Re: [Vo]:Dark Matter as a "sterile antineutron" and the LENR connection
There is stillsquabbling over LIGO at the moment "An illusion": Grave doubts over LIGO's'discovery' of gravitational waves Michael Brooks New Scientist Sat, 01 Dec 2018 12:00 UTC https://www.sott.net/article/399642-An-illusion-Grave-doubts-over-LIGOs-discovery-of-gravitational-waves Then there is thepetition asking for LIGO to explain themselves: PETITION TEXT IN ENGLISH Prof. Karsten Danzmann, please answer 3 questions on the measurementof gravitational waves in connection with the LIGO Experiment. https://www.change.org/p/prof-karsten-danzmann-beantworten-sie-bitte-3-fragen-%C3%BCber-das-ligo-experiment On Wednesday, 5 December 2018, 23:25:02 GMT, CB Sites wrote: Jones Beene is correct in that this should be falsifiable. I think LIGO could possibly detect this. Let's say a gravitational wave was moving across a void in the deep reaches of space where a negative mass value might be hiding. Wouldn't a gravitational wave be dampened if it was on the opposite side of the LIGO detector's direction? Would there be a dampened gravitational wave signal from far distances not seen or accounted for compared to closer object signals? On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 5:17 PM Jones Beene wrote: A negative mass theory like this should be falsifiable in a straightforward way using an ultra-precision scale and ultra-high vacuum system to measure the very tiny decrease in weight of a vacuum chamber as it is being pumped. The whole system could be mounted on levered arms. The drop in mass as the vacuum increases should be out of proportion with the drop in mass at higher pressure. IOW the last few atoms removed should seem to weigh proportionately more, no? From: CB Sites Wow. I just read a science brief on a new theory that explains Dark-matter and Dark-energy in a very odd way. Ponder this one for a moment. Empty space has a negative mass. Not zero mass but something with a minus sign in front of it! This is a new model worked out by Dr. Jamie Farnes of the Oxford e-Research Centre published in 'Astronomy and Astrophysics'. So because empty space has negative mass, it has negative gravity and thus the universe is accelerating as it expands from negative gravity. Maybe CNF has tapped into negative mass in the empty space of the lattice voids? Or maybe it's more like stuff from the old movie 'Flubber'. Either way, it's an interesting perspective on Dark matter and Dark energy. CB Sites wrote: Sometimes you stumble on to a story from a source you don't expect. Forbes had this write up on Erik Verlinde's theory(s) and I think it will give insight to others why Dark matter may simply be an emergent effect by the quantum occupation of space/time by matter. No hard details but a nice overview from Forbes; https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/02/28/is-dark-matter-about-to-be-killed-by-emergent-gravity/#70bcb0d05359 That doesn't mean that something couldn't be oscillating in neutrons makeup. It would just be hard to explain give how baryons decay and morph. See; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_baryonsand https://www.revolvy.com/page/List-of-particles is also interesting. https://www.revolvy.com/page/List-of-baryons points to the problem with dark matter. If it's a baryon, it doesn't fit with anything we know. Jones Beene wrote: I like Erik Verlinde's theory and papers. Definitely worth a read. Some of his thinking is consistent with the "mirror matter" proposition, so long as the mystery particles are generally located in a parallel dimension, so that they interact with normal matter minimally no matter how they are characterized... and which dimension has remarkable similarity to Dirac's reciprocal space. To claim that something (mysterious) is an emergent property of something else (better known) is framing the problem philosophically and of limited value in pointing to a real-world application unless the particles are literally emerging from one dimension into another dimension - aka: mirror matter oscillation. Admittedly, most of this is well above my pay grade to comprehend - so unless there is a particularly useful aspect of any theory which can be incorporated into LENR experiment, it is more like flag-waving. When a researcher says he has evidence that 1% of any neutron beam oscillates so as to exhibit the properties of a different kind of neutron ... and can decay in our 3-space even if came from another space - that sounds like a detail which can be useful somehow and incorporated into experiment. The more one looks at the Bush/Eagleton rubidium experiment, the more it seems to do this (despite the inventors being completely wrong on their own explanation), In LENR it seems there is a high probability that hydrogen morphs into "something else" when confined in a metal matrix - and which species may not be the result of nuclear fusion per se. Having a better
