Some Answers to
the Missing Mass Problem
In other pages on this web site we have redefined some of the basic tenets that have shaped the direction the field of astronomy has taken over the last 70 years. Specifically, we have tried to show that the universe is not expanding, there never was a big bang, and there exist fairly ordinary stars with extremely large gravitational forces (SuperStars) that create false images due to the gravity lens effect. With this new knowledge in mind we will now revisit one of the most puzzling problems facing the astronomical community today—the missing mass problem. Interestingly, the problem could have been given a different name, one which might have resulted in some different research. This new name is the excess gravity problem. In other words, astronomers found things they could not explain, and assumed it was because of matter that could not be seen (and has not been found). What they really found were gravitational forces that could not be explained! It’s really the same problem, but with a new focus—one we shall pursue in this chapter.
Astronomers have identified a large catalog of objects that might be the cause
of the missing mass in the universe. But after many years of study, none of the
candidates has been found to be the probable source. Astronomers are still as
much in the ‘dark’ as they were when the started their quest to identify the
missing matter 25 years ago. Perhaps by taking a different approach using what
we have learned so far, some new light can be shed on the subject. We intend to
do so in this chapter.
There are really four different
reasons that form the basis for astronomer’s belief that as much as 90-99% of
the mass of the universe is dark matter, undetectable by current methods. Each
of these reasons stands alone, and each provides a different estimate of the
amount of missing matter (or excess gravity) in the universe. In the following
sections we will address each different reason for the missing mass assumption,
and hopefully provide some new answers.
The
Cosmological Search for Missing Mass
For many years, cosmologists have been trying to determine some very obscure (to the layman) information about the universe—whether the apparent expansion will continue, stop and begin contracting, and various other types of speculations on the nature of the universe that I choose not to get into. Many of these investigations involve the so-called ‘inflationary’ model of the universe originally put forth by astronomer Alan Guth[1]. This theory was developed to overcome some very knotty problems with the Big Bang theory. Guth’s theory, which I will not go into, provides for a very rapid inflationary phase in the early stages of the universe, shortly after the big bang, to explain away some observational problems. The inflationary model is very important to those astronomers who have based their careers on the big bang, since it is the only model they have which accounts for many observations.
One of the main problems with Guth’s
inflationary universe theory is that it is extremely mass-sensitive. If the big
bang occurred as currently believed, the total mass of the expanding universe
should have a very precise relationship with the outward velocities and
distances of all galaxies and other matter. This mass must not deviate from
this amount by even one part in 1055, an extremely small tolerance.
Unfortunately the estimated mass of the visible universe is less than 1/10 of
this critical value. Therefore the Big Bang concept and the inflationary
universe model is in very serious difficulty. Only by believing that a vast
amount of invisible, unmeasurable mass is hidden somewhere, can the big bang
theory be saved.
But as we have seen in
other pages of this web site, it is very likely that the universe is not expanding and there never
was a big bang, so this reason to believe there is missing mass in the universe
simply disappears, along with the inflationary universe model. It was never a
driving force behind the missing mass problem for the observational astronomer,
anyway, so causing it to go away does not eliminate the missing mass problem,
as we shall see. Of course, astronomers who still hold to the big bang theory
would probably not agree!
Missing
Mass in the Milky Way
In
1932, a young Dutch astronomer named Jan Oort provided evidence that there was
about twice as much matter in the disk of the Milky Way (our local galaxy) than
could be seen in the stars and gas observed nearby. He had earlier demonstrated
that the Milky Way galaxy rotates about its center—roughly one turn every
quarter of a billion years.
In his research, he had been measuring the speed and direction of many stars moving within our galactic disk. His studies indicated that stars tend to bob up and down, like merry-go-round horses, as they slowly circle our galaxy. A star first moves down toward the galactic disk because it is gravitationally attracted by the disk’s immense mass, but then the star overshoots and passes on through the plane of the Milky Way. Yet, like a swinging pendulum, the star eventually slows down and is pulled back up by those same gravitational forces. Such bobbing goes on and on, like the horses in a circus carousel. The speed with which the stars are pulled back and forth appeared to require more gravitational force than could be predicted from the amount of visible material within our galaxy. His observations led to the idea that there was missing mass in our galaxy, although what was really missing was light which could be counted as mass, or even more succinctly, there seemed to be excess gravity present in the disk of the Milky Way.
Not all astronomers agree that Oort’s results prove that there is
missing matter in our galaxy. The presence of dust, gas or various other dim
objects could just as well provide the needed gravitational forces. In
addition, as we have seen, the presence of a few SuperStars with tremendous
gravitational force could easily skew the results of his studies and provide
the missing gravitational forces. And since Oort’s estimate of missing mass is
only about half the mass of our galaxy, while other estimates of missing matter
are 90% or more, this one study does not provide a compelling justification for
missing mass. We attribute the
observations to the presence of SuperStars.
