tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315236707728759521.post247816134171113340..comments2018-02-17T11:45:25.769-07:00Comments on Dispatches From Turtle Island: Planck Data Bounds On Dark MatterAndrew Oh-Willekehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02537151821869153861noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315236707728759521.post-12508457029678156302015-04-14T10:24:13.713-06:002015-04-14T10:24:13.713-06:00Thanks for the link.
In their (Jussi Valiviita, E...Thanks for the link. <br />In their (Jussi Valiviita, Elina Palmgren) analysis, Dark-sector interaction (energy transfer from dark matter to dark energy), they concluded {in the phantom models an interaction rate higher than 10% of the expansion rate, Γ/H0 = −0.16 (−0.12), led to an improvement of χ 2 by 3.9 (2.2) with CMB+BAO (CMB+BAO+lensing) data.The non-interacting model lied outside of the 95% CL interval ...}.<br /><br />Their conclusion is a good supporting point to my W = 9% in my dark energy/dark matter calculation.<br /><br />The key point of my calculation is that that framework gives rise to all calculations:<br />Alpha equation,<br />Vacuum Boson mass = 125.46 Gev<br />G-string language, etc.<br /><br />Being right once could be just happenstance. Being right every time at every point, it cannot be a coincidence.<br />Tienzenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05842156512465678309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315236707728759521.post-17249894398830217332015-04-13T03:39:37.425-06:002015-04-13T03:39:37.425-06:00Another paper on parameter bounds on dark matter m...Another paper on parameter bounds on dark matter models from Planck is <a href="http://arxiv.org/abs/1504.02464" rel="nofollow">here.</a>andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08172964121659914379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7315236707728759521.post-54981197905773268632015-04-08T11:53:15.598-06:002015-04-08T11:53:15.598-06:00"Dark matter: 10^17 years.
By comparison the..."Dark matter: 10^17 years. <br />By comparison the age of the universe is roughly 1.38 * 10^9 years.<br />This means that dark matter (if it exists) is at least as stable as anything other than a proton, at least 10^33 years."<br /><br />Amen!<br />For the Planck data (dark energy = 69.2; dark matter = 25.8; and visible matter = 4.82), it can be calculated (derived) with following equations.<br /><br />Among 48 fermions (quarks and leptons), only 7 of them are visible.<br /><br />So, the d/v (dark/visible ratio) = [41 (100 – W) % / 7]<br />When, W = 9 % (according to the AMS2 data), d/v = 5.33<br /><br />In this scheme, the space, time and mass form an *iceberg model*. <br /><br />Space = X<br />Time = Y<br />Total mass (universe) = Z<br />And X = Y = Z<br /><br />In an iceberg model (ice, ocean, sky), Z is ice while the (X + Y) is the ocean and sky, the energy ocean (or the dark energy). Yet, the ice (Z) will melt into the ocean (X + Y) with a ratio W.<br /><br />When W = 9%, <br />[(Z – V) x (100 – W) %] /5.33 = V, V is visible mass of this universe.<br />[(33.33 –V) x .91]/5.33 = V<br />V= 5.69048 / 1.17073 = 4.86 (while the Planck data is 4.82),<br />D (Dark mass) = [(Z – 4.86) x (100 – W) %] = [(33.33 -4.86) x .91] = 25.90 (while the Planck data = 25.8)<br /><br /><br />So, the total dark energy = (X + Y) + [(Z – 4.86) x W %)] = 66.66 + (28.47 x 0.09) = 69.22 (while the Planck data is 69.2)<br /><br /><br />Except the ‘W’ is a free parameter (testable), the above calculation is *purely* theoretical, and it marches the data to an amazing degree. <br /><br />This calculation shows that the dark matter is all about the STRUCTURE of the universe; that is, it must have a longer lifetime than the AGE and the CONPONENT (such as proton) of this universe.<br /><br /><br />Any number can always be reached with zillion different numerological formulas. On the other hand, a single scheme cannot normally reach more than two different numbers. The following is a single scheme. The above calculation is a numerological MIRCLE.Tienzenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05842156512465678309noreply@blogger.com