Its come to my attention that everything we can call ‘the universe’ is only 5% of what there is. Everything is hardly anything when we get down to it. Measly 5%!!!
All this Dark Matter 25% and Dark Energy 70% makes up 95% the whole shebang.
Now either this is true or not. If its true, what does it mean for me here & NOW? Leaving aside its not true, in which case we’re exactly as we’ve always been, status quo ante, as theres no way of knowing otherwise is there any point in all of this??
Is there anything we can be more sure of? According to David Hume, Uncle Dave to me and some of you by now, no. We must take that as where we are, sincerely not knowing anything for definite.
Just as individual impressions are corrigible, the system as a whole is fallible, and thus fallibility is at the heart of what Hume in the first Enquiry calls “mitigated scepticism.”
What is left after all is taken away- eg. by Uncle Dave in this way then?
Another possibility: nudge given by Kelly Dean Jolley: Quantum Est In Rebus Inane
From Asher Moore’s “Existentialism and the Tradition”:
In Kant’s synthesis, transcendence was prior, existence derivative. There is one place in his thought, however, at which it looks like he might reverse this order. This is the concluding section of the Dialectic. Leibniz’ pretensions to knowledge of self, other selves, and God have just been disposed of. We have not yet been told, except in asides, that those realities are still there, busy changing into their second-act costumes. Here on this watershed, and for just a moment, there is a sense that God, self and other selves are indeed present, but present as absent, as ideals and lures, as almost empty memories.
If one were determined to find nothing new in existentialism, to hold it derivative through and through, I think one would derive it, not really from Hume–who, except to the eyes of fondest affection, is too one-sided–but from this particular moment in Kant–this moment when, in Kant’s imagination, Hume stands alone on the battlefield, the unchallenged victor, but suddenly and poignantly moved by the grandeurs he has struck down. For existentialists, transcendence, the ontological dimension, is present, but taken in its own inner sense, per se, it is present as an ideal, a standard of comparison–something regretted or hoped for, heard or plighted–a brave, comic pretension.
Next bit: Today. End of summer here, start of shooting season tomorrow.
Home»July/August»The Possible Parallel Universe of Dark Matter
FROM THE JULY/AUGUST 2013 ISSUE
The Possible Parallel Universe of Dark Matter
As researchers learn more about dark matter’s complexities, it seems possible that our galaxy lives on top of a shadow galaxy without us even knowing it.
By Corey S. Powell|Thursday, July 11, 2013
RELATED TAGS: DARK MATTER, THE UNIVERSE, COSMOLOGY, BIG BANG
NASA/ESA/The GMOS Commissioning Team (Gemini Observatory)
I am a light-matter chauvinist. Don’t snicker; you’re probably one, too. Almost all of us are.
We think of ourselves, and the world immediately around us, as something special. And by extension we regard our kind of matter — atoms, molecules, rocks, water, air, stars and all of the other things that interact with visible light — as the most important kind of matter in the universe. The only matter that matters, as it were.
Science tells a starkly different story. Last spring, the European Space Agency’s Planck spacecraft completed an ultraprecise 15-month census of the composition of the universe. The kind of matter that we can see makes up 4.9 percent of the total. Another fundamentally invisible type of matter vastly outweighs it, accounting for 26.8 percent. (The remaining 68.3 percent is an even more baffling component that consists of formless energy: That means more than two-thirds of the universe has no substance at all.)
Even the technical language used to describe the Planck result was humbling. Things made of visible atoms are known as baryonic matter, which sounds like something you’d take at the doctor’s office. The unseen 26.8 percent, in contrast, is “dark matter” — cool and mysterious.
But cosmologists have a hard time letting go of their prejudices. For years they convinced themselves that although the visible universe may be secondary in mass, it is where all the interesting things happen. Extrapolating from their very limited knowledge of how dark matter works, cosmologists assumed that dark matter consisted of just one kind of substance with a limited range of behavior, tending to gather in giant, diffuse clouds. They generally regarded dark matter as little more than the glue that holds together the visible universe and all its rich diversity.
Two recent advances hint at just how much we have been missing about the dark side. In January 2012, Christoph Weniger, a physicist at the University of Amsterdam in the Netherlands, started noticing hints of a strange type of radiation around the center of our galaxy. To his excitement, he realized that the glow could be a signal of dark-matter particles smashing into each other and, in the process, transforming from something invisible to something visible. If so, it might finally be possible to go beyond simply deducing where dark matter gathers, and start learning how it actually behaves.
The other shoe dropped earlier this year, when a group of Harvard University theorists, including Lisa Randall and JiJi Fan, formulated a new theory of dark matter. One of the oddest things about Weniger’s detection, Randall notes, is that it was possible at all. “The signal would be too small for you to see under most reasonable models of dark matter,” she says. But Randall and her collaborators realized they could tidily explain the observation if there were a second type of dark matter out there: one that is not as diffuse as the dominant component of dark matter, but can interact with itself, just like visible matter. Clumps of this interacting kind of dark matter could form a disk, collapsing into a plane that could produce a correspondingly concentrated signal like the one Weniger saw.
Acknowledging that dark matter might have some of the same kind of diversity as visible matter may seem a minor adjustment. But it’s one that has, as Randall narrates in an excited staccato, “super-dramatic consequences.” If one variety of dark matter can clump together, it could form a panoply of previously unimagined dark structures. It could ball up into dark stars surrounded by dark planets made of dark atoms. In the most extravagant leap of possibility, this new kind of dark matter might even allow the existence of dark life.
We could be sitting right on top of a whole shadow galaxy and not even know it.
“A Whole New World”
So back with me for a moment: Its an exciting time, things being discovered about whats what & even whats right in front of our noses!!
Answers on a postcard to the usual address please
If you have an answer that is or even a moment to think about it a little.