Hacker News Reader

Comment by lkrubner | Hacker News Reader

And yet, it has also been suggested that this periodic table only describes 4% of the mass in the universe:

"All the stars, planets and galaxies that can be seen today make up just 4 percent of the universe. The other 96 percent is made of stuff astronomers can't see, detect or even comprehend."

https://www.space.com/11642-dark-matter-dark-energy-4-percen...

They should have mentioned this in the article, as it is an important qualifier.

View on HN

All the things I've seen today make up just 4% of my apt building. The other 96% is made up of things I can't see, detect, or even comprehend.

Therefore this periodic table must only describe 4% of my apt building.

If your wrote your own periodic table, that would probably be true.

Do you mean to imply that dark matter is just regular matter we somehow can't see because it's too small or dark? Because they've thought of that (obviously), and it doesn't work.

They just need a really bright light!

Really, that is probably true. If we can give photons enough energy we can use them to discover all kinds of interesting science.

Dark matter is most likely the graviton flux that has been emanating from mass-energy since the big bang. It is literally the gravitational field itself. Gravitons are likely negative mass particles - this makes sense considering the zero total energy universe conjecture lauded by Hawking, Krauss, and others.

Interesting, can you point to a paper outlining this theory and how it matches all of the extensive observations that otherwise have supported the theory of dark matter?

http://vixra.org/abs/1708.0258

Do you have one printed in a reputable peer reviewed journal?

https://arxiv.org/abs/0807.5130

Arxiv is also not a peer-reviewed journal. (Although it is reputable.)

I guess knowledge is only accepted when it plays a banjo these days...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com