Re: [Vo]:Dark Matter as a "sterile antineutron" and the LENR connection
Oh. It's on Arxiv.org. https://arvix.org/abs/1712.07962 On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 4:43 PM CB Sites wrote: > Wow. I just read a science brief on a new theory that explains > Dark-matter and Dark-energy in a very odd way. Ponder this one for a > moment. Empty space has a negative mass. Not zero mass but something with > a minus sign in front of it! This is a new model worked out by Dr. Jamie > Farnes of the Oxford e-Research Centre published in 'Astronomy and > Astrophysics'. So because empty space has negative mass, it has negative > gravity and thus the universe is accelerating as it expands from negative > gravity. > > Maybe CNF has tapped into negative mass in the empty space of the lattice > voids? Or maybe it's more like stuff from the old movie 'Flubber'. Either > way, it's an interesting perspective on Dark matter and Dark energy. > > > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 11:23 AM CB Sites wrote: > >> Sometimes you stumble on to a story from a source you don't expect. >> Forbes had this write up on Erik Verlinde's theory(s) and I think it will >> give insight to others why Dark matter may simply be an emergent effect by >> the quantum occupation of space/time by matter. No hard details but a >> nice overview from Forbes; >> >> >> https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/02/28/is-dark-matter-about-to-be-killed-by-emergent-gravity/#70bcb0d05359 >> >> That doesn't mean that something couldn't be oscillating in neutrons >> makeup. It would just be hard to explain give how baryons decay and >> morph. See; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_baryons >> and https://www.revolvy.com/page/List-of-particles is also >> interesting. https://www.revolvy.com/page/List-of-baryons points to >> the problem with dark matter. If it's a baryon, it doesn't fit with >> anything we know. >> >> >> On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 10:20 AM Jones Beene wrote: >> >>> >>> I like Erik Verlinde's theory and papers. Definitely worth a read. >>> >>> Some of his thinking is consistent with the "mirror matter" proposition, >>> so long as the mystery particles are generally located in a parallel >>> dimension, so that they interact with normal matter minimally no matter how >>> they are characterized... and which dimension has remarkable similarity to >>> Dirac's reciprocal space. To claim that something (mysterious) is an >>> emergent property of something else (better known) is framing the problem >>> philosophically and of limited value in pointing to a real-world >>> application unless the particles are literally emerging from one dimension >>> into another dimension - aka: mirror matter oscillation. >>> >>> Admittedly, most of this is well above my pay grade to comprehend - so >>> unless there is a particularly useful aspect of any theory which can be >>> incorporated into LENR experiment, it is more like flag-waving. When a >>> researcher says he has evidence that 1% of any neutron beam oscillates so >>> as to exhibit the properties of a different kind of neutron ... and can >>> decay in our 3-space even if came from another space - that sounds like a >>> detail which can be useful somehow and incorporated into experiment. The >>> more one looks at the Bush/Eagleton rubidium experiment, the more it seems >>> to do this (despite the inventors being completely wrong on their own >>> explanation), >>> >>> In LENR it seems there is a high probability that hydrogen morphs into >>> "something else" when confined in a metal matrix - and which species may >>> not be the result of nuclear fusion per se. Having a better understanding >>> of the properties of that particle would be important - especially if it >>> has some broader relevance to a Universal phenomena like dark matter. >>> >>> -- >>> *From:* CB Sites >>> >>> Every story on dark matter simply leaves me confused and perplexed. >>> The first question I would ask is what is the spin of dark matter. Is it >>> a fermion or boson? If it's a fermion, it has to interact and if it >>> interacts why is it nearly impossible to see the interaction. If it's a >>> Boson, then it would tend to undergo condensation, and you would have a >>> bose star or a dark matter black hole. That too should be easy to observe >>> as a gravitational lens without a source of matter to create it. Both >>> have led me to conclude that dark matter is part of the concept of Emergent >>> Gravity (Entropic Gravity). Emergent gravity (and emergent dark matter) >>> doesn't have spin but would effect matter gravitationally and be associated >>> with matter since it appears out of the warping of small amounts space/time >>> by the occupation of matter and the entropic warping of space-time from >>> matter.This is all from Erik Verlinde's theory. It's good stuff and >>> I don't understand why it's not the leading candidate for a dark matter >>> explanation. >>> >>>
