General / Off-Topic So... Do we have free will? :)

@picommander did you watch the video i made? You can see the effect there.

The reason for the outer mass moving slower is the gravitational- vs. orbital pull. They move at the same speed, but the orbit is larger, resulting in the differentiation.
Yes, but that's not the point. This effect is also known from ice skaters and how they control the rotation of a pirouette.
Have you read the article I've linked above? I quoted the related part which is about the expected curve of rotation:

"The curve of this differential rotation shows irregularities that cannot be explained by visible mass alone."
 
Also have a look at this one:
Galaxy_rotation_curve
Note that I'm just citing the current state of astrophysics, not that I personally believe nor advocate this.
So if you're going to question this I'm certainly the wrong address.
Also note these are all more or less accepted theories while nothing's carved in stone.
I would bet my fully Engineered Corvette that these theories will significantly change - still before I'm too old to be able to enjoy the new insights. :D
 
Last edited:
A somewhat heretic follow-up question would be how they can be so sure as all current physics don't seem to work anymore when it comes to calculating the outer regions of spiral galaxies (the're moving faster than they should in relation to the inner regions), which in the end led to such exotic auxiliary constructions like dark matter and dark energy.
Well, there are proposals to modify how gravity works in order to fit the observations though they are not taken too seriously and there's good evidence to suggest that's not the case.

 
Well, there are proposals to modify how gravity works in order to fit the observations though they are not taken too seriously and there's good evidence to suggest that's not the case.

Thanks for this one, I don't have the time right now but certainly will watch it later. I like the videos of this guy very much, I've already watched quite a few of him. He's also very clear so that even a non-physicist and non-native speaker like me can usually follow him very well. And that alone is already quite outstanding! :)
 
Thanks for this one, I don't have the time right now but certainly will watch it later. I like the videos of this guy very much, I've already watched quite a few of him. He's also very clear so that even a non-physicist and non-native speaker like me can usually follow him very well. And that alone is already quite outstanding! :)
Yeah, and he does try and explain it well, many youtubers who also talk about physics don't give the proper details to genuinly understand what you are hearing, although his latest string theory videos are pretty darn hard to grasp though I don't blame him.
 
Just watched the video, very interesting. If I got that right then there seems to be a common theme between dark matter and ultra diffuse galaxies, which in return lead to the idea/possibility of dark matter being a "product" of gravity and not the other way around. I didn't fully understand this stuff though, guess I'd need to watch again tomorrow, when I'm less tired...

p.s. I also smiled about how he pronounced "dunkle Materie" but found the nitpicking about it in the comments not so funny. But also the nitpicking about the nitpicking (aka "nazi grunt"). So much cliches in the comments (like Germans have no humor. so do I have no humor now if I can't laugh about cheap jokes?) about such fascinating stuff. Sometimes I wonder what's up with people these days, as if more and more people would turn into mindless zombies. Scary - or just how people act in the internet...
 
Last edited:
Well, my personal theory about dark matter (well, personal - it's based on hundreds of other people's ideas) is that it is either a particle so light that it doesn't interact with anything (like neutrinos) or (and I really like this one) - it is a particle so heavy that it doesn't manifest as a particle at all. I mean, normal particles are a fluctuation in quantum field. Let's say that an electron field has a certain probability to ripple in a certain point in space and that ripple is what we detect as an electron.
What if there is a particle field so heavy that it doesn't ripple, therefore it doesn't create a detectable particle. It just sits there, doing nothing, having a lot of mass and screwing up gravity. :LOL:
Kind of like Higgs field, which also doesn't like to create particles per se and rather just presents "friction" which gives other particle fields their mass.

As for the dark energy, I have one theory that is so wild that I'm really proud of it as a sci-fi geek.
Dark energy (or energy density of vacuum) is supposedly what makes the universe's expansion accelerate. And we don't know where it comes from.
Well, what if it doesn't come from our universe at all? Meaning - what if it isn't a property of the space time but rather an outside influence?
When I'm explaining the expansion of the universe to somebody, I always like to do it on the famous rubber baloon example. If you imagine a lot of marker pen dots on a baloon that is being inflated. The dots are coming apart but not because they are moving across the rubber, but simply because the rubber between them is stretching. And they don't move in any particular direction, rather every dot is moving away from every other dot - an observer in any place of the baloon would see everything moving away as if they were the centre of the (baloon) universe). That is a 2D space curved into 3rd dimension with a curvature that is slowly flattening as the baloon expands.
What if our universe is the same, only one dimension higher? A 3D space curved into 4th (spatial) dimension. (spoiler - we kinda know it is)
Now the fun part. If you lived in the 2D space of the stretching baloon, you wouldn't be able to understand why is it getting bigger, because nothing you can observe in the rubber itself gives you any indication of the forces that are applied. It's the air inside the baloon that does the stretching - an outside force that isn't a property of the rubber, nor is it a part of its "equation"
Similarly, what if the thing we call dark energy is a force applied from 4th dimension that makes our 3D space bigger and flatter? Nothing we can observe, measure or calculate in this universe would ever indicate the cause of this expansion.

