arXiv blog

First Evidence That Mirror Matter May Fill the Universe?

If dark matter exists it may take the form of mirror planets, mirror stars and mirror galaxies. Now one physicist says the most recent evidence seems to confirm this idea

kfc 04/26/2010

  • 20 Comments

When astronomers study distant galaxies, they see only a small fraction of the mass needed to hold these clumps of stars together. Without some kind of extra hidden mass, galaxies ought to fly apart.

Astronomers call this hidden mass 'dark matter' and physicists around the world are engaged in an increasingly desperate race to find evidence of it here on Earth. That's why there are more than 30 experiments in various parts of the planet looking for the stuff.

The consensus is that, despite this global effort, dark matter remains well hidden. Nobody has had a whiff of the stuff.

That is nobody except an Italian group which has spent the last ten years or so watching a giant lump of sodium iodide. Their thinking is that any dark matter hitting the sodium iodide should generate a photon. And that as Earth moves around the Sun, they should see more photons when heading into the background sea of dark matter than when moving away from it.

Sure enough, this seasonal signal is exactly what this team says it sees. They claim that it's experiment called DAMA/LIBRA is the first direct evidence of dark matter.

The trouble is that nobody else believes them, mainly because so many other experiments have seen nothing. The critics says something else must be responsible for these seasonal signals, perhaps some kind of environmental change like a variation in temperature.

Then, about a month ago, everything changed when an experiment called CoGent based in the US reported that it too had found a hint of dark matter. CoGent looks for evidence that dark matter particles have bumped into a crystal of germanium and sure enough, the CoGent team say that the experiment is producing abundant evidence of these kinds of collisions.

Curiously, while most experiments are looking for relatively heavy dark matter particles which should produce higher energy collisions, CoGent looks for much lighter particles.

The interesting thing is that the DAMA\LIBRA evidence is from a similar mass range.

Now the theoreticians are attempting to reconcile the DAMA and CoGent results by finding a dark matter model that can explain them both. Last month, Liam Fitzpatrick at Boston University and a couple of mates suggested that a light, weakly interacting dark matter particle could explain both results.

And today, Robert Foot from the University of Melbourne has an even more interesting solution. He says that mirror matter could explain both. "This result adds weight to the mirror dark matter interpretation of the direct detection experiments," he says.

The theory behind mirror matter suggests that every particle in the standard model has a mirror equivalent that interacts with ordinary matter only very weakly.

However, mirror particles interact with each other in exactly the same way as ordinary particles. So in this scenario, the Universe is filled with mirror planets, stars and galaxies. That's a mind blowing idea.

Foot is one of the leading proponents of mirror matter and says other observations also point to its existence.

Perhaps the new evidence will tempt astronomers to look harder. If it exists, mirror matter ought to be observable in other ways. For example, its gravity should bend light causing microlensing events although distinguishing mirror matter microlensing events from the same thing caused by ordinary but dim matter will be hard.

Still, an interesting avenue to pursue.

Refs:

arxiv.org/abs/1004.1424 : A CoGeNT Confirmation Of The DAMA Signal

arxiv.org/abs/1003.0014: Implications Of CoGeNT And DAMA For Light WIMP Dark Matter

TRSF: Read the Best New Science Fiction inspired by today’s emerging technologies.

Print

Close Comments

To comment, please sign in or register

Forgot my password

ZephirAWT

299 Comments

  • 658 Days Ago
  • 04/26/2010

Mirror matter versus antimatter

What the concept of mirror matter means? If it's antimatter, then there are many both experimental, both observational evidences, this antimatter forms a substantial part of dark matter.

http://aetherwavetheory.blogspot.com/2009/03/is-dark-matter-composed-of-antimatter.html

I cannot understand, why contemporary physicists are so surprised by the lack of dark matter in observable universe and by its relative abundance in dark matter clouds at the same time.

Until they're not complete trolls, indeed...

Reply

UncleAl

409 Comments

  • 658 Days Ago
  • 04/26/2010

Fast mirror matter test

Mirror matter mass is not 1:1 visible matter.  Diverged mirror images' (enantiomers') abundances, suggest source diastereotopic interaction with a chiral vacuum background.  A left foot discriminates between left and right shoes.

