Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
Weitter Duckss

Why is the Universe Dark?

212 posts in this topic

It follows subtopics that is clear to every scientist and layman in the world except me.

You good fun, I call myself an ambulance ... why are in black?

WHY IS THE UNIVERSE DARK?

The universe is a vast space that is not very easy to illuminate, though, because the stellar objects are very far from each other.

Nevertheless, a basic problem is not the vast space, but the light itself. The light comes from the Sun to the planets and to all the other objects of our system. Since the intensity of light decreases with the increase of distance, already behind Pluto it is rather dark. When we gaze at the sky at night, we can easily conclude that the range of light is very long (Andromeda is seen with bare eyes, even though it is more than 2 million of light-years far from us). Satellites and telescopes can detect light that has been travelling for more than 13 billion of light-years.

It is estimated there are some 200 billion of stars in our galaxy only. So many stars that emit light to the endless distances, and yet, we barely have some light. It is enough to leave the atmosphere of Earth to find yourself in the darkness. That is a paradox of the conventional definitions of light. We can see that the Moon reflects the light coming from the Sun and then it comes to Earth, but it is pitch dark between these objects. Maybe there are no photons, which are, namely, light itself, but the light from the Sun reaches Pluto, too, and travels even further into the space – how come it does not illuminate among planets and other objects, but only on their surfaces? It seems that light must be some kind of a magician or some unnatural force when its photons illuminate at some places and don’t illuminate at others. The photons lurk outside the atmosphere; they stalk us from the dark and you are finished unless you have good protective equipment (a protective suit, not a sun lotion).

By the definition, a photon should be the light and the carrier of heat, which is a fact that becomes obvious the moment you get out to the sunlight. Then how come that it is warmer closer to the ground than in the mountains or outside the atmosphere? If a countless quantity of them sets out from the surface of Sun, why can they only be seen on the objects, but not up, in “the vacuum?” Why they don’t illuminate there, too?

A photon is only another delusion, firmly set in the foundations of physics. Obviously, something else is here present because the term “photon”, both as a particle or a particle and wave, does not correspond to the truth, since the photon does not exist. If we compare it to the light, than the light itself would not exist and therefore, the speed of light would not exist either. There are only waves, matter (the visible one) and the event, occurring in the collisions of waves and matter, the product of which is known as the light. The speed of light exists as long as there is matter and when the matter is gone, the light is gone, too, and if there is no light, it is pointless to talk about its speed.

The waves in the collision with the particles (matter) by their blows (work) create friction among the particles, which manifests as the light and heat. Dark matter, which exists among the celestial objects, even though it carries a wave, it decreases its intensity proportionally to the distance increase. It is almost a classical situation: if vacuum really existed, the intensity would not be decreased because there would be nothing to decrease it. The further the wave travels, the weaker it gets; that is why there is a sunset and a very cold weather on Pluto. A lack of atmosphere is another disadvantage to it. Coldness is a characteristic of the dark matter. The lower intensity of the waves, the lower is the temperature, too; that is why the temperature in the Oort cloud ranges from 4 to 12°K and that of the background radiation, which comes from the surface of the universe, is below 3°K.

Since there is no charge in the dark matter, it can not support or produce friction and, as a consequence, neither light nor heat. That is why the universe is dark and cold – it is a basic state of matter which has a mass, but does not have a charge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Light is directional... you can only see it at an certain angle. When it bounces off an surface, it can only be seen from one direction, while an source that radiates light outwards in all directions can be seen from any angle such as the Sun. In between the Moon and Earth, you will not see the light because it is not reflecting off anything. Space is an Vacuum with very tiny particles that are too small to reflect the photons of the light..

Figured I sum it up for people.

Edited by Uncle Sam
5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've answered it, space is vast, while stars are finite both in number and age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add to what Uncle Sam and Rlyeh have already said...

Space is only ``dark'' to human perception. As Weitter Duckss has already pointed out in other threads, space is filled the cosmic microwave background. There is plenty of ``light'' in the void of space, just at wavelengths outside the range we can see with our eyes.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It follows subtopics that is clear to every scientist and layman in the world except me.

You good fun, I call myself an ambulance ... why are in black?

WHY IS THE UNIVERSE DARK?

The universe is a vast space that is not very easy to illuminate, though, because the stellar objects are very far from each other.

Nevertheless, a basic problem is not the vast space, but the light itself. The light comes from the Sun to the planets and to all the other objects of our system. Since the intensity of light decreases with the increase of distance, already behind Pluto it is rather dark. When we gaze at the sky at night, we can easily conclude that the range of light is very long (Andromeda is seen with bare eyes, even though it is more than 2 million of light-years far from us). Satellites and telescopes can detect light that has been travelling for more than 13 billion of light-years.

