EmDrive: UK scientist claims ‘new physics’ explains galaxy rotation and theoretical space propulsion

Posted: February 14, 2017 by oldbrew in Astrophysics, research
Tags:

Dwarf galaxy NGC 5264 [image credit: ESA/Hubble]

Dwarf galaxy NGC 5264 [image credit: ESA/Hubble]


Dark matter faces quantised inertia. One of these ideas must leave town, or the galaxies, it seems.

British physicist Dr Mike McCulloch, who previously used quantised inertia to explain how the controversial electromagnetic space propulsion technology EmDrive works, says that he has new evidence showing his theory can also explain galaxy rotation, which is one of physics’ biggest mysteries, as the IB Times reports.

McCulloch, a lecturer in geomatics at Plymouth University’s school of marine science and engineering, says he now has even more evidence that his “new physics theory” about quantised inertia works, and that it makes it possible to explain why galaxies are not ripped apart without using theory of dark matter.

One of the biggest problems in physics today is how galaxies rotate. Galaxies are collections of millions of stars swirling around, and galaxies spin so rapidly that their centrifugal force should cause them fly apart, as there isn’t enough visible matter in them to hold them together by the force of gravity.

To try explain how galaxies are held together, astronomers use the popular theory of dark matter, which was discovered by Fritz Zwicky in 1933 and then popularised by Vera Rubin in the 1970s.

Galaxies and how dark matter works

The theory is that galaxies contain dark matter and that this makes them gravitationally stable in the standard model of physics. McCulloch is sceptical about dark matter and he says that it is an implausible theory to explain dwarf galaxies, which are super-tiny galaxies containing only between 1,000-10,000 stars that revolve around the Milky Way.

There are 20 dwarf galaxies in existence from Segue-1 (the smallest) to Canes Venatici-1 (the largest), and dark matter is only meant to work by spreading out across a wide distance, but it is still used to explain dwarf galaxies, even though this requires dark matter to be concentrated within these systems, which is implausible.

Instead, McCulloch asserts that quantised inertia can be used to explain how galaxies rotate without using dark matter, and he has written a paper that has been accepted by the bi-monthly peer reviewed journal Astrophysics and Space Science.

“The photons in the EmDrive, when they go into the narrow bit of the EmDrive, fewer Unruh wavelengths fit into that narrow bit, so they lose inertial mass, and that’s what I’m saying causes the EmDrive to move,” he told IBTimes UK.

“In the galaxy, as you go out to the edge, the acceleration of the stars reduces, and that means the Unruh wavelengths get longer. Just like for the EmDrive, few of them fit into the cosmos so their inertial mass decreases in the same way. This is further evidence that this theory is correct, as it seems to explain both the EmDrive and galaxy rotation.”

The report continues here.

Comments
  1. rishrac says:

    My biggest problem with the expansion of the universe is the individual motion of the stars and galaxies. The movement of a star across the expanding space would create a distortion in the fabric of space. Uncertainty as to where anything is relative to each other would increase to infinity. You have 2 incompatible vectors multiplied by the number of moving objects.

  2. pg sharrow says:

    Looks to be another step back in the direction of Aether. “quantised inertia” is a step in the right direction but needs further thought. Quantize the fabric of space is a better POV. The effects of mass/inertia are IN the Quanta of space, not IN Mater. Gravity is a linear acceleration caused by the electrostatic tension between Mater and Space. Space is not empty. Space is jam packed full of something, Aether. I had to quantize it to make Photons work, to make EMF work. Believe it or not, It fits together rather well. Everything exists in this Ocean of Quantized Charge…pg

  3. oldbrew says:

    Rotating Galaxies Could Prove Dark Matter Wrong
    SEP 23, 2016 @ 10:00 AM
    by Brian Koberlein

    The researchers looked at the observed rotation curves for 153 galaxies, and calculated the radial acceleration at various distances in each galaxy. They then compared these results to the gravitational acceleration as predicted by the distribution of visible matter within a galaxy (technically the distribution of baryonic mass). They found a strong correlation between the two. When the gravitational acceleration was stronger, so was the radial acceleration, and when one was weaker, so was the other. What’s interesting is that this relation holds up in a range of galaxies. It didn’t matter whether most of the visible matter was clustered in the center or not, the relation still held. It’s also a purely empirical correlation, so there is no strong theoretical component to make it work.
    [bold added]