The Equivalence Principle (EP) says all atoms are anonymous unit masses toward gravitation.  Probe with twistane, a molecule whose chirality arises from geometry not composition,

http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/twisten3.gif

Molecular beam supersonic expansion into an FT microwave spectrometer cavity cools it to ~10 kelvin rotational temperature.  The EP is true to at least 5x10^(-14) relative, g/g (Eot-Wash publications).  E=mc^2, that is 4.49 J/g.  Boltzmann for thermal divergence/molecule,

[(4.49 J/g)(268.436 g/mol)]/[(6.022x10^(23) molecules/mole)(1.380651^(-23) J/kelvin)] = 73.6 kelvin/molecule.

View microwave rotation temperature vs. time of day as Earth's ~1000 mph rotation is normal, parallel, normal, antiparallel to its orbital velocity.  Diurnal divergence of enantiomers' rotational states detects a chiral vacum background active in the massed sector.  Rigidly paired rotors are better (internal <I>meso</I> control) but a longer synthetic path.

Reply

rsanchez1

213 Comments

  • 658 Days Ago
  • 04/26/2010

Mirror Matter?

Can someone explain mirror matter more clearly to me? I've actually never heard of it, but the way it is described in this article, it almost sounds like their talking about supersymmetric partners for normal matter particles. Just wondering if someone can clear it up a bit. They also talk about mirror planets, etc. Could it be possible that a mirror solar system is passing through our solar system right now?

Reply

UncleAl

409 Comments

  • 658 Days Ago
  • 04/26/2010

Re: Mirror Matter?

Mirror matter would gravitate without equivocation.  EM, Strong, and Weak interactions with ordinary matter would be deeply suppressed.

http://iopscience.iop.org/1063-7869/50/4/R08/
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0606202

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_matter
http://arxiv.org/abs/0706.2694
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0407623

Physics cannot predict parity violations.  Noether's theorems (smooth Lie groups!) require continuous symmetries or approximation (e.g., Taylor series).  Parity is the only external symmetry (coupled to translation and rotation) outside Noether.  Testable proposals arising from parity violation are <I>nekulturny</I> but important.

Reply

rsanchez1

213 Comments

  • 657 Days Ago
  • 04/27/2010

Re: Mirror Matter?

Thanks!

Reply

ZephirAWT

299 Comments

  • 657 Days Ago
  • 04/27/2010

Is dark matter linked to antimatter or not

This article would contradict the previous article, in which antimatter isn't linked to dark matter.

"Signs of dark matter may point to antimatter candidate" versus "Astrophysicists cast doubt on link between excess antimatter and dark matter"

http://www.physorg.com/news191562687.html
http://www.physorg.com/news190631146.html

This is because positrons are particles of antimatter and "Mirror matter" concept is identical to antimatter, in fact. The phrase "mirror matter" was introduced by Bob L. Forward as an alternative term for what is commonly called antimatter, in an attempt to emphasize that antimatter is identical to ordinary matter, except reversed in all possible ways.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_matter

As you can see, in today's physics is possible to tell whatever you want, if you change terminology a bit.

Reply

ms

190 Comments

  • 657 Days Ago
  • 04/27/2010

Re: Is dark matter linked to antimatter or not

If you bothered to actually read the mirror matter wikipedia entry you cited, you would see that mirror matter is a completely different concept from antimatter. Antimatter interacts strongly with matter, the postulated mirror matter does not.

Reply

Advertisement

ZephirAWT

299 Comments

  • 657 Days Ago
  • 04/27/2010

Too many concepts indicates confusion

The question is, what the "mirror matter" is supposed to balance? Now we have to balance both missing antimatter, both missing mirror antimatter.

The fast growing number of particles proposed for explanation of dark matter is striking: positrons, neutrinos, SIMs, WIMPs like neutralinos and fotinos, axions, MACHOs, micro-black holes, dark fluid, chameleon particles, scalar field, quintessence, mirror matter... - not saying about various modifications of Newtonian gravity and/or relativity (and I definitelly forgot something..).

Frankly, I don't believe in concept of "mirror matter" very much, simply because common heavily ionized atom nuclei and positrons and well known extensions of relativity are able to explain both cold, both hot dark matter by itself.

