Dark Matter is an unnecessary ad hoc fix


The singularity at the center of a black hole must be unique and have testable consequences.

Dark Matter is an unnecessary ad hoc fix to fill in the blanks in the Friedmann model under the FLRW metric. Galactic supermassive black-holes exist as true physical singularities according to the Kretschmann invariant and Schwartzchild’s analysis of his spacetime metric under GR. Therefore, as point masses, they must possess a hyperbolic (1/kr) gravitational field, NOT a field that falls off as 1/r2. Now, k = constant = 1m, S.I., for dimensional integrity. It is not true that GR cannot tolerate hyperbolic spacetime geometries. “The universe is hyperbolic.” said Albert Einstein in his classic paper of 1915. An hyperbolic field will give constant orbital acceleration to orbiting bodies as far from the center of a black-hole as we might like to measure. This means that bodies near the periphery of a galaxy should seem to move at constant velocity because rotational acceleration does not drop to near zero there as with a 1/r2 inverse square law, it becomes consant. This constant velocity distribution effect has actually been measured and has given rise to the notion of Dark Matter.

Gravitation does not fall nearest to zero between galaxies in a cluster either. So they too can bend light and affect redshifts in ways that mimic Dark Matter. The rotation of galaxies in clusters is also influenced by the black-holes that they contain with their 1/kr gravitational potential profiles. The not quite counterbalanced redshift effects in the Sunyaev-Zeldovich phenomenon are influenced by the hyperbolic galactic and galactic cluster gravitational fields that exist as light falls out of such clusters and super-clusters into a large void and as it climbs out of it again after the universe has expanded by another billion light years or more.

Scientists are mapping, not Dark Matter, but the huge extent of the network of hyperbolic galactic and super-galactic gravitational fields that behave like Dark Matter because of the mathematical properties of the hyperbolic gravitational field are similar to that expected for Dark Matter.

Primordial massive and supermassive black-holes with their 1/kr galactic gravitational fields can also mimic the “halos” of dark Matter that are postulated to have existed just after the big bang and before the emission of the cosmic microwave background. There is nothing that Dark Matter explains that cannot be accounted for just as well or better by the hyperbolic black hole gravitational field.

The hyperbolic 1/kr supermassive black-hole galactic gravitational field explains “the Dark Matter Effect” without Dark Matter and it is more parsimonious and is a falsifiable hypothesis, unlike Dark Matter which is revised every time no Dark Matter is found.

The conditions for validity of Birkhoff’s Theorem are not met for real black-holes. Therefore, Birkhoff’s Theorem does not apply. It sometimes may be used as a first approximation, but it cannot be depended upon as a rigid rule for precise calculations. “The physics near at the extreme curvature of a black-hole singularity is not well defined”. This covers Birkhoff’s too.

It does too matter how the internal mass is distributed if it is contained within a single point. Then, in fact, it is NOT distributed at all! This is the point of Kretschmann’s invariant and Schwartzschild’s GR analysis of the consequences of his metric. Ordinarily, the distribution would not matter. But, a singularity must be different. If this is not explicitly acknowledged in some way, then to say there is a singularity with such intense curvature of spacetime in its vicinity that the laws of physics must begin to break down is a meaningless fatuous gesture to humility. It is false humility if it has no ameliorating effect on professional arrogance. Please, do not just restate Birkhoff.

I contend there is a loophole here or a gross misinterpretation. The consensus interpretation of Birkhoff and of Schwartzschild/Kretschmann cannot both be true at the same time. There must be a measureable consequence of the presence of a singularity that is beyond imaginary untestable gedanken experiments. The test is the hyperbolic gravitational field. It results in a nonzero constant rotational velocity distribution effect in spiral galaxies, ellipticals, globulars and galactic clusters. This is easier to believe than Dark Matter.

The very same phenomena that are used to argue for Dark Matter can be used to argue for the hyperbolic field. So, it is testable. But, how do we choose between them? I think that Occam ’s razor is the principle of choice here. WIMPS and neutralinos and the other oddball particles that have been proposed require ad hoc additions to theories or their complete rewrites. The hyperbolic field is far simpler. All that is needed is acknowledgement that the black hole singularity is unique. No rewrite of GR. No undetectable new heavy particles that get given self-serving, revised, lower detection limits every time they are determined to be really undetectable.

There seems to be a tendency of cosmologists to think inside the box. They never really consider anything that is outside the consensus. So too do journal editors rely on  conventional wisdom. They would all have been supremely comfortable with the Pope’s decision to censor Galileo.

“Cosmologists are always wrong, but never in doubt.”   Lev Landau

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

4 Responses to “Dark Matter is an unnecessary ad hoc fix”

  1. garyakent Says:

    The hyperbolic (1/kr) super-massive black hole galactic gravitational field is not my idea. It was mentioned by Michael Rowan-Robinson in a paper he wrote just after the announcement of the accelerating expansion of the universe by Adam Riess, Saul Perlmutter and Brian Schmidt. The hyperbolic field would be a momentous idea capable of invoking a paradigm shift in cosmology.