The universe is not dark but absolutely filled to the brim with wavelengths of electromagnetic radiation which your eyes can't detect. If you place two plates facing each other in the vacum of space they attract each other more than the force of gravity.

The reason being is the gap between the two plates excludes electromagnetic radiation with wavelengths bigger than the gap. This means more electromagnetic radiation exists outside the plates than inbetween them creating a pressure difference which pushes them together. If you have two plates facing each other with a gap of just a few 1000 atoms the pressure force is immense. In fact its the most powerful force we know of in the universe. Thats only possible because the vacum has so much electromagnetic radiation in it!

We can only tap small amounts of the energy at the moment but when we can use the pressure from two plates 1000 atoms apart we will be able to draw more power from it than the sun gives out. Currently its existance is more of a problem for us because in nanotechnology it is responsible for the 'sticking together' of components.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another reason the universe is dark (also known as Olber's paradox) is because the universe had a beginning. If the universe were static and infinitely old, everywhere one would look at the night sky one would see a bright star, therefore the sky would be evenly bright. This is sort of off-topic, though. Just thought I'd throw it in cuz well, in this OP's thread i guess anything goes.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a vacuum, why decreasing the intensity of radiation from the Sun, the distance covered road? in vacuo

there are no obstacles and radiation expanding the same pace and strength.

Why does not light photon? Is the refusal of the surface does not mean crash radiation with matter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Light is invisible and has no colour, the dark space of the universe is coloured deep black and is easily visible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The brightness of light, as well as the strength of forces like gravity, decrease with distance in accordance with the inverse square law. It's quite simple -- the further you are from a light source the more area each photon has to illuminate, and as the distance increases linearly the area increase exponentially by the power of two (and so the brightness decreases exponentially).

The main reason the sky is dark is because the universe that we see had a beginning in time and light from things more light-years distant from the time of that beginning has not yet had time to reach us. Because of the accelerating expansion, much of it probably never will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It follows subtopics that is clear to every scientist and layman in the world except me.

You good fun, I call myself an ambulance ... why are in black?

Its quite obvious you don't write the majority of your own posts. Can you please credit the source for the text when you use it?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its quite obvious you don't write the majority of your own posts. Can you please credit the source for the text when you use it?

Emma is right, if you're posting content that's not your own words you must use a source link.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How could someone tell whether such gobbledygook was plagiarized?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How could someone tell whether such gobbledygook was plagiarized?

Because some parts of it aren't quite as "gobbley" as other parts...and this leads one to wonder where the less "gobbley" parts came from originally.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Light is invisible and has no colour, the dark space of the universe is coloured deep black and is easily visible.

If light is invisible then why do we refer to some wavelengths as VISIBLE light?

If we see black so well why can you not see in the dark?

Black is NOT a visible colour, it is a total ABSENCE of visible colour.

We see the space as black because there is no visible light above the detection level of the human eye in those regions.

This is primary school stuff taniwha. In fact you don't even need a primary school education to see that your post is total nonsense, just the ability to think in a very simple, logical manner.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this leads one to wonder where the less "gobbley" parts came from originally.

My guess is that some parts are better translated by google (or which ever software he is using) than others.

It's all nonsense but some is poorly translated nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Another reason the universe is dark (also known as Olber's paradox) is because the universe had a beginning. If the universe were static and infinitely old, everywhere one would look at the night sky one would see a bright star, therefore the sky would be evenly bright. This is sort of off-topic, though. Just thought I'd throw it in cuz well, in this OP's thread i guess anything goes.

Not only is that not "off topic," that is the actual answer to the question (the other "answers" don't answer it.)

Through expansion, visible light from far away galaxies has been red-shifted out of the visual range. That's the reason, and it's because the universe is not static, exactly like you said.

Harte

Edited by Harte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well now it's on topic.

What I was taught (get it -- so if I'm wrong I can blame my teachers) is that it is because the universe has existed a finite time and even if it is infinite most of its light has not had time to reach us.

Now I hear it's because of red shifting. That would diminish the light from a single source, but not eliminate it (assuming recession stays below light speed -- another thing that could produce a mostly dark universe -- so that given enough time and a big enough universe the effect of red shifting would be overcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

How could someone tell whether such gobbledygook was plagiarized?

Because we have sentences like

Dark matter, which exists among the celestial objects, even though it carries a wave, it decreases its intensity proportionally to the distance increase.

next to

You good fun, I call myself an ambulance ... why are in black?

Edited by Emma_Acid
5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I hear it's because of red shifting. That would diminish the light from a single source, but not eliminate it (assuming recession stays below light speed -- another thing that could produce a mostly dark universe -- so that given enough time and a big enough universe the effect of red shifting would be overcome.