Or imagine a drop of paint in a glass of water, spreading by Brownian motion. If you lived in the droplet, you wouldn't understand why it is getting bigger and is slowly diluting (metaphorically in the case of our universe), because the thing that causes the "expansion" of your droplet isn't a property of your droplet, but rather the water molecules outside, tugging on "your" molecules inside.

You know... 6am thoughts. :)
 
Last edited:
Well, my personal theory about dark matter (well, personal - it's based on hundreds of other people's ideas) is that it is either a particle so light that it doesn't interact with anything (like neutrinos) or (and I really like this one) - it is a particle so heavy that it doesn't manifest as a particle at all. I mean, normal particles are a fluctuation in quantum field. Let's say that an electron field has a certain probability to ripple in a certain point in space and that ripple is what we detect as an electron.
What if there is a particle field so heavy that it doesn't ripple, therefore it doesn't create a detectable particle. It just sits there, doing nothing, having a lot of mass and screwing up gravity. :LOL:
Kind of like Higgs field, which also doesn't like to create particles per se and rather just presents "friction" which gives other particle fields their mass.

As for the dark energy, I have one theory that is so wild that I'm really proud of it as a sci-fi geek.
Dark energy (or energy density of vacuum) is supposedly what makes the universe's expansion accelerate. And we don't know where it comes from.
Well, what if it doesn't come from our universe at all? Meaning - what if it isn't a property of the space time but rather an outside influence?
When I'm explaining the expansion of the universe to somebody, I always like to do it on the famous rubber baloon example. If you imagine a lot of marker pen dots on a baloon that is being inflated. The dots are coming apart but not because they are moving across the rubber, but simply because the rubber between them is stretching. And they don't move in any particular direction, rather every dot is moving away from every other dot - an observer in any place of the baloon would see everything moving away as if they were the centre of the (baloon) universe). That is a 2D space curved into 3rd dimension with a curvature that is slowly flattening as the baloon expands.
What if our universe is the same, only one dimension higher? A 3D space curved into 4th (spatial) dimension. (spoiler - we kinda know it is)
Now the fun part. If you lived in the 2D space of the stretching baloon, you wouldn't be able to understand why is it getting bigger, because nothing you can observe in the rubber itself gives you any indication of the forces that are applied. It's the air inside the baloon that does the stretching - an outside force that isn't a property of the rubber, nor is it a part of its "equation"
Similarly, what if the thing we call dark energy is a force applied from 4th dimension that makes our 3D space bigger and flatter? Nothing we can observe, measure or calculate in this universe would ever indicate the cause of this expansion.

Or imagine a drop of paint in a glass of water, spreading by Brownian motion. If you lived in the droplet, you wouldn't understand why it is getting bigger and is slowly diluting (metaphorically in the case of our universe), because the thing that causes the "expansion" of your droplet isn't a property of your droplet, but rather the water molecules outside, tugging on "your" molecules inside.

You know... 6am thoughts. :)
Flatland! :)

Once at 6am, while de-rigging my telescope, I started wrapping up dimensions in euclidean space. If you curve X, Y and Z into circles, you get room for an extra set of dimensions which are mirrored versions of the three we know. Still at a 90 deg angle.
 
in both examples you could possibly measure the external effects (gravity and surface tension acting on molecules of the droplet, the curvature of the rubber world ...) which would prompt you to assume them as physical laws, which is what we do in our 3d world ... you do not fully understand why it works, but you understand how. with dark matter we do have a contradiction between observation and predictions, but the observation that there are very likely things currently eluding our observation is quite spot on :)
 
Flatland! :)

Once at 6am, while de-rigging my telescope, I started wrapping up dimensions in euclidean space. If you curve X, Y and Z into circles, you get room for an extra set of dimensions which are mirrored versions of the three we know. Still at a 90 deg angle.
"Inside our Earth, there is another, much bigger one."
 
Here is a pitch:

On one hand science and philosophy has shown that the Universe (that includes you) seems to be deterministic, build on a foundation of uncertainty. Once the dices have been thrown, everything follows the laws of nature. This seems to rule out free will as we know it.

On the other hand you make choices every day.

So which one is it? :)
Actually they don't say that. Deterministic means there is a known outcome (the opposite of uncertainty)
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom