light from the galactic center is because there is no valid XYZ coordinate we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. Or more precisely, everywhere you point is equally valid.

shawns