"Diminish" the light?

Not at all.

It is red-shifted to a wavelength too long for our eyes to detect. It hasn't gone anywhere.

Harte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Diminish" the light?

It is red-shifted to a wavelength too long for our eyes to detect. It hasn't gone anywhere.

Harte

The energy remains and therefore accumulates. I remember a blackboard demonstration that at some point the sky will become as hot as the surface of the sun. I think this is back in the days of the osciallating universe and would happen about the time the expansion stopped and turned into collapse under gravity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If light is invisible then why do we refer to some wavelengths as VISIBLE light?

If we see black so well why can you not see in the dark?

Black is NOT a visible colour, it is a total ABSENCE of visible colour.

You cant see any better with someone shining a torch in your eyes either so light doesnt guarantee visibility.

We see the space as black because there is no visible light above the detection level of the human eye in those regions.

This is primary school stuff taniwha. In fact you don't even need a primary school education to see that your post is total nonsense, just the ability to think in a very simple, logical manner.

When you look into the contents of outer space where are the rainbows of colour hiding? Why is black all that is visible, or invisible if that is the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

You cant see any better with someone shining a torch in your eyes either so light doesnt guarantee visibility.

When it comes to basic science you really are a clueless individual aren't you?

A little tip for you, if you want to know if something in the science sections is wrong look to see who posted it. If it was you that posted it then it's wrong... every single time.

If someone shouts very loudly in your ear it will drown out all other sound, does that mean sound is inaudible?

Absolutely not, it means your senses are overwhelmed by the louder sound.

Same thing when someone shines a light in your eye, the light is so bright that you can't see ANYTHING ELSE. You are still seeing the light from the torch.

When you look into the contents of outer space where are the rainbows of colour hiding?

They (unlike your scientific knowledge) aren't hiding.

Many stars are obviously coloured even to the unaided eye. However the limitation in seeing colours is due to the limitation of the human eye.

The human eye has two types of light receptors, rods and cones.

Cones come in 3 types, those sensitive to red light, those sensitive to blue light and those sensitive to green light (notice that there are none sensitive to black... because black ISN'T A COLOUR). A brain interprets colour depending on the signals it receives from these cones.

Rods are sensitive to light but can not detect colour. Rods are more sensitive than cones, meaning they see better in lower light conditions. However because they are not colour sensitive we lose our colour vision in low light conditions.

Most of the objects in the night sky are far too dim for us to detect their colour with the unaided eye. Indeed a long exposure photograph of an object like a nebula will show brilliant colours but if you look at the same nebula with the same telescope using the human eye you will only see shades of grey.

Why is black all that is visible, or invisible if that is the case.

Black is how the human brain interprets a total lack of detectable light. We don't "see" black. Black is what is there when there is nothing to see.

Edited by Waspie_Dwarf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You really are a clueless individual aren't you?

A little tip for you, if you want to know if something in the science sections is wrong look to see who posted it. If it was you that posted it then it's wrong... every single time.

If someone shouts very loudly in your ear it will drown out all other sound, does that mean sound is inaudible?

Absolutely not, it means your senses are overwhelmed by the louder sound.

Same thing when someone shines a light in your eye, the light is so bright that you can't see ANYTHING ELSE. You are still seeing the light from the torch.

They (unlike your scientific knowledge) aren't hiding.

Many stars are obviously coloured even to the unaided eye. However the limitation in seeing colours is due to the limitation of the human eye.

The human eye has two types of light receptors, rods and cones.

Cones come in 3 types, those sensitive to red light, those sensitive to blue light and those sensitive to green light (notice that there are none sensitive to black... because black ISN'T A COLOUR). A brain interprets colour depending on the signals it receives from these cones.

Rods are sensitive to light but can not detect colour. Rods are more sensitive than cones, meaning they see better in lower light conditions. However because they are not colour sensitive we lose our colour vision in low light conditions.

Most of the objects in the night sky are far too dim for us to detect their colour with the unaided eye. Indeed a long exposure photograph of an object like a nebula will show brilliant colours but if you look at the same nebula with the same telescope using the human eye you will only see shades of grey.

Black is how the human brain interprets a total lack of detectable light. We don't "see" black. Black is what is there when there is nothing to see.

Black is totally visible, you can point to it and say look there it is, you dont have to scratch your head and wonder where it is when you can see it. If you cant see black then we have an absence of it. The moon reflects sunlight but without knowing that as true we might think that the moon glowed on its own. We cant see any sunlight travel through space because....its invisible. However the dark of space is visible with or without light.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... However the dark of space is visible with or without light.

You have to be kidding? Please tell me you're kidding?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.