Mass should slowly increase unless mass destroys excess dark matter. If made from an interference pattern of CMB, dark matter should be scalar stress energy and have a quadrupole form with spin of two. This is the same as a graviton, if a graviton can travel less than light speed.. It suggests that a gravity field is maintained by dark matter quanta.
All known sources of gravity are quantized. So a gravity field should be quantized. Curvature on a small scale is thought to be a field of vacuum space oscillators with somewhat smaller wave length and frequency than flat space. They need a particle field to transport stress energy to them. Dark matter seems to fill this requirement.
Space is filled with dark matter not closely connected to a mass. To stabilize a mass it must destroy any excess of dark matter, making kinetic energy, either microwaves like black body radiation, or dark energy,
Does Mass Destroy Dark Matter?
IF one Poynting vector has form of sine squared,
S1 = EoHosin2( kx - ωt )(k)
and another Poynting vector on the same axis has opposite direction and half a wave length out of phase,
S2 = EoHosin2( kx - ωt + π )(-k)
the sine waves cancel completely including the Poynting vectors, but the energy is conserved as scalar stress energy. Frequency and wave length are given.
f = ω/2π
λ = c/f
k = 2π/λ
Energy of the stress quanta scalar is given.'
E = 2 EoHo λ2/f
This is a quadrupole of spin two, like a graviton but with mass and moving less than light speed.
When a third Poynting vector joins with a fourth Pointing vector on a close parallel axis one quarter wave length out of phase.
S3 = EoHosin2( kx - ωt )(k)
S4 = EoHocos2( kx - ωt )(k)
the result is a vector of kinetic energy moving at light speed.
E = 2 hf = 2 EoHo λ2/f
This is a massless stress energy quanta that repels gravity. The spin is two, but the form is skewed quadrupole because of the quarter wave difference.
For other collisions microwaves scatter each other, which is the most likely interaction. Only a small percentage of microwave encounters have the matching properties for destructive interference.
Much testing is needed to determine if this representation is valid.
There’s a misunderstanding: First of all, mass can’t destroy anything. Second, dark matter possesses mass-that’s the reason for inferring its existence at all.
Dark matter doesn’t have anything to do with the CMB,,because dark matter isn’t electrically charged. For the moment the only way it is inferred that it couples to ordinary matter is gravitationally. That’s why any calculation that relies on its electromagnetic reponse isn’t relevant, since it can only occur indirectly.
Stam Nicolis
CMB destructive interference can make particles that are not electrically charged. Two EM dipoles of spin one can occasionally make a quadrupole of two made of stress energy and having no EM components. This was taught decades ago in antenna design of electrical engineering.
There are two possibilities. Poynting vectors can be added together as massless dark energy moving at light speed, kinetic energy repelling gravity in the LaGrangian. The other possibility is a scalar stress energy potential with no EM components remaining, moving much less than light speed, having mass and attracted to gravity.
For a swarm of microwaves to exist in CMB both types of dark particles must be created occasionally along with scattering and other interactions.
CMB would be depleted if there was no way for the two types of dark particles to occasionally decompose producing microwaves. Possibilities include half lives, collisions, and destruction of excess DE by a large mass object.
The two type of dark particles should be produced in about equal amounts. DE is thought to be surviving less than half as much as DE, suggesting one of the mechanisms may operate to decompose DM that does not affect DE. Destruction of excess DE by mass is one candidate.
DM is thought to be the same as gravitons. If gravitons had no mass they would move at light speed and repel gravity in the LaGrangian. Implication is that gravitons have mass, quadrupole form and spin of two like DM. One consequence is that each graviton should have limited range of force, combining with other DMto make unlimited range.
All the known sources of gravity are quantized. So gravity should be quantized by construction.
Dear Jerry ( Jerry Decker ),
Excuse me if in this case I do not agree with you! Yout question : 'Does Mass Destroy Dark Matter?'- is not well formulated. The mass itself, if it is not precisely defined what it is the mass of, is meaningless. The same is true for dark matter. Another problem is the way you interpret gravity and the way you quantize the gravitational field... 'Graviton' exists, but not as a quantum of gravitational field... The theory is ready for the graviton,,,:
https://www.researchgate.net/project/A-new-formulation-of-the-possible-nature-of-the-graviton
But the writing will break soon. since I do not have the background information needed to define the graviton particle in more detail, while looking for answers to the questions: what is a graviton? What does a graviton do? How can it be detected?
