Go Back   Science Forums > Physical Sciences Forums > Alternative theories
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 06-30-2009   #121 (permalink)
Moontanman's Avatar
Astounding Vision


Location:
South Eastern North Carolina, Cape Fear Region
 
Moontanman has a reputation beyond reputeMoontanman has a reputation beyond reputeMoontanman has a reputation beyond reputeMoontanman has a reputation beyond reputeMoontanman has a reputation beyond reputeMoontanman has a reputation beyond reputeMoontanman has a reputation beyond reputeMoontanman has a reputation beyond reputeMoontanman has a reputation beyond reputeMoontanman has a reputation beyond reputeMoontanman has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Moontanman
 



Neutral  +1 score     
Re: The Dominium model by Hasanuddin

If your idea of antimatter repelling matter gravitationally is proven to be wrong by experiments that will hopefully be done in the next few years would this totally negate your idea? While I do not claim any expertise in this field I have often considered the possibility of repulsion between the two. The idea does seem to be intuitively sound.

Another thing I would like to ask but do not want to hijack your thread to do so is this. does Mirror Matter figure into your hypothesis in any way? I have communicated with Dr. Foot, a leading proponent of Mirror Matter about ways to detect the presence of Mirror Matter on the earth. He seems to be caught in a similar snafu with Mirror Matter. Since it has not been detected it would seem to be just another hypothesis but some experiments have suggested it's presence. Does your idea have any bearing on Mirror Matter?


----------------
Michael
Life is the poetry of the universe.
Love is the poetry of life.

Nuclear is the only real option!
http://www.nuclearspace.com/Liberty_ship_menupg.aspx

Over heard from a three year old, "Daddy why do my toes get sticky when I eat strawberry jam?"

Never wrestle a troll. You both get dirty and the troll likes it

Proud graduate of Wossamotta University!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2009   #122 (permalink)
Hasanuddin's Avatar
Questioning


Location:
Boston, MA USA
 
Hasanuddin is a glorious beacon of lightHasanuddin is a glorious beacon of lightHasanuddin is a glorious beacon of lightHasanuddin is a glorious beacon of light
 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Re: The Dominium model by Hasanuddin

Hi Moontanman,

Yes, is the straightforward answer to your question
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moontanman View Post
If your idea of antimatter repelling matter gravitationally is proven to be wrong by experiments that will hopefully be done in the next few years would this totally negate your idea?
If the AEGIS project categorically shows that matter and antimatter gravitationally attract, then game over. I’ll collect my marbles and leave the playground. The Dominium model is a falsifiable construct. The central premise is its cornerstone, dislodge that and everything falls.

There are two other outcomes that could come out of AEGIS, and/or other current experiments seeking to discover the gravitational relationship between matter and antimatter:

2: Gravitational repulsion is indicated. Although this outcome wouldn’t “prove” the entire model… it would go a long way in that direction & certainly it would change many minds/opinions.

3: Inconclusive results. This is the most dreaded of outcomes. Honestly, I’m getting tired of the uncertainty. Margins of error could easily be so wide that nothing significant is shown. That would be a much bigger disappointment than having the model negated. Showing the actual relationship between matter and antimatter (even at the expense of the Dominium) would be a scientific advancement. Inconclusive results would mean essentially nothing. Therefore my fingers are crossed that something tangible/significant results.

As far as your 2nd question is concerned the simple answer is “no.”
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moontanman View Post
Another thing I would like to ask but do not want to hijack your thread to do so is this. does Mirror Matter figure into your hypothesis in any way?
I like this question because it highlights one of the most compelling aspects of the Dominium model. This model requires no never-before-measured exotic “things” to make the deductive conclusions flow to match the empirically known physical world. I’ve called such devices in many popular theories “djinnis” because like a djinni, such devices magically solve problems & sticking points (paradoxes) between theory and actual data; and like djinnis, their magic is often too good to be real. The Dominium requires no new form of exotic energy, no branes, no extra dimensions, … none of that stuff. The only thing required for the Dominium model to deductively flow is that matter and antimatter gravitationally repel… which cycles back to your first question and potential tests of that hypothesis.

BTW: I find it absolutely amazing that we’ve come this far as a scientific community collective and a question as fundamental as the gravitational relationship between matter and antimatter has been left unanswered. Even more amazing than that is that until recently most folks within the scientific community seemed unaware of this hole in our understanding.