Re: [Vo]:Dark Matter as a "sterile antineutron" and the LENR connection
A negative mass theory like this should be falsifiable in a straightforward way using an ultra-precision scale and ultra-high vacuum system to measure the very tiny decrease in weight of a vacuum chamber as it is being pumped. The whole system could be mounted on levered arms. The drop in mass as the vacuum increases should be out of proportion with the drop in mass at higher pressure. IOW the last few atoms removed should seem to weigh proportionately more, no? From: CB Sites Wow. I just read a science brief on a new theory that explains Dark-matter and Dark-energy in a very odd way. Ponder this one for a moment. Empty space has a negative mass. Not zero mass but something with a minus sign in front of it! This is a new model worked out by Dr. Jamie Farnes of the Oxford e-Research Centre published in 'Astronomy and Astrophysics'. So because empty space has negative mass, it has negative gravity and thus the universe is accelerating as it expands from negative gravity. Maybe CNF has tapped into negative mass in the empty space of the lattice voids? Or maybe it's more like stuff from the old movie 'Flubber'. Either way, it's an interesting perspective on Dark matter and Dark energy. CB Sites wrote: Sometimes you stumble on to a story from a source you don't expect. Forbes had this write up on Erik Verlinde's theory(s) and I think it will give insight to others why Dark matter may simply be an emergent effect by the quantum occupation of space/time by matter. No hard details but a nice overview from Forbes; https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/02/28/is-dark-matter-about-to-be-killed-by-emergent-gravity/#70bcb0d05359 That doesn't mean that something couldn't be oscillating in neutrons makeup. It would just be hard to explain give how baryons decay and morph. See; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_baryonsand https://www.revolvy.com/page/List-of-particles is also interesting. https://www.revolvy.com/page/List-of-baryons points to the problem with dark matter. If it's a baryon, it doesn't fit with anything we know. Jones Beene wrote: I like Erik Verlinde's theory and papers. Definitely worth a read. Some of his thinking is consistent with the "mirror matter" proposition, so long as the mystery particles are generally located in a parallel dimension, so that they interact with normal matter minimally no matter how they are characterized... and which dimension has remarkable similarity to Dirac's reciprocal space. To claim that something (mysterious) is an emergent property of something else (better known) is framing the problem philosophically and of limited value in pointing to a real-world application unless the particles are literally emerging from one dimension into another dimension - aka: mirror matter oscillation. Admittedly, most of this is well above my pay grade to comprehend - so unless there is a particularly useful aspect of any theory which can be incorporated into LENR experiment, it is more like flag-waving. When a researcher says he has evidence that 1% of any neutron beam oscillates so as to exhibit the properties of a different kind of neutron ... and can decay in our 3-space even if came from another space - that sounds like a detail which can be useful somehow and incorporated into experiment. The more one looks at the Bush/Eagleton rubidium experiment, the more it seems to do this (despite the inventors being completely wrong on their own explanation), In LENR it seems there is a high probability that hydrogen morphs into "something else" when confined in a metal matrix - and which species may not be the result of nuclear fusion per se. Having a better understanding of the properties of that particle would be important - especially if it has some broader relevance to a Universal phenomena like dark matter. From: CB Sites Every story on dark matter simply leaves me confused and perplexed. The first question I would ask is what is the spin of dark matter. Is it a fermion or boson? If it's a fermion, it has to interact and if it interacts why is it nearly impossible to see the interaction. If it's a Boson, then it would tend to undergo condensation, and you would have a bose star or a dark matter black hole. That too should be easy to observe as a gravitational lens without a source of matter to create it. Both have led me to conclude that dark matter is part of the concept of Emergent Gravity (Entropic Gravity). Emergent gravity (and emergent dark matter) doesn't have spin but would effect matter gravitationally and be associated with matter since it appears out of the warping of small amounts space/time by the occupation of matter and the entropic warping of space-time from matter. This is all from Erik Verlinde's theory. It's good stuff and I don't understand why it's not the leading candidate for a dark matter explanation.