In AWT the dark matter dispersion mechanism is universal: the looking for new ideas shouldn't serve as an easy salary generator for scientists, who are just lazy/unmotivated to reconcile existing concepts. It slows down evolution in the same way, like the blind conservative adherence to established concepts. In Occam's razor we are forced to introduce new particles only when absolutely necessary.  We all know, how popular is bringing something new and how unpopular is revitalization of Aether concept - but the science is not (supposed to be) a popularity contest.

Reply

flared0ne

395 Comments

  • 656 Days Ago
  • 04/28/2010

Zephir, sorry, but you don't seem to understand.

There IS no "revitalization of Aether concept" -- that concept was dealt with and killed off back in Freshman Physics. Period. Done. End of story. Stop it already. There is nothing new to learn there, and particularly NOT from the mishmash of stuff you keep throwing together.

You have built up this whole belief system and keep pushing it as worthwhile. Except nobody wants to keep revisiting the same stale old obsolete fantasies. Which explains, I'm afraid, why you keep hanging around here -- because you keep grasping at straws, hoping to find some new re-interpretation that WILL provide new life (or at least new "oh, look -- shiny!") to what you're still clinging to. Unfortunately, that isn't going to work. It can't. No chance.

Because, among other things, those actual hypotheses regarding the existence of "Aether" allowed for several different predictions which, if "Aether" existed, could be proven.

And those predictions HAVE been proven to be false.

Give it up. It isn't a matter of "belief", or "popularity", or "wishful thinking" -- it is a matter of your hypothesis doesn't work, its "Reality Check" has bounced -- it repeatably fails several significant tests, past any point of deniability or rational disagreement.

But if you really want to know the worst part? Your insistence on a particular "foundation" underlying all your babble may actually be doing damage, in the sense that there MAY be a useful concept floating around out here -- and your "look at me, look at me" is getting in the way of SEEING the possibly useful stuff. Tiring, already.

Oh, and just a side-note: "mirror matter" doesn't believe in the concept of YOU, either.

Note to self: leave this alone. It isn't worth the time to read his cruft, it definitely isn't worth the time anyone puts into trying to explain what is so obviously incomprehensible to him.

Note to others: no point in responding to him, it just encourages him.

My apologies. Moving on. Back to REALITY, the Interesting Stuff. This could be such a powerful venue for meaningful discussion, too...

Reply

smithsomian

182 Comments

  • 650 Days Ago
  • 05/04/2010

Re: Zephir, sorry, but you don't seem to understand.

Correct, I believe i have already sufficiently challenged him to actually come up with something here, he doesn't even seem to be able to specify his own 'theory'. He couldn't even give one example. (btw this is bugmenot account)

Reply

ZephirAWT

299 Comments

  • 650 Days Ago
  • 05/04/2010

Re: Zephir, sorry, but you don't seem to understand.

A new preprint: The Physics Surrounding the Michelson-Morley Experiment and a New Aether Theory
http://arxiv.org/abs/1004.0716


Eddington on aether

http://arxiv.org/abs/1004.0716

Eddington who supposedly proved Einstein’s Relativity in 1919 believed in aether, too. Many relativity texts falsely present that aether has been disproved by relativity - so it’s worth looking at Eddington on this issue.

Reply

ZephirAWT

299 Comments

  • 656 Days Ago
  • 04/28/2010

There IS no "revitalization of Aether concept"

See my review here:

http://tinyurl.com/39lk3pf

New articles supporting aether concept appear daily - just compare the recent models of Universe by interior of black hole or the comparison of light wave and internal waves in water

http://tinyurl.com/2vsb4e6
http://tinyurl.com/odmg

http://www.physorg.com/news191657531.html
http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v104/i11/e118501

And those predictions HAVE been proven to be false.... which one, for example?

Reply

hans1694

1 Comment

  • 651 Days Ago
  • 05/03/2010

Re: There IS no "revitalization of Aether concept"

None of those articles reference aether in any way. The first one is about black holes as being the force that created the big bang, which one has nothing to do with aether, and two is speculation at best. The second is about internal waves, which once again have absolutely nothing to do with aether, and occur in fluids, the atmosphere, or astrophysical bodies, all of which require a traditional medium consisting of matter to work.