----------------
In comparison to the Universe we are all much more puny and more short-lived than microbes
Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2009   #123 (permalink)
CraigD's Avatar
Creating

Administrator
Editor

Location:
Silver Spring, MD, USA
 
CraigD has a reputation beyond reputeCraigD has a reputation beyond reputeCraigD has a reputation beyond reputeCraigD has a reputation beyond reputeCraigD has a reputation beyond reputeCraigD has a reputation beyond reputeCraigD has a reputation beyond reputeCraigD has a reputation beyond reputeCraigD has a reputation beyond reputeCraigD has a reputation beyond reputeCraigD has a reputation beyond repute
 



Not Ranked  0 score     
Post Possible AEgIS experiment outcomes

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hasanuddin View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moontanman View Post
If your idea of antimatter repelling matter gravitationally is proven to be wrong by experiments that will hopefully be done in the next few years would this totally negate your idea?
If the AEGIS project categorically shows that matter and antimatter gravitationally attract, then game over. I’ll collect my marbles and leave the playground. The Dominium model is a falsifiable construct. The central premise is its cornerstone, dislodge that and everything falls.
Its falsifiability is an important feature, as, IMHO, it makes the Dominium model scientific, regardless of any criticism of it.

It’s also fortunate that the model is being discussed at the same time that the first time in the roughly 80 years that antimatter has been known to science, experiments to directly and unambiguously test its central premise – that antimatter and matter are gravitationally repulsive – is possible, and nearing completion by the AEgIS collaboration.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hasanuddin View Post
There are two other outcomes that could come out of AEGIS, and/or other current experiments seeking to discover the gravitational relationship between matter and antimatter…
I think Hasanuddin’s list is too small, missing a major class of possible result - the one, in fact, on which much of the effort of the experiment’s design and engineering is focused (begging pardon for the physics experimentalist pun):

4: Gravitational attraction is observed, but with a lower apparent gravitational constant (G) that observed for matter-to-matter attraction.

The planned AEgIS experiment should be able to detect variations in G of about 1%.

My guess is that it’ll reveal either outcome #1 - No difference in G, or #4 – A very small reduction in G.

If outcome #4 is observed, an explanation might be that antimatter and matter gravitationally repel, but only for particles that are distinguishable from their antiparticles – that is, in conventional particle physics terms, for fundamental particles what are not their own antiparticles. If this is the case, then for the reasons I discussed in post #63, the observed value of G should be about 97.3% of usual, a difference that should be detectable by the experiment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hasanuddin View Post
3: Inconclusive results. This is the most dreaded of outcomes.

Margins of error could easily be so wide that nothing significant is shown.
I don’t believe we need worry about this outcome, because CERN’s antihydrogen production ability has become very reliable, and its instrumentation is simple, reliable, and accurate to its stated precision. As with any gravitational deflection experiment involving very small particles, the major threats to this experiment appears to be uncontrolled charge, because the electromagnetic interaction of the particles involved are so much stronger than their gravitational. A failure of the experiment’s beam to consist of neutral antihydrogen, but instead contain many ions, would ruin it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hasanuddin View Post
Honestly, I’m getting tired of the uncertainty.
I can’t think of anybody who likes large margins of error in experimental setups. The task for an experimentalist is to design experiments and build apparatus to minimize it - one of the most demanding jobs on Earth.


----------------
Moderator: Computers and Technology; Medical Science; Science Projects and Homework; Philosophy of Science; Physics and Mathematics; Environmental Studies
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Origin of the Universe,,,,Bang or no Bang Harry Costas Astronomy and Cosmology 860 07-17-2009 07:32 AM
Relativity discussion from "Origin of the Universe,,,,Bang or no Bang" Little Bang Physics and Mathematics 7 05-21-2008 06:58 AM
Origin of the Universe: No Bang, Splash! (New theory) SlipString Astronomy and Cosmology 11 02-22-2007 04:07 AM
Bang! The Complete History of the Universe coldcreation Astronomy and Cosmology 4 12-18-2006 06:36 AM

» Advertisement
» Current Poll
Should Hypography have a forum dedicated to Plant Sciences?
Yes - 69.57%
16 Votes
No - 13.04%
3 Votes
Maybe - 17.39%
4 Votes
Total Votes: 23
You may not vote on this poll.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:17 AM.

Hypography?

Hypography [n.]: A combination of "hyperlink" and "bibliography" - ie, a list of links to electronic documents. Comparable to discography and bibliography, but not cartography.

We have been online since May 2000, and aim to be the best place to find and share science-related content of all kinds.

Share the love!

Please add more science to your life. Use our RSS feeds on your blog, your portal, or your favorite feedreader!


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.3.2
Copyright © 2000-2009 Hypography
Part of the Hypography - Science for Everyone Network