1
$\begingroup$

So far as I know attempts to detect new particle that responsible for the nature of dark matter/energy are not successful. And there are reasonable explanation for this, like energy levels we can get access on earth, sensitivity of detectors and so on.

Are there another views on what dark matter/energy is?

Are there any other theories that explains movements of galaxies, universe clustering and other observations (that lead us to assume dark matter existence) as an exotic states of space-time? And these states do not let matter within it to interacts with the rest of the universe in electromagnetic way (it affects gravity field only)?

For example, GR solutions allow existence of CTC. Causality principle still holds if CTC space-time is not reachable from the outside, i.e. it enclosed in a singularity shell that stops continuation of the smooth solutions of space-time trajectory.

I am not trying to say that dark matter is a clusters of CTCs. My question is: what are alternative explanation of observed phenomenon that is attributed to "dark matter particle"? Is view of dark matter/energy as an exotic state of space-time have obvious flaws?

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Are there another views on what dark matter/energy is?

Yes, but you tend not to hear about them because there's a presumption that dark matter consists of particles. This is despite Einstein saying "the energy of the gravitational field shall act gravitatively in the same way as any other kind of energy" in The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity. A gravitational field is a region of space where the energy-density is higher than free space. This spatial energy has a mass equivalence and a gravitational effect, but it isn't made of particles.

Are there any other theories that explains movements of galaxies, universe clustering and other observations (that lead us to assume dark matter existence) as an exotic states of space-time?

I don't know of any theories which propose an exotic state of space-time. But note that galaxies are gravitationally bound, and as per the raisin-cake analogy, "space expands between the galaxies but not within". So conservation of energy ought to mean that every galaxy is sitting in a halo of space with a higher energy-density than intergalactic space. One would expect this to have a mass equivalence and a gravitational effect, particularly for older galaxies.

I am not trying to say that dark matter is a clusters of CTCs.

Good, because a closed timelike curve is little more than a line on a map. It doesn't have a mass equivalence and a gravitational effect.

Is view of dark matter/energy as an exotic state of space-time have obvious flaws?

Dark energy isn't the same thing as dark matter, so let's set that aside for now. And there's nothing exotic about a gravitational field or the expanding universe or conservation of energy. I don't know if you know, but in this 1929 article Einstein described a field as "a state of space". So IMHO what we're probably talking about here is dark matter that is comprised of field rather than particles. I don't know of any obvious flaws with that. See Inhomogeneous and interacting vacuum energy on the arXiv for a paper that touches on this subject.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ thanks. I always appreciate references to articles about subject. $\endgroup$ – hOff May 6 '15 at 17:11

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.