Regards,
Laszli
László Attila Horváth
Thank you for reply. This question is rather far in the direction of new science that needs testing and verification.
Gravity is a bending of space that tends to enclose the source, concave in geometric terms. On smalll scale it should be quantized, as I suggested a field of microscopic oscillators that have small er wave length and frequency in a gravity field. The opposite is convex to the source and tends to repel gravity.
Anything moving slower than light speed must have mass, either particles or stress concentrations. The dark matter I propose is a scalar of stress energy concentration.
Graviton is said to be quadrupole form with spin of two. I suggest it also has mass of the stress concentration type, without which it would repel gravity. This is identical to the description of dark matter produced by destructive interference of microwaves.
Gravity field must be quantized because all the known sources of gravity are quantized.
The question is well prepared if you review the several threads that preceded it. In the present question a way us needed to destroy dark matter while not affecting dark energy.
Dark matter in my representation is a scalar of potential stress energy. LaGrange function adds all the energy potentials as if they increase curvature and attract gravity. Again the microscopic scale is a field of oscillators possibly of Planck size that have change of amplitude and frequency when placed under stress.
Mass is often defined as the ratio of force and acceleration for low speed objects, modified by a factor for high speed.
F = dp/dt
p2 = (mv)2/(1-v2/c2)
m2 = p2(1-v2/c2)/v2
precisely defined in any frame where v is not zero.
Mass can also be defined by a gravity equation at non relativistic velocity and v not zero.
m = rv2/(2G)
When velocity is zero, mass is defined by light speed.
m = E/c2
So what is not precise?
Dear Jerry Decker ,
Thank you for the response!
With all due respect for your original concept, but my opinion is different... I will reply later when I have finished writing. The writing itself will be a response...
Regards,
Laszlo
The composition of angular momentum of electromagnetic waves doesn't imply creation or destruction of matter and how that occurs doesn't have anything to do with the CMB. Matter, whether dark or not, is created in the Universe by its expansion. (It can be created by very strong electric fields, this is understood and doesn't have anything particular to do with the CMB, either.)
How this occurs for ordinary matter is well understood, for dark matter the obstacle is that its particle content isn't known; for any given model it is, however how to do the calculation is now a standard exercise in field theory.
The Poynting vector describes the flux of energy of electromagnetic waves, not of matter, whether dark or not. That's why it doesn't make sense bringing it up when discussing dark matter particles.
The process
Photon + Photon -> dark matter particle + dark matter particle
can only take place indirectly, through quantum effects, because dark matter particles don't carry electric charge, therefore they can't couple directly to photons.
And such processes don't have anything to do with the CMB. I don't understand the fixation with it.
The reverse process,
dark matter particle + dark matter -> Photon + Photon
is a possible way for detecting dark matter particles; the obvious obstacle is the background, since ordinary matter contributes to that, too.
Stam Nicolis
My points that energy and momentum are conserved whether an interference pattern has vector or scalar form.
I agree that dark matter has mass and dark energy does not. The proposition is that gravitons exist and also have mass, with other properties the same as dark matter., spin and polarization.
Mass should collect dark matter and become more massive unless it is able to destroy the excess or expel it. A mechanism for destruction is needed to explain the ratio between CMB and dark mass.
CMB is well involved, because it is well known that a swarm of microwaves ALWAYS creates two types of destructive interference patterns. CMB originated at the end of opacity in distant past and was much higher temperature at that time, maybe around 5000K, able to create dark particles of stress energy.
All of it is internally consistent while needing verification from testing.
Jerry Decker ,
we have so far a model of gravitation which gives accurate predictions within our solar system by distorting euclidean geometry and time together.
It needs a huge additional mass to model correctly the dynamics of galaxies, this is all, which mass is called dark mass.
Gravitation in principle may not have anything to do with bending space. How can you bend space unless there is something which changes its "status"? A metric diffeomorphism (GR) can be only an attempt at describing something occurring at a deeper level, which we still do not know anything yet about.
Dark matter is a macro effect, we know nothing about its more detailed composition, and mass, from a micro point of view, there is enough evidence to prove that it comes from vacuum symmetry breaking. If these two things are to be combined, how to see, there are no substantial clues at present, for the origin of mass, please refer to this article：
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/360724807_Perfection_of_the_standard_model_-_derivation_of_the_grand_unified_node_normalization_of_the_mass_coupling_constant_and_treatment_of_the_magnetic_moment_anomaly_of_simple_particles