Re: [Vo]:Dark Matter as a "sterile antineutron" and the LENR connection
Sorry; If you saw this previously, apparently I made a typo in the URL. It should be; https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.07962 On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 4:43 PM CB Sites wrote: > Wow. I just read a science brief on a new theory that explains > Dark-matter and Dark-energy in a very odd way. Ponder this one for a > moment. Empty space has a negative mass. Not zero mass but something with > a minus sign in front of it! This is a new model worked out by Dr. Jamie > Farnes of the Oxford e-Research Centre published in 'Astronomy and > Astrophysics'. So because empty space has negative mass, it has negative > gravity and thus the universe is accelerating as it expands from negative > gravity. > > Maybe CNF has tapped into negative mass in the empty space of the lattice > voids? Or maybe it's more like stuff from the old movie 'Flubber'. Either > way, it's an interesting perspective on Dark matter and Dark energy. > > > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 11:23 AM CB Sites wrote: > >> Sometimes you stumble on to a story from a source you don't expect. >> Forbes had this write up on Erik Verlinde's theory(s) and I think it will >> give insight to others why Dark matter may simply be an emergent effect by >> the quantum occupation of space/time by matter. No hard details but a >> nice overview from Forbes; >> >> >> https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/02/28/is-dark-matter-about-to-be-killed-by-emergent-gravity/#70bcb0d05359 >> >> That doesn't mean that something couldn't be oscillating in neutrons >> makeup. It would just be hard to explain give how baryons decay and >> morph. See; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_baryons >> and https://www.revolvy.com/page/List-of-particles is also >> interesting. https://www.revolvy.com/page/List-of-baryons points to >> the problem with dark matter. If it's a baryon, it doesn't fit with >> anything we know. >> >> >> On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 10:20 AM Jones Beene wrote: >> >>> >>> I like Erik Verlinde's theory and papers. Definitely worth a read. >>> >>> Some of his thinking is consistent with the "mirror matter" proposition, >>> so long as the mystery particles are generally located in a parallel >>> dimension, so that they interact with normal matter minimally no matter how >>> they are characterized... and which dimension has remarkable similarity to >>> Dirac's reciprocal space. To claim that something (mysterious) is an >>> emergent property of something else (better known) is framing the problem >>> philosophically and of limited value in pointing to a real-world >>> application unless the particles are literally emerging from one dimension >>> into another dimension - aka: mirror matter oscillation. >>> >>> Admittedly, most of this is well above my pay grade to comprehend - so >>> unless there is a particularly useful aspect of any theory which can be >>> incorporated into LENR experiment, it is more like flag-waving. When a >>> researcher says he has evidence that 1% of any neutron beam oscillates so >>> as to exhibit the properties of a different kind of neutron ... and can >>> decay in our 3-space even if came from another space - that sounds like a >>> detail which can be useful somehow and incorporated into experiment. The >>> more one looks at the Bush/Eagleton rubidium experiment, the more it seems >>> to do this (despite the inventors being completely wrong on their own >>> explanation), >>> >>> In LENR it seems there is a high probability that hydrogen morphs into >>> "something else" when confined in a metal matrix - and which species may >>> not be the result of nuclear fusion per se. Having a better understanding >>> of the properties of that particle would be important - especially if it >>> has some broader relevance to a Universal phenomena like dark matter. >>> >>> -- >>> *From:* CB Sites >>> >>> Every story on dark matter simply leaves me confused and perplexed. >>> The first question I would ask is what is the spin of dark matter. Is it >>> a fermion or boson? If it's a fermion, it has to interact and if it >>> interacts why is it nearly impossible to see the interaction. If it's a >>> Boson, then it would tend to undergo condensation, and you would have a >>> bose star or a dark matter black hole. That too should be easy to observe >>> as a gravitational lens without a source of matter to create it. Both >>> have led me to conclude that dark matter is part of the concept of Emergent >>> Gravity (Entropic Gravity). Emergent gravity (and emergent dark matter) >>> doesn't have spin but would effect matter gravitationally and be associated >>> with matter since it appears out of the warping of small amounts space/time >>> by the occupation of matter and the entropic warping of space-time from >>> matter.This is all from Erik Verlinde's theory. It's good stuff and >>> I don't understand why it's not the leading candidate for a dark matter >>> explanation. >>> >>>