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/briankoberlein/2016/09/23/rotating-galaxies-could-prove-dark-matter-wrong/

  4. pg sharrow says:

    The propulsive effects of the EM drive are External, not internal to the device. The shape warps the fabric of space to cause static charge in the Aether to be stronger in 1 direction then the other during the EM cycles of the applied charge. They were using 400 vdc bias and microwave RF. With higher bias charge they could get a stronger effect My prediction was 40,000vdc bias would be needed to get a useful result…pg

  5. Sphene says:

    I thought Erik Verlinde’s entropic gravity already explained the galactic rotational curves without dark matter.

    https://m.phys.org/news/2016-12-verlinde-theory-gravity.html

  6. oldbrew says:

    Sphene: not quite.

    From your link: ‘The new theory is currently only applicable to isolated, spherical and static systems, while the universe is dynamic and complex. Many observations cannot yet be explained by the new theory, so dark matter is still in the race.’

  7. Dewey B. Larson quantized space-time — both space and time — in his “Reciprocity Theory”, and “explained” everything using it. “Quantized inertia” sounds like a related idea; at least, not entirely original…

    Then there is: “Twas brillig and the slithy toves…and the momraths outgrabe.” (Warning: That text is for real experts.)

  8. Jaime Walker says:

    emdrive doesnt need new physics.it obeys same physics used to derive compton scattering equation ,but equations and purpuse of EMdrive is different .however emdrive has speed limit below light since spaceship cannot carry infinite energy to speed it to light speed as per einstein equation E= lorentz factorxMo c2 Mo=spaceship mass at 0 velocity

  9. Sphene says:

    Oldbrew, in the article I linked they claim that:

    “Brouwer calculated Verlinde’s prediction for the gravity of 33,613 galaxies, based only on their visible mass. She compared this prediction to the distribution of gravity measured by gravitational lensing, in order to test Verlinde’s theory. Her conclusion is that his prediction agrees well with the observed gravity distribution… Verlinde’s theory provides a direct prediction, without free parameters.”

    I just wanted to point out Verlinde’s concept seems to be another alternative to dark matter. I’m glad to see other ideas being considered. Personally, I like the idea of baryonic matter causing the galactic rotational curves, that you linked to above.

  10. Paul Vaughan says:

    From OB’s quote:
    “It’s also a purely empirical correlation, so there is no strong theoretical component to make it work.”

    Beautiful. It makes it infinitely more beautiful that no one can understand despite simplicity.

  11. oldbrew says:

    PV: yes, as ever any theory around this has to be compatible with the observations.

    Harry H : Lewis Carroll’s home village is near me (< 10 mins).
    http://www.lewiscarrollcentre.org.uk/

  12. In a Dec 14, 1936 Time magazine interview, “Shift on Shift” the father of big bang said it was a hoax.

    “Mysterious Dr X says, Universe is NOT Expanding” at CanadaFreePress….

  13. Jason Calley says:

    Hey oldbrew! Ooops! Yes, and it was only a few posts down the page! No excuses, been too busy lately to keep current. Thanks!

    By the way, I have been intellectually expanded reading some of the information you have posted concerning planetary orbits, rotations and phi. VERY interesting. It is appreciated.

  14. oldbrew says:

    JC: excellent, I’d like to think we’ve made some progress recently.

  15. https://gregoriobaquero.wordpress.com/2017/01/26/rame-is-dm/ #Space #Darkmatter #Physics #Darkenergy #Galaxies #Science

  16. oldbrew says:

    11 April 2017
    New Scientist: New approach to dark energy might explain our cooling universe

    We thought dark energy was behind the accelerated expansion of the universe to its cold, dark end state, but it might be a supporting actor in a quantum plot

    http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23431214-600-new-approach-to-dark-energy-might-explain-our-cooling-universe/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s