A Hypothesis on Dark Energy/Matter

 Paul (@CalebDH)6 years, 8 months ago

I had an idea the other day. Assuming matter can exist on varying frequencies, what if Dark Matter is simply higher-vibration matter, where higher-vibration beings exist and live? And that the same counts for Dark Energy, being for higher beings still. And in this case, would the expansion of the universe equate to the expansion of the universal consciousness?

Just a thought :) what do you think?

September 29, 2014 at 10:13 am
Kris (328) (@kjbaran) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

INspansion. An ALL creator cannot create outside himself. There is no matter or energy in the Dark, however, it could be seen as the prime projector to this holographic UniVerse.

[Hidden]
Paul (6) (@CalebDH) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

If the universe is holographic, you can still expand internally. If All the universe is inside itself, it can expand itself, within itself, since it is all there is (if that makes sense). Your mind can expand while still being inside your head.

[Hidden]
Kris (328) (@kjbaran) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

You’re right. All truths are half-truths in the world/mind of man. All directions of movement are only seeming in this divided thought-wave universe. Back to question, perhaps what is “real” is just the thinking of God/You, that dark matter is forever elusive because it’s the mirrors surface that consciousness uses to produce the illusion.

[Hidden]
Paul (6) (@CalebDH) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

that dark matter itself produces the illusion of dark matter? That’s some odd circle thinking.

[Hidden]
Kris (328) (@kjbaran) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

I see what you mean. Question though, is a mirror still a mirror without something being reflected in it? When you look at a mirror, are you seeing the mirror itself or that which is reflected?

[Hidden]
Paul (6) (@CalebDH) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

I’d say both. If you ask me, a mirror is a mirror regardless if anything is being reflected in it. And you can see both the mirror and the reflection depending on what your focus is.

[Hidden]
Ryan (16) (@ryanoneill) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

The mirror itself always reflects light, but you only ever see one perspective of that reflection, so in a way, nothing else technically exists until you experience it.

[Hidden]
Paul (6) (@CalebDH) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

i’m having issues understanding what you’re trying to say. Could you rephrase? I’d love to understand.

[Hidden]
LVX (297) (@Vovinawol) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

I have encountered a good number of energies in the Dark, so I suppose I see it all different than most. I would add that the plane that we are on makes a bit of difference also though.

[Hidden]
Kris (328) (@kjbaran) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

If you observed it, it wasn’t the Dark. When will the pizza stop seeing itself as one of its pepperonis? Our awareness is on just one slice of reality amongst the infinite slices. The only way to end infinity is in the Mind, where infinity is produced. Not the “brain” mind, but the OBSERVER Mind. The one mind.

[Hidden]
lyfe (1) (@greenbreath) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

Remember “dark” is only used in describing this form of matter because it has yet to be seen/measured in a way that can be explained from a scientific standpoint. In response, I definitely agree that frequency has a lot to do with it. Perhaps like a canvas or ocean whose frequencies act as a sort of base for the properties of mass to exist?

[Hidden]
Paul (6) (@CalebDH) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

i am aware of and agree with your statement on the term “dark”. Could you rephrase your last sentence? having issues interpreting it properly.

[Hidden]
lyfe (1) (@greenbreath) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

Like how a person with O negative blood can give to all other blood types, a universal donor. So what I mean by that is the frequency of this all-energy could be universal to all the stars and such which are able to create within it forming galaxies and solar systems, sort of like a canvas or an ocean

[Hidden]
Paul (6) (@CalebDH) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

So essentially, that (perhaps) frequency is the basis for the universe, and that due to this, could be looked at and viewed as a canvas upon which everything has been created?