    But Birkhoff’s Theorem is quoted almost religiously to dogmatically claim that the interior distribution of matter inside a massive body cannot affect the shape of the exterior gravitational field. But, singularities are different. They permit no “distribution” of matter. They are point masses. This must have very serious testable effects. There must be a loophole in Birkhoff. There must be misinterpretation. There is precedent for said misinterpretation.

    I need a collaborator who would like to participate in initiating this paradigm shift.

  2. kagmi Says:

    I’d be interested to hear how this hyperbolic gravity would happen. Is it assumed to be an effect of the huge amount of mass in the singularities, or is there some other kind of math involved?

    I’m afraid I’m no good at math, so I’m no collaborator. But I would be very interested to see if you can manage a theory that explains all of our observations without invoking dark matter.

    • garyakent Says:

      Galactic M-Sigma Relation and the Anomalous Stellar Velocity Dispersion

      Inverse gravitational decline versus inverse square decline

      Analyzing the implications of a black hole singularity with near infinitely tight curvature close to the center and what this means to the mathematical form of the gravitational field, one concludes that a postulated singularity requires that black hole gravity declines as 1/r, not as 1/r^2. This effective “infinitely” deep gravitational “point-mass” geometrically implies a hyperbolic gravitational field profile. So, the concept has some bizarre twists.

      But, general relativity does not permit a 1/r gravitational field in 3-D + t spacetime. However it does allow a hyperbolic field in 2-D + t spacetime. By GR, gravitational force must decline as 1/r^(n-1), where n = spacial dimensionality. If n = 2, gravity declines as 1/r. So, it is also posited (postulated) that there exists a 2-D, sub-event horizon, hyper-spinning, centripetally induced, infinitely broad disk singularity in all central galactic SBHs. Having mass probably concentrated nearer to the singularity center but being of spacetime in nature, the entirety of the disk singularity is immune to the event horizon of the black hole. It can therefore extend outward to far beyond the galactic rim even to nearby galaxies within a cluster or supercluster.

      This 2-D gravitational field is also quantum renormalizable. It is well known that items in a 3-D space can be projected perfectly onto a 2-D surface – the holographic principle. Might this be a simple route toward validatable, falsifiable quantum gravity? It is interesting to contemplate that a supermassive central BH with its coterie of inner bulge orbiting stars may be a quantum object obeying quantum law.

      This postulated set of logical statements is immune to criticism. If otherwise logical, it cannot be argued against. It must be experimentally tested. Observation is the only choice to conclusively validate or falsify such an argument. See the definition of “postulate” given below.

      Definition of a Postulate

      • A Postulate is assumed to be a true statement, which does not require to be proved.

      • Postulates are used to derive other logical statements to solve a
      problem. If a problem is thereby solved, especially if proven by
      other data, the postulate must also be true.

      • Postulates are also likened to axioms.

      In other words, postulates are to be accepted at face value “for the sake argument” for whatever they may be worth as if they were indisputable axioms. THEN, if a whole argument containing such postulates actually works, there may be much joy. If not, it is back to the drawing board.

      Newton’s law of gravity and Kepler’s laws are all easily adjusted to accommodate the hyperbolic 1/r G-field in two dimensions plus time. Kepler’s 3rd law in 2-D is derived from 2-D Newton analogously to the 3-D derivation. It is NOT the same result as if orbiting 3-D objects were limited to an Euclidean plane.

      The G-field diagram is hyperbolic when its equal gravitational force contour lines are drawn with spacing in such a way that a 1/r relation is followed to the origin where spacing approaches zero. If the contour lines are then plotted having a z axis, Flamm’s hyperboloid is the result. This is a spacetime diagram, not a gravitational potential diagram.

      No inner galactic bulge stellar orbits need be fitted to raw Kepler. Kepler does not define these orbits. Kepler’s laws are used merely to analyze them. The orbits are what they are. Kepler’s 2nd law applies no matter what the form of the central force. The “adjusted” Kepler’s 3rd law follows exactly from Newton’s law of gravity with reduced dimensionality according to GR. It is “adjusted” Kepler that should be used to compute central galactic supermassive black hole mass. See the Gary Kent post on WordPress.com.

      There is nothing more to prove. What there is still to be done is to compare with observation.

      Mathematically, the constant velocity distribution observed in spiral galaxies is explicitly derived. This means that the M Sigma relation is explained because peripheral stellar v = (GM/r*)^½. Also, Milgrom’s MOND constant, “a[o]”, is derived, where a[o] = GM/r*r[∞] = v^2/r*r[∞]. This implies that the universe must have a finite or maximum r because a[o] is an observed finite non-zero quantity. And, M, the black hole mass, may include the masses of many tens of thousands or more of very large stellar mass black holes that are thought to be embedded in every galaxy. The unit vector of r, r*, is used to maintain dimensional integrity.

      No modification of Newton’s law is required. But, Newton must be regarded in the context of a 2-D hyperbolically curved spacetime. So, gravity for black holes declines as 1/r and is not an inverse square relation.