Re: [Vo]:Dark Matter as a "sterile antineutron" and the LENR connection
Jones Beene is correct in that this should be falsifiable. I think LIGO could possibly detect this. Let's say a gravitational wave was moving across a void in the deep reaches of space where a negative mass value might be hiding. Wouldn't a gravitational wave be dampened if it was on the opposite side of the LIGO detector's direction? Would there be a dampened gravitational wave signal from far distances not seen or accounted for compared to closer object signals? On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 5:17 PM Jones Beene wrote: > > A negative mass theory like this should be falsifiable in a > straightforward way using an ultra-precision scale and ultra-high vacuum > system to measure the very tiny decrease in weight of a vacuum chamber as > it is being pumped. The whole system could be mounted on levered arms. > > The drop in mass as the vacuum increases should be out of proportion with > the drop in mass at higher pressure. IOW the last few atoms removed should > seem to weigh proportionately more, no? > > > > > -- > *From:* CB Sites > > Wow. I just read a science brief on a new theory that explains > Dark-matter and Dark-energy in a very odd way. Ponder this one for a > moment. Empty space has a negative mass. Not zero mass but something with > a minus sign in front of it! This is a new model worked out by Dr. Jamie > Farnes of the Oxford e-Research Centre published in 'Astronomy and > Astrophysics'. So because empty space has negative mass, it has negative > gravity and thus the universe is accelerating as it expands from negative > gravity. > > Maybe CNF has tapped into negative mass in the empty space of the lattice > voids? Or maybe it's more like stuff from the old movie 'Flubber'. Either > way, it's an interesting perspective on Dark matter and Dark energy. > > > > CB Sites wrote: > > Sometimes you stumble on to a story from a source you don't expect. > Forbes had this write up on Erik Verlinde's theory(s) and I think it will > give insight to others why Dark matter may simply be an emergent effect by > the quantum occupation of space/time by matter. No hard details but a > nice overview from Forbes; > > > https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/02/28/is-dark-matter-about-to-be-killed-by-emergent-gravity/#70bcb0d05359 > > That doesn't mean that something couldn't be oscillating in neutrons > makeup. It would just be hard to explain give how baryons decay and > morph. See; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_baryons > and https://www.revolvy.com/page/List-of-particles is also interesting. > https://www.revolvy.com/page/List-of-baryons points to the problem with > dark matter. If it's a baryon, it doesn't fit with anything we know. > > > Jones Beene wrote: > > > I like Erik Verlinde's theory and papers. Definitely worth a read. > > Some of his thinking is consistent with the "mirror matter" proposition, > so long as the mystery particles are generally located in a parallel > dimension, so that they interact with normal matter minimally no matter how > they are characterized... and which dimension has remarkable similarity to > Dirac's reciprocal space. To claim that something (mysterious) is an > emergent property of something else (better known) is framing the problem > philosophically and of limited value in pointing to a real-world > application unless the particles are literally emerging from one dimension > into another dimension - aka: mirror matter oscillation. > > Admittedly, most of this is well above my pay grade to comprehend - so > unless there is a particularly useful aspect of any theory which can be > incorporated into LENR experiment, it is more like flag-waving. When a > researcher says he has evidence that 1% of any neutron beam oscillates so > as to exhibit the properties of a different kind of neutron ... and can > decay in our 3-space even if came from another space - that sounds like a > detail which can be useful somehow and incorporated into experiment. The > more one looks at the Bush/Eagleton rubidium experiment, the more it seems > to do this (despite the inventors being completely wrong on their own > explanation), > > In LENR it seems there is a high probability that hydrogen morphs into > "something else" when confined in a metal matrix - and which species may > not be the result of nuclear fusion per se. Having a better understanding > of the properties of that particle would be important - especially if it > has some broader relevance to a Universal phenomena like dark matter. > > -- > *From:* CB Sites > > Every story on dark matter simply leaves me confused and perplexed. The > first question I would ask is what is the spin of dark matter. Is it a > fermion or boson? If it's a fermion, it has to interact and if it > interacts why is it nearly impossible to see the interaction. If it's a > Boson, then it would tend to undergo condensation, and you would have a > bose star or a dark
[Vo]:Re: Frequency reading app done
