Unifying Dark Matter and Dark Energy.

[StarMountainKid]

4 hours ago, sepulchrave said:

It is nice that they have some means of testing the theory, but I'm not holding my breath on the results.

Negative matter is more philosophically appealing than dark energy+dark matter, as others have pointed out in this thread it is nice to have a universe with balanced duality. But when you have to slap on an ad-hoc ``creation tensor'' (in my opinion it is ad-hoc) to continuously generate more negative mass over time, it sort of ruins the duality, doesn't it?

This is what I noticed, as well. When the equations don't work, just add an equation that compensates for the problem.

[sepulchrave]

I'd say the ``creation tensor'' is worse than untestable - it is required to force the theory to match observations.

Any matter that behaves ``normally'' according to the physical laws as we understand them will either aggregate into dense groups (via mutual attraction by gravity) or diffuse evenly (via mutual repulsion by gravity).

This does not appear to be what we observe: the article mentions the dark matter/energy/fluid ``halos'' around galaxies.

The only way (it seems, from my reading of the article) to get this to work in their theory is to include this ``creation tensor'' to continuously generate new negative matter.

If you want the theory to suit the facts (as Sherlock Holmes might advise), I think you end up with the current LambdaCDM model --- which everyone knows is flawed and imperfect but starts from testable grounds, and throws all the parts that we can't quite figure out under the names ``dark energy'' and ``dark matter'', which by their very names basically admit that we don't really understand that part (yet).

If you want to start from a philosophically pure theory (as Aristotle might advise), you need to work your way to the logical end, and it if doesn't match reality you may need to discard the theory and try a new approach. (For example, the old Kaluza-Klein theory provides a fairly simple an elegant way to combine quantum mechanics and general relativity using 4-dimensional spacetime, but fails because it requires the mass of electrons to be close to the Planck mass, among other flaws.)

This ``dark fluid'' theory seems to start from the philosophically pure concept of +/- dualism, and then attempts to force that concept onto a working theory even though this ``creation tensor'' ultimately breaks the +/- dualism. (Where is the equivalent tensor for normal matter?)

[bison]

The presence, or absence of the proposed 'dark fluid' is apparently testable in principle. Dr. Farnes proposes to do so when the Square Kilometer Array radio telescope becomes available. If the presence of 'dark fluid' were confirmed, this would also seem to make the creation tensor probable. 

Recall that a similar equation was used for the continuous creation of normal matter, in  support of the once-highly-regarded  Steady State Cosmology. A link to an article by Dr. Farnes, writing about this, and his theory in general, appears below:

https://theconversation.com/bizarre-dark-fluid-with-negative-mass-could-dominate-the-universe-what-my-research-suggests-107922