Excess
Gravitational Forces in Clusters of Galaxies
In 1933, astronomer Fritz Zwicky announced that the Coma cluster of galaxies appeared to be missing as much as 90% of the mass required to keep this cluster from breaking apart. The Coma cluster is a rich group of hundreds of associated galaxies some 300 million light years away. The various galaxies are thought to be slowly rotating about a common center of gravity.
Zwicky arrived at his conclusion by first estimating the total mass of
the cluster using a method called the virial technique. Then he measured the
velocities of some of the galaxies using their spectra and the Doppler effect.
He found that their velocities were higher than they should have been if the
galaxies were gravitationally bound and in rotation around the center. If the
cluster were to keep from breaking up (and it did not appear to be), then the
total mass of the cluster would have to be at least ten times that he had
calculated. This would be satisfied if 90% of the matter contained within the
cluster was dark matter—matter which could not be seen and did not give off
light.
Zwicky’s calculations were relatively crude
by today’s standards. However, a similar situation has now been found in
numerous other clusters by other investigators. Thus here is a missing mass
situation which appears to be experimentally verified, and needs further
investigation.
Our suggestion is very simple. The clusters are not real—they are optical illusions caused by the gravity lens effect.
Somewhere near the center of the clusters is a SuperStar with enormous
gravitational force, causing us to see false images of distant galaxies by the
gravity lens effect. The apparent motion of the images around the SuperStar is
due in part to the intrinsic motion of the distant lensed galaxies. Probably
the largest cause of apparent motion is the rotation of the SuperStar, which
causes the gravitational field surrounding the SuperStar to rotate as well. An
analogy is the mirrored ball found in many dance halls and saloons. When the
ball is put in motion and a spotlight is directed toward it we see spots of
light traveling around the room—a myriad images of the spotlight emanating from
a rotating, inert mirrored ball.
In deep space the effect of a rotating SuperStar is similar. We see
false images of distant galaxies, focused by the gravitational lens effect of the
SuperStar and set in apparent motion by the rotating gravitational field
surrounding the SuperStar.
If the suggestion that galactic clusters are optical illusions is
unsettling, just take a look at a few of these clusters, as shown in the
following figures. I personally find the idea that they are optical illusions
very compelling. And of course if clusters of galaxies are not real, then is no
reason to believe that there is any missing mass in them.
It may seem absurd to suggest that
these galactic images seen in clusters are optical illusions. But in fact that
would solve a very serious problem with them which is seldom raised, but which
is very revealing. Astronomers estimate
the age of the universe to be around 15 billion years, give or take a few billion
years. These same astronomers do not have any idea how a galaxy could have
formed in this relatively short time. In this time span, for example, our own
galaxy would have made perhaps just 40 complete revolutions, if as astronomers
believe it is in rotation around a common center of gravity. That is, our galaxy
is only 40 years old (if one rotation about the center is considered a year).
How could galaxies have formed in just 15 billion years? Astronomers have
absolutely no explanation.
But then you look at the clusters of
galaxies, apparently consisting of hundreds of related galaxies, and ask how,
if we can’t explain how a single galaxy could have formed in the short lifetime
of the universe, then how in heaven’s name could a huge cluster of galaxies
have been formed!
To twist the knife just a little more into the heart of astronomy-land, it is known that there are super clusters—clusters of galactic clusters, containing hundreds of clusters of galaxies, each containing hundreds of clusters. And long strings of clusters have been found as well. There is absolutely no way to explain this in the short 15 billion year lifespan of the universe, or even with much longer time frames. Astronomers shy away from these facts, because they cannot explain them, and it means they are studying objects which logic compels cannot exist. (Maybe if we don’t talk about it, it will go away). It is the ostrich with the head in the sand syndrome.
So they probably don’t exist.
Galactic clusters such as the Coma and Virgo clusters are the signatures of the
gravity lens effect of some super-gravitational SuperStars off in the distance.
How far away I can’t say, but I’ll wager they are not very far away at all. And
bottom line, there is no missing mass problem here.
Rotation
Curves of Elliptical Galaxies
The
most compelling reason to believe there is missing matter in the universe is
found in the rotation curves of elliptical galaxies. A typical elliptical
galaxy is shown below.
M31, The Andromeda galaxy. A typical elliptical galaxy, and one of our nearest neighbors.
As we know from our solar system, Kepler’s law, coupled with Newton’s laws of gravity, provide a very accurate account of the motion of planets in orbit around the sun. These laws provide that planets closest to the sun have the highest orbital velocity, while that velocity drops as planets further from the sun are studied. For example, the planet Mercury is speeding around the sun with a velocity of 48,000 meters per second, while the earth plods along in its orbit at only 30,000 meters per second. Pluto, the planet furthest from the sun, has an orbital velocity of less than 5,000 meters per second.