[Hidden]
lyfe (1) (@greenbreath) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

Perhaps ya somethin like that

[Hidden]
LVX (297) (@Vovinawol) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

Remember “dark” is only used in describing this form of matter because it has yet to be seen/measured in a way that can be explained from a scientific standpoint. (End Quote)
Indeed x2

[Hidden]
lyfe (1) (@greenbreath) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

Cheese

[Hidden]
Ray (4) (@brainofmorbius) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

Its unlikely we will ever detect dark matter or energy. We can only detect the effects it has on the known universe. Non-baryonic matter is something that is not composed of the fundamental particles of the atom, protons and neutrons…

In fact, science has largely given up searching for neutrinos – one of the prime candidates for dark matter and energy. A decades long, multi-million dollar search has turned up nothing and it has fallen out of fashion in science.

[Hidden]
JaapDeAap (1) (@JaapDeAap) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

????
Neutrinos have been detected over 50 years ago
http://www.ps.uci.edu/physics/news/nuexpt.html

[Hidden]
Ray (4) (@brainofmorbius) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

Meant to say “tachyons” there. Tachyons are the faster than light (theoretical) light “particles” that have never been discovered. Theoretically, if you travel faster than light, you begin to travel back in time, you reach what is known as “zero” velocity. So they should be detectable. But they have never been found.

Finding them would go a long way towards verifying the nature of “dark energy.” However, its likely that both dark energy and dark matter are not detectable by normal scientific means, as they are not true elements of our universe, and science can only deal with the physical.

[Hidden]
JaapDeAap (1) (@JaapDeAap) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

Thanks for clarrifying, I was a bit confused as you seem to know what you’re talking about.

[Hidden]
Paul (6) (@CalebDH) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

I don’t agree with the last think you wrote there, that “science can only deal with the physical”. Science is about explaining and understanding phenomena that occur in the universe on macro and micro scales. Assuming that things can only exist physically is blinding ourselves to the possibility of non-physical phenomena that might exist that we have yet to uncover. When it comes to science and understanding the world and universe we live in, we must be open to anything and everything, and sift out the bullshit via applying the scientific method ruthlessly.

[Hidden]
Ray (4) (@brainofmorbius) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

Paul, science is only capable of experimenting on matter and energy, the known universe itself. The universe is defined in science as wholly material/energetic. There is nothing else according to traditional science.

Of course there can be experiments in areas termed “metaphysical” that go beyond this. Dean Radin has proven this with his extensive lab work into the ESP realm. But this is not considered “science” by the rank and file scientific community. Its looked at as anecdotal evidence, as folklore, which science disparages. (I’m not saying science is right in this regard).

Most scientists are very conservative and rigid. Our whole society in the west is built upon the world view that there is nothing but the atom – and the quantum field from which it arises.

[Hidden]
Paul (6) (@CalebDH) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

Simply because science is and has been focused on the study of material and physical matter and energies, doesn’t mean it has to stay that way. Keeping the lens of scientific focus within materialistic boundaries doesn’t do anything but limit ourselves in in our pursuit of understanding the universe. As you seem/might to be aware, there are and have been studies that suggest and show significant evidence towards the idea that non-physical phenomena exist and do affect physical systems and events.

The way you speak of the scientific community has it come across as something that is set in it’s ways. Like it’s an unwavering pillar that has its ways of doing things and that’s that. But science is so much more than that. It’s about the pursuit of knowledge and truth wherever it may lead. The scientific institution might be rigid and conservative, but the scientific spirit (if you will) isn’t and shouldn’t be. And i think many, maybe even you, would agree on that.

[Hidden]
Ray (4) (@brainofmorbius) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

The pursuit of knowledge is much broader than science, I agree. That’s where religion, politics, social advancement all come into play.

But the scientific method is very rigid for a reason and has been so for centuries. Its a way of removing human biases from the discovery of knowledge, and it has served us very well. Test, examine the data, establish a hypothesis from the results, test more, define a theory…all under strictly controlled conditions. Without this process modern chemistry, physics, medicine would all be impossible.

That’s why many scientists ridicule the paranormal or supernatural or anything believed in without physical proof. There is proof and evidence of the non-physical or quasi-physical realm – everything from UFOs and extratrerrestrial encounters to superhuman abilities, powers of the mind, psychic events… The problem with all of this proof from a scientific point of view is that its often not repeatable under laboratory conditions. Some of it is, but many scientists won’t look at the evidence.