      All the other effects that have been observed that have been traced to Dark Matter are also explained in this way. These include the anomalous velocity dispersion in spiral galaxies and in clusters, the weak gravitational lensing, the Sunyaev-Zel’dovich, the Sachs-Wolfe and the Bullet Cluster effects.

      The hyperbolic G-field parsimoniously explains these phenomena without appeal to any unfalsifiable hypotheses of exotic dark matter. Weakly interacting massive particles and other alien perpetrators of Dark Matter effects have been researched avidly for a very long time. They must be regarded now as unfalsifiable hypotheses because it has become clear that there is no way to prove or disprove their existence or it would have been done by now.

      The hyperbolic SBH singular ultra-spin disk G-field might have mass, perhaps like Alan Guth’s inflaton field in the false vacuum. Its mass, but not its hyperbolic gravitational spacetime configuration, could be confined to below the event horizon. The horizon itself could be greatly distorted – including any surrounding plasma or photon sphere. So, a photon passing through the expansive hyper-spin singular spacetime disk would experience therein an enhanced gravitational field, just as if it had passed through a Dark Matter “halo”.

      The open cell foam, network or spiderweb structure of the large scale universe is also explained by the extensiveness of the hyperbolic field and its form as a 2-D saddle shape “hyperboloid of one sheet” embedded in 3-D space. Galaxies and galactic clusters will be expected to align so that the hyperbolic surfaces of their 2-D fields tend to coincide. So, even the initial structure of the nascent universe would be influenced by supermassive BHs therein which could have formed very quickly at that time.

      They might have been there from t = 0 + an instant, for all we know. After all, if the inflaton particle was like an unstable subatomic particle, it may have decayed into smaller particles including many SBHs. Some have said that the inflaton particle must have decayed all at once. Under these extreme initial conditions, what experimentally validated physical law or fundamental principle is quoted thereby? So, it decays all at once. To what?

      In short, the hyperbolic 1/r SBH galactic G-Field explains all the phenomena that have ever been traced to Dark Matter. The hyperbolic G-field IS Dark Matter. Its potential energy profile is generally higher than the profile of an equivalent inverse square G-field. Since m = E/c^2, it accounts for the unseen and unseeable missing mass of Dark Matter. The HBHG field is mathematically derived rigorously and satisfies the mathematical requirements of all observations.

      I have written a paper on gravitational decline with distance, but I need a reviewer to help check my mathematics. kentgen1@aol.com

  3. garyakent Says:

    Alan Guth postulates that a quantum statistical virtual particle in the hyper-excited false vacuum of the spacetime continuum of the multiverse in meta-time that existed prior to the Big Bang simply “appeared” as a random quantum fluctuation due to its extremely high energy state. Such higher energy states are simply much more probable that low energy states due to the zero-point cutoff.

    When the BB occurred, its quantum renormalizable gravitational field stemming from its enormous mass began to collapse or “transition” from its hyper-excited state to its present unrenormalizable inverse square Newtonian gravitational field. In so doing, it released its potential energy in the form of the expansion of spacetime and the kinematic stimulation of massive cosmological bodies in their inevitable tendency to move farther apart.

    This renormalizable gravitational field is one that follows an “inverse” relation, not an “inverse square” relation. That is, it declines as 1/r instead of as 1/r^2. It is hyperbolic in nature, not parabolic or exponential. Because this gravitational field falls off so much more slowly, it affects massive bodies far beyond, say, the peripheries of galaxies where stellar velocity distributions have been found to be anomalously high. It extends so far, in fact, that nearby galaxies in local clusters and even in super-clusters are affected. This hyperbolic gravitational field extends from supermassive black holes in the cores of virtually all galaxies. In the case of globular clusters, these black holes must be almost “naked” because they are “dark”.

    Dark Matter composed of dark black holes is an old idea. But, that black holes may exercise their gravitational influence by means of a hyperbolic field is new. It explains the anomalous stellar velocity distributions in spiral galaxies perfectly. And so, the hyperbolic gravitational field is a candidate for an explanation of Dark Matter.

    It does not eliminate Dark Matter. It explains it. The hyperbolic field is an excited renormalizable gravitational field in quantum spacetime. In the case of black holes, it is due to the in-fall of matter into it. Some of the energy from this in-falling mass raises the excitation energy of the gravitational field. Perhaps this is why this field can spread its influence so much farther than can a “ground state” inverse square field.

    General Relativity can describe a hyperbolic gravitational field if the metric (the definition of spacetime) that is derived therefrom comes about due to correct assumptions and boundary conditions. Restrictive relativistic theorems like “Birkhoff’s Theorem” will not be in force then and they do not apply anyway. This is because they presume that the massive bodies that they describe, including black holes, are “unperturbed” and perfectly “spherically symmetric”. In fact, there are no such real black holes anywhere in existence. They are good ideas only for approximate calculations, not for “precision cosmology”.

    So, Dark Matter in the form of the hyperbolic black hole galactic gravitational field is still required to account for all the matter in the universe. It is still needed to fill in the blanks of the Friedmann equations under the FLRW metric which is used as a “standard model” of the universe by cosmologists.

    But, remember

    “Cosmologists are always wrong, but never in doubt.”
    Lev Landau

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: