alt.sci.physics

David,

Thanks for responding. First, let me clarify a few points, as your
response seems to indicate I was unclear in some areas. 1)The
physicists discussing this topic on "The Universe" discounted black
holes as BEING dark matter because there simply are not enough of them
to produce its gravitational effects; What I suggested in my original
post was that black holes may EMIT it, which is a star of a different
magnitude. 2)Every time I used the words "We know" in my original
post, it was because those same physicists used that phrase when THEY
said it. 3)I realize it may be a matter of semantics, but it was said
on that same episode of "The Universe" that the normal matter in the
universe is sticking to the dark matter, not vice versa. Don't know
what, if any, difference that really makes.

Now that that's out of the way, let me address a few of the things you
said. The bulk of the statements you use to refute my argument center
around the fact that everything in the Universe must conform to its
natural laws. This is true; however, you are making the mistake of
assuming that just because we've been watching the game for a few
decades that we've learned the entire rulebook! The number of
contradictory paradoxes we've observed in these past few decades
should be enough to tell you we haven't! Case in point: Electrons in
orbit around the nucleus of an atom jump spontaneously from one orbit
to another with no apparent path between points A and B--a "quantum
jump." There are only two ways to explain this that I know of: The
electron is either shifting in and out of our Universe or else it is
exceeding the speed of light. Both of these explanations defy our
understanding of the laws of nature. Yet, our own observations of
this event tell us that one of these MUST be the case! Therefore, it
stands to reason that either there are some things in the Universe
that do not conform to all of its laws, or else that we do not yet
KNOW all the rules! It is, therefore possible to have a particle able
to move with enough velocity to escape a black hole without violating
the laws of physics!

You also said that we don't know that dark matter is not composed of
atoms. Well, unless there is an element on the periodic table that
I'm not aware of which contains no protons, neutrons OR electrons,
whatever dark matter is *cannot* be atomic in nature! If it were, it
wouldn't be "dark" because we would be able to detect it directly.

You also made the point that Hot Dark Matter would be fatal to the
Universe and not bound to galaxies. I have two things to say on
this. 1)I don't know about you, but I would call any force that will
one day cause the universe to pop like a cosmic balloon and then
dissipate "fatal"; and 2)Cold Dark Matter does exist, but it does not
discount the existence of Hot Dark Matter because, if all matter in
the universe follows the same set of laws then dark matter, like any
other particle in the universe, can--and does, because it MUST--exist
in various states of excitement.

Therefore, Hot Dark Matter WOULD conform to all the laws of physics,
including those that we've seen evidence of, but do not yet fully
understand. This brings me to another point in favor of the idea I
brought up in my original post: Dark Matter--Hot and Cold alike--
conforms to all the laws of physics, including the Newtonian laws. We
do know that when two objects collide, there is a transfer of momentum
between them. The slower object will speed up and the faster one will
slow down. Therefore it is possible that Hot Dark Matter colliding
with Cold IS the dark energy that is causing the expansion of the
universe to accelerate, as I suggested because the Hot would not just
rip through the cold and keep going at its original speed. Nor would
the Cold remain still upon the collision. The Hot would "cool off"
and slow down, while the Cold would "heat up" and gain speed, moving
with the momentum transferred to it. The normal matter fixed to the
Cold would simply move along with it!

Lastly, I will address your point about Hot Dark Matter not helping
Science by saying this: Neither does assuming that we know all the
rules and dismissing an idea just because we think we know better.
Science is helped by thinking outside the box. If we DIDN'T think
outside it, we'd all still be living on a tabletop in a geocentric
universe surrounded by crystal spheres!

Ok, I'm going to end this post here, as I am about to start waxing
philosophical.

Thanks for listening!

Jason :)