Ultimately, you are dealing with two different worlds here that have no interest in merging. The physical/reductionist/materialistic scientific method, and manifestations outside of the physical that don’t conform to testing or objective analysis in many cases.

I doubt the two will merge. The two perspectives essentially loathe each other. Look at how eminent scientists like Stephen Hawking or Neille De Grasse Tyson openly ridicule the kinds of metaphysical things talked about out here… These are the best scientists the world has to offer, and they think anything outside of what can be proven in a lab is superstitious nonsense.

[Hidden]
Zykanthos (4,757)M (@chodebalm) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

I’ve always liked to believe that dark matter is consciousness. :)

[Hidden]
Paul (6) (@CalebDH) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

Have you read the His Dark Materials books (The Golden Compass, The Subtle Knife, The Amber Looking Glass)? Part of the premise is that dark matter is consciousness-particles. The books are a great read!

[Hidden]
Zykanthos (4,757)M (@chodebalm) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

No I have not, but wow, I will definitely check them out. Thank you for letting me know about them. Looking forward to reading them!

[Hidden]
JonH (1,139)C (@IJesusChrist) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

uh……………
Take some college level physics classes, or buy some physics books and read up on the subject.

[Hidden]
Paul (6) (@CalebDH) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

I really wish to. Physics is so interesting. But i have to do a lot of preemptive preparation before i could delve that deep into it.

[Hidden]
Andre Sanchos (3) (@dekooo) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

I’ve heard about like this man!! Joe Rogan said something about our universe be like radio and the possibility to exist infinite worlds all around us all the time. You can hear by yourself the video is on youtube called “What is Reality – Joe Rogan”

[Hidden]
Paul (6) (@CalebDH) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

Yes! It’s been a while since I’ve seen that, and watched it again. i forgot he touched upon it. Weird huh :P

[Hidden]
melbube (0) (@melbube) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

Crack pot theory…but its always good to question and wander. It doesn’t matter if your right or wrong though create the world to be as you wish it.

[Hidden]
Paul (6) (@CalebDH) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

I’m not saying this is fact or anything, it’s just an idea i wished to discuss :) it could easily be way off, but would be real interesting if the hypothesis had any support to it.

[Hidden]
melbube (0) (@melbube) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

You know, I really respect that. All great discoveries in this world come from a hypothesis. Scientific method…its our greatest tool. Are you familiar with the string theory? Considering we only see a fraction of wavelength (visible) theres certainly so much we don’t see in this universe. Does it comprise dark matter?…Matter has weight…and energy(vibrations/frequencies) is not matter so the weight comprising the dark matter (98% of all relative mass) doesn’t add up in your hypothesis. But keep at it, I would love to hear more.

[Hidden]
Paul (6) (@CalebDH) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

I’m glad to hear that! :) And yes, i am quite familiar with String Theory, as well as M-Theory (and when i say familiar, i mean the gist and basics of the idea, rather than all the technical stuff).

I’m going under the assumption that there is some validity to String/M-Theory, and that dark matter might be matter at a higher (or lower) frequency. And as i’m sure you are aware, in Einsteins Theory of Relativity it is stated that Energy = Mass * Speed-of-Light, so there is a connection between mass (and therefore, weight) and energy.

And all of this, of course, is under the assumption that frequency and vibration are fundamental to the workings of the universe. If that isn’t the case, this whole idea goes asunder. That, and even string theory itself is just a random idea someone came up with without (to my knowledge) there has been any data to support the theory. I’d love to learn more about all this, so i can speak with more certainty.

[Hidden]
Ray (4) (@brainofmorbius) 6 years, 8 months ago ago

The frequency shouldn’t make a difference – that would be detectable by normal scientific processes. Dark matter is non-baryonic matter. Here’s a brief explanation:

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/N/non-baryonic_matter.html

[Hidden]
load more