As far as the experiments that eliminated any need  or practicality of luminiferous aether is the very famous Michelson-Morley experiment which was designed to detect aether, but failed instead more than 100 years ago and the results have been verified with greater precision more than a dozen times. I don't think the other poster was trying to be mean, but the aether medium your proposing simply isn't necessary and has been proven as such, which in science terms means it doesn't exist. While there are modern "aether" theories, they are nothing more than equivalence theories, such as dark energy, and have nothing to do with the aether you are proposing.

Reply

flared0ne

395 Comments

  • 650 Days Ago
  • 05/04/2010

Re: There IS no "revitalization of Aether concept"

Not trying to be mean, rather trying to be blunt -- his horse is tenderized already. Most of us have his refrain memorized, just to simplify recognition and automatic discard. And as I've mentioned (sadly) some of his concepts, if not weighed down by his proselytizing, MIGHT have some value as thought experiments if they didn't have an obsolete foregone conclusion so visibly embedded. Have to recognize his persistence in the face of futility, at least...

I don't know about anyone else who frequents these domains, but I come here to find rigorously considered 'connections' that I would otherwise probably not encounter; fertilizer, as it were, for an active mind...

Unfortunately, some of what I find here qualifies a little too literally as "fertilizer", and after a while I start to take it as a challenge to attempt to explain the apparently-overlooked etiquette underlying participation here. Since it seems like we are otherwise essentially unmoderated -- and since nobody seems to be proffering an "Ignore" function...

About my only other recourse is to make a conscious habit of rating people as to the value (or lack thereof) of their contributions. Doesn't accomplish much, but perhaps provides a clue to "the innocent" in first encounters.

Reply

Advertisement

Soinium

1 Comment

  • 651 Days Ago
  • 05/03/2010

Shadow universe

Fascinating...  Any possibility that at time = zero (big bang), when the universe started to expand from a single point to our side, antimatter tunneled through the light speed barrier and formed a “shadow universe” where reversed arrow of time, imaginary rest mass and right-handed interactions rule?

Reply

rboblee

8 Comments

  • 651 Days Ago
  • 05/03/2010

The Universe as Accountant


When any normal matter falls through the event horizon of a black hole, it literally accelerates and then exceeds the ability for light to report its existence, but gravity still accounts for it as an increase in the mass of an infinitesimal point in spacetime.

General relativity expresses this as a "pop" from normal numeric spatial dimensions, to imaginary numeric space, as the Lorentz contraction factor incorporates the square root of a negative number.

The common response by today's physicists is that physics has nothing to say when this happens, but actually it does.

Matter that exceeds the speed of light in velocity mathematically traverses to a trajectory that is orthogonal to the normal spatial-temporal dimensions. It enters a hyper-dimensional space and becomes undetectable, leaving behind only its gravitic effects as a chit for maintaining the accounts of the Universe with respect to conservation of matter, energy, and information.

Note that the perfusion of dark matter throughout galactic structure is not an even distribution: It appears to clump and cluster normal matter, especially along the spiral arms of galaxies, and especially towards the central super-massive blackholes of each galaxy.

This suggests a causal relation between blackholes and dark matter:

If you think of each super-massive blackhole as a gigantic blender with blades of gravity backed with the speed-of-light, dark matter is nothing more than the hyper-accelerated particulate detritus of matter that has fallen into that blender, the gravitic tallies of spaghetti-ized matter that no longer extends into normal spatial dimensions, but instead has entered a hyper-lightspeed escape trajectory away from the blackhole. It's point-mass does not join the blackhole: Instead, the point-mass perfuses into the neighboring space, joining an almost uncountable host of other point-masses like a gravitic gas leak, leading to the expansion of space.

What prevents normal matter from falling into these femto-blackholes is quantum physics. Uncertainty principal prevents the absolute certainty of dark matter from accreting normal Fermionic matter.

Given the age of the universe, this perspective makes sense: If at the edge of the universe, there is an expanding shell of dark matter just beyond the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation, it could be dense enough to cause the expansion acceleration noted by the Cosmological Constant, with a sufficient gravitic gradient to continue to accelerate normal matter from billions of lightyears away.

For us, the universe is expanding outward to the end-of-time, where our sense of time effectively stops due to time-dilation effects as matter accelerates towards the speed-of-light.

A common-sense idea is that a galaxy's largest concentration of dark matter should persist along its galactic plane, mapping closely to the region of space most likely to see centrifugal releases of dark matter from the central super-massive blackhole.