If the stars that make up an
elliptical galaxy are in orbit around a common center of gravity, then we would
expect that the outer stars are traveling at a lower velocity than the inner
stars, and this velocity should decrease the further out you look. But when
astronomers measure the redshift of stars at various points across the surface,
they find that the velocity indicated by their redshift is nearly constant with
distance from the center, as illustrated below. Such a velocity curve
is completely inconsistent with what was expected, and occurs for most
elliptical galaxies.
Astronomers have found that they can duplicate the type of rotation curves seen if they hypothesize a spherical halo of invisible matter surrounding the galaxy, with a mass ten times the mass of the galaxy as computed from the masses of the visible stars. In other words, it appears as if 90% of the mass of galaxies is invisible, and contained in a halo surrounding the galaxy. In effect, astronomers made something up that made the answer come out right (an ad hoc solution!). The problem, of course, is that so far they have failed to find out what this missing mass is.
Why astronomers believe there is a halo of dark matter surrounding a galaxy.
But let us take a different approach, based on what we have learned so far. Suppose that the image of a galaxy is really an optical illusion caused by the gravity lens effect of a SuperStar. We have already seen how galactic images are just what we would expect from the gravity lens effect.
Now let us suppose that the
SuperStar is rotating, as well might be expected (our own sun rotates). Scientists know that the rotation of an
object with a large gravitational field results in distortions in the
gravitational field in its vicinity. In effect this gravitational field rotates
along with the source of gravity. As a
result of this distortion of the gravitational field, light passing on one side
of the SuperStar is given a boost (accelerated by the moving gravitational
field), causing a blueshift. Light passing on the opposite side loses some of
its energy fighting the rotating gravitational field, and is redshifted.
Suppose now that the velocity of the rotating gravitational field decreases linearly as the distance r from the SuperStar increases, so that redshift influence = constant1 / r. In a similar manner the length of time that a ray of light passing at a distance r passes through this rotating gravitational field is proportional to the circumference of a circle of radius r, or time of influence = constant2 × r. Then for any beam of light being deflected by the rotating SuperStar at a distance r we would have:
redshift (or blueshift) =
(redshift influence) × (time of influence).
This would then result in :
redshift (or blueshift) =
(constant1 / r) × (constant2 × r) =
constant.
The
distance term r cancels out, and we would expect the redshift or blueshift to
be independent of the distance that a light ray passed from the surface of the
SuperStar. If the math is confusing, don’t worry. The result is unmistakable.
This is exactly the effect found in elliptical galaxies, attributed up to now
to missing matter in an invisible halo! It has nothing to do with missing mass.
It has to do with the gravity lens effect and rotation of SuperStars. This is
illustrated below.
So now we are on the horns of a super dilemma. We can eliminate once and for all the problem of missing mass in the universe (which has defied all efforts at finding it), but in the process we must give up the idea that most of the galaxies that have been studied are real. Instead it seems that the velocity curves which have been measured provide very strong evidence that most galactic images are optical illusions caused by the gravity lens effect.
The elliptical galaxy M105. A typical example of the gravitational lens effect of a SuperStar.
The
End of the Missing Mass Problem
So we have faced the enemy and conquered it. The enemy is the missing mass problem. The conquering has, as in most battles, left us in disarray. The gravity lens effect of SuperStars can very easily explain the astronomical observations which originally led to the concept of missing mass, so we no longer need look for something conjured up to explain these observations. But the battlefield is strewn with the corpses of billions and billions of galaxies—exposed as being optical illusions. But this is not really a loss, since they never really existed in the first place. To solve the missing mass problem, we must now believe that most images of galaxies are optical illusions!
This observation is both unsettling
and relieving. Unsettling because, through a telescope or on a photographic
plate, galaxies are beautiful! There is such a diversity of shape, size,
distance, and even personality that we feel drawn to each as if it were an old
friend. Galaxies make our visible heavens interesting. They provide fuel for
the imagination of generations of observers and researchers. But unfortunately
most of them don’t really exist!
And relieving because maybe we are important in the universe after all. The seemingly infinite numbers of galaxies which can be seen through our most powerful telescopes, each containing billions of stars, has brought us to believe that we are an insignificant speck of intelligent life among an infinity of God’s creations. But maybe this is not so! Certainly there are other stars out there, and probably we are in a galaxy, and perhaps there are even a galaxy or two that are real, but we should now seriously question if the universe is even remotely as huge as has been believed for the past century. Most images of galaxies are optical illusions. Most galaxies don’t really exist. We must forget almost everything we ever learned, or heard, about the universe and begin to form a new, more accurate understanding of heavens.
I hope this site has opened your eyes to the possibility that almost
everything that astronomers currently believe must be questioned, and it is
time to start a completely new astronomy.
Conclusions
There is no missing mass. The effects observed in the
heavens which have led to the conclusion that 90-99% of the mass in the
universe are false. These effects are caused by the gravity lens effect of
SuperStars.
Nearly all elliptical galaxies studied so far do not really
exist. They are optical illusions caused by the gravity lens effect of
SuperStars.
Return to the Main Page Contact me