The article sets the stage …Black holes slamming into the moon could end the dark matter debate
Gnome #1 ... age of the universe (Big Bang)
Gnome #2 ... mini black holes exists, for which they admit there is, currently, no actual proofCirca 14 billion years ago, when the universe's clock began to tick, space was still a tight, blazing hot, frenzied packet of cosmic stuff. Stars were yet to shine, planets hadn't been born, and jittery particles of every shape and size were zipping around at random.
Gnome #3 ... dark matter is these mini black holesBut somewhere amid the lawlessness, in between spirals of stardust, a few minuscule, unstable and hyper-dense pockets of flaming matter might have collapsed. And if they did, scientists believe they would've dotted the early universe with clusters of black holes even smaller than atoms.
Don't let these petite spheres of doom fool you. A black hole half the size of a golf ball would have a mass equivalent to Earth's. Even microscopic black holes, with masses comparable to asteroids, would've unceasingly sucked in and destroyed everything along their path.
And it's time to pin their hopes on yet another gnome …They are, scientists believe, our newest lead on dark matter -- perhaps the greatest mystery of the universe.
So ... it looks like he'll be begging for money to find the gnome (and thus keep enjoying his nice, comfortable lifestyle).So to ensure this innovative hypothesis isn't a dead end, we'd need to locate unseen, miniature versions of black holes. ... snip ...
That's where the moon comes in.
"There's this funny estimate that you can do," says Matt Caplan, an assistant professor of physics at Illinois State University and one of the theorists behind the research published in March. Caplan contends that if dark matter can indeed be explained by these tiny black holes, then at some point, they would have punctured the moon.
Yes, you read that correctly: The moon might've been bombarded by atomic-sized black holes. Taking it a step further, the wounds they inflicted should still be up there; if these mini-abysses are proven to exist, dark matter may no longer be an everlasting enigma.
A good question.But really, what is dark matter?
But a confusing answer because it contradicts what the mainstream has been saying ... that they can detect the presence of dark matter because of it’s interaction with light (it bends light due to gravity). This is stated all over the internet. Is this so-called physicist completely out of the loop?"A more accurate description would be transparent matter," says Almog Yalinewich, a theoretical physicist at the Canadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics, who co-authored the paper with Caplan. "It doesn't interact with light, it doesn't reflect light, it doesn't produce light."
Gnome #4
That is nothing more than an assumption which is still unproven decades and decades and decades after it was first made. Making it more and more likely untrue.Dark energy, responsible for speeding up the universe's expansion, accounts for 68% of the cosmos. Dark matter, which slows it down, holds 27%. That means less than 5% of the universe is visible, standard energy and matter we're used to on Earth.
Notice that this so-called *professor of physics*, director of an "Institute for Gravitation and the Cosmos", completely ignores the presence of another long range force out there … electromagnetism … for which there is plenty of evidence to suggest it has shaped and affected the motion of objects throughout the cosmos. Indeed, there is strong evidence in the form of lab experiments and computer simulations, using codes modeling electromagnetic effects on plasma back in the 80s, to prove electromagnetic effects alone could be responsible for the rotation curves of galaxies ... that the gnomists still claim is the strongest piece of evidence they have for the existence of dark matter.But even though we can't see dark matter, it isn't sly enough to disguise its effects. That's how scientists discovered the hidden material exists in the first place. Sarah Shandera, associate professor of physics at Pennsylvania State University and director of its Institute for Gravitation and the Cosmos, says the way astrophysical bodies move within the universe proves dark matter lurks out there.
"You look at the motions of stars and galaxies, or clusters of galaxies, and you realize what we're able to infer about the mass that's there, that's giving off visible light or any kind of electromagnetic radiation," she said. "It's not enough to account for the motion of the objects -- it looks like there's a lot more matter there."
Dark matter "stretch"es the universe faster than predicted? What sort of goobledegook is this? No wonder the author of the article is so confused. The whole topic is mired in nothing but confusion … because mainstream astrophysicists simply don’t know what is going on out there … because they’re not doing real physics any more. They are the priests of a cult, pushing a religion now. And rubes, like the author of this article, are being taken in by their song and dance, making them willing to fund the priest's lifestyles. But continuing with this latest gnome …In other words, astronomers suspect dark matter is making the universe stretch way faster than their calculations predict it should. Shandera also emphasizes the overwhelming amount of further evidence to support the force's omnipresence.
And now for the money part …But remember, the sneaky stuff leaves fingerprints -- if a micro black hole really did hit the moon, as Caplan and Yalinewich propose, we'd notice the collision's effects. The smash, they say, would produce small craters a few meters wide with different shapes and properties than classic asteroid impacts.
Thus, Caplan and Yalinewich argue that if we study the moon and find craters fitting the description of an impact by a miniature black hole, we'd prove the existence of these tiny, early universe ("primordial") black holes.
BIG MONEY, I'd say.A trip to the moon
Caplan and Yalinewich urge a backup measure to bolster their unique theory: revisiting the moon.
… snip …
You could look for dust of different quartz phases and silicates that you wouldn't be able to produce [otherwise]," Caplan said. "Rock smashing into rock doesn't get that hot."
But finding these altered materials would require getting astronauts to return samples from the lunar surface or sending a probe to the moon that can sample rocks, similar to the way Mars rovers work.
Just saying ...