Try Voice Staff Free and tell me how it worked for you. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.znidarsic_science_books.voicestafffree Frank Z
[Vo]:Digitizing an old graph from Fleischmann
I am digitizing an important old graph from Fleischmann. The process is illustrated here: https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/5782-digitizing-an-old-graph-from-fleischmann/?postID=98837#post98837
Re: [Vo]:Dark Matter as a "sterile antineutron" and the LENR connection
Wow. I just read a science brief on a new theory that explains Dark-matter and Dark-energy in a very odd way. Ponder this one for a moment. Empty space has a negative mass. Not zero mass but something with a minus sign in front of it! This is a new model worked out by Dr. Jamie Farnes of the Oxford e-Research Centre published in 'Astronomy and Astrophysics'. So because empty space has negative mass, it has negative gravity and thus the universe is accelerating as it expands from negative gravity. Maybe CNF has tapped into negative mass in the empty space of the lattice voids? Or maybe it's more like stuff from the old movie 'Flubber'. Either way, it's an interesting perspective on Dark matter and Dark energy. On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 11:23 AM CB Sites wrote: > Sometimes you stumble on to a story from a source you don't expect. > Forbes had this write up on Erik Verlinde's theory(s) and I think it will > give insight to others why Dark matter may simply be an emergent effect by > the quantum occupation of space/time by matter. No hard details but a > nice overview from Forbes; > > > https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/02/28/is-dark-matter-about-to-be-killed-by-emergent-gravity/#70bcb0d05359 > > That doesn't mean that something couldn't be oscillating in neutrons > makeup. It would just be hard to explain give how baryons decay and > morph. See; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_baryons > and https://www.revolvy.com/page/List-of-particles is also interesting. > https://www.revolvy.com/page/List-of-baryons points to the problem with > dark matter. If it's a baryon, it doesn't fit with anything we know. > > > On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 10:20 AM Jones Beene wrote: > >> >> I like Erik Verlinde's theory and papers. Definitely worth a read. >> >> Some of his thinking is consistent with the "mirror matter" proposition, >> so long as the mystery particles are generally located in a parallel >> dimension, so that they interact with normal matter minimally no matter how >> they are characterized... and which dimension has remarkable similarity to >> Dirac's reciprocal space. To claim that something (mysterious) is an >> emergent property of something else (better known) is framing the problem >> philosophically and of limited value in pointing to a real-world >> application unless the particles are literally emerging from one dimension >> into another dimension - aka: mirror matter oscillation. >> >> Admittedly, most of this is well above my pay grade to comprehend - so >> unless there is a particularly useful aspect of any theory which can be >> incorporated into LENR experiment, it is more like flag-waving. When a >> researcher says he has evidence that 1% of any neutron beam oscillates so >> as to exhibit the properties of a different kind of neutron ... and can >> decay in our 3-space even if came from another space - that sounds like a >> detail which can be useful somehow and incorporated into experiment. The >> more one looks at the Bush/Eagleton rubidium experiment, the more it seems >> to do this (despite the inventors being completely wrong on their own >> explanation), >> >> In LENR it seems there is a high probability that hydrogen morphs into >> "something else" when confined in a metal matrix - and which species may >> not be the result of nuclear fusion per se. Having a better understanding >> of the properties of that particle would be important - especially if it >> has some broader relevance to a Universal phenomena like dark matter. >> >> -- >> *From:* CB Sites >> >> Every story on dark matter simply leaves me confused and perplexed. The >> first question I would ask is what is the spin of dark matter. Is it a >> fermion or boson? If it's a fermion, it has to interact and if it >> interacts why is it nearly impossible to see the interaction. If it's a >> Boson, then it would tend to undergo condensation, and you would have a >> bose star or a dark matter black hole. That too should be easy to observe >> as a gravitational lens without a source of matter to create it. Both >> have led me to conclude that dark matter is part of the concept of Emergent >> Gravity (Entropic Gravity). Emergent gravity (and emergent dark matter) >> doesn't have spin but would effect matter gravitationally and be associated >> with matter since it appears out of the warping of small amounts space/time >> by the occupation of matter and the entropic warping of space-time from >> matter.This is all from Erik Verlinde's theory. It's good stuff and >> I don't understand why it's not the leading candidate for a dark matter >> explanation. >> >>