From here until December 12, 2012, one might hypothesize an increase in dark matter interactions as the Solar System crosses the Milky Way's plane. There may be a gradual increase in local gravity as the dark matter density increases during the crossing of the galactic plane. On the other hand, it could also be a turbulent crossing, the result of dark matter wind storms issued by the Milky Way's central blackhole thousands of lightyears in the past.

In the small, an increase in local gravity forces may not be easily detected on Earth, but in the large, the Sun's solar activity could increase as fusion reaction rates increase.

A postscript: One intriguing thought is that when matter exceeds the speed of light, that is when it "pops" into a hyper-dimensional spacetime, it can do so at the "origin" of that alternate space-time, where its relative clock time is Zero: Basically, cross the event-horizon of a blackhole, and that hyperized matter participates in the moment of the Big Bang in that alternate space-time.

This would cap an interesting cosmic zero-sum game, with the speed-of-light as the game's starter, referee, and ultimate scorekeeper.

Reply

smithsomian

182 Comments

  • 650 Days Ago
  • 05/04/2010

Re: The Universe as Accountant

Nice word salad. Do it with the actual GR field equations.

Reply

flared0ne

395 Comments

  • 650 Days Ago
  • 05/04/2010

The Universe: NOT a CPA

rboblee, you start out fine, with "it literally accelerates and then exceeds the ability for light to report..." but then there's a gap, just a little later in your discussion, that invalidates the majority of the remainder...

That gap occurs when you use the phrase "Matter that exceeds the speed of light in velocity". Because (so far as we currently know) the speed of light is an absolute upper limit, directly associated with the upper limit on the transfer of the information associated with position, energy, mass, etc. -- that transfer commonly known as "motion".

Event Horizon: the spherical surface around a black hole, defined by where the acceleration due to gravity is such that photons influenced by inbound matter are unable to travel outward from that surface, a near equivalent to "total internal reflection".

In the absence of significantly weird topologies (various types of toroidal singularities have been hypothesized with interesting 'frame-drag' inertial-cancellation possibilities) any quantity of matter intersecting an event horizon is subjected to tidal shear forces exceeding ALL possible bonding energies.

I don't know if there is a formal name for the equivalent "shell" where the acceleration due to gravity, applied to the mass of a particle, yields a speed which equals or exceeds the speed of light -- quite possibly that 'surface' is essentially the same as the event horizon.

Black Hole = Ultimate Cosmic "Shredder"; Matter goes in, gets stripped down to fundamental particles, then disappears completely from our ken.

NOBODY has anything more than hypotheses about what happens to these fundamental particles. I believe there are theories dealing with the information "lost to the universe", but those theories are evolving daily. Most do NOT include hyperspatial contexts. Sadly. Personally I still hope for FTL at some point, and I AM intrigued by what is left behind when you decouple all possibly-identifying information from a particle (i.e., when all that is left is E/(c^2), which means what? and contributes to a gravitational field how?)... But I digress...

Meanwhile, there appears to be a consensus that the concept of "singularity" means "NO way to know what happens behind that curtain -- nothing meaningful comes out, as far as anyone can prove."

So everything from about your second paragraph on down becomes unsupported fantasy built upon fanciful "hypothesis" based upon a cracked foundation. And as soon as you throw in a reference to 2012, well... Next?

"Word salad" -- nice descriptor.

Reply

Pug1

1 Comment

  • 11 Days Ago
  • 02/02/2012

Re: The Universe: NOT a CPA

in my oppinion you are all fighting and belly aching about the same thing.....half of it is a hoxe the other half hasn't been proven....

Reply

bigbangno

1 Comment

  • 641 Days Ago
  • 05/13/2010

I'm against Universe expansion and have a blog over it:

For example a question: - The universe expand in any radius at light speed: How can accelerate? At what speed expand the diameter (radius x 2)?

This and more questions, doubts, proofs and hypothesis agains Universe expansion in http://bigbangno.wordpress.com

Thanks.

Reply

Bio

The Physics arXiv Blog produces daily coverage of the best new ideas from an online forum called the Physics arXiv on which scientists post early versions of their latest ideas. Contact me at KentuckyFC @ arxivblog.com

Follow The Physics arXiv Blog on Twitter

Subscribe to the arXiv blog RSS Feed

Advertisement
Advertisement

Facebook

Advertisement