If you are going to quote Wiki, provide links to the articles...

That said, "Dark Matter" is simply matter that is not radiating towards us (or its radiation is too weak to detect).

Therefore, we are not detecting any light from that source. Therefore, all we can observe as effects are impacts on photon densities (local effects on geodesics) responsible for Einstein Rings, Red shift, etc.

In fact, we can't observe "normal matter" at all outside our solar system, and there is an argument that we don't "observe" matter at all, since locally (subjectively) the speed of light is instantaneous, although we can model an energy interaction by assuming light has mass (radar, antenna resistance, laser weapons on fast burn boosters, etc...)

From a photon (quantum) perspective, if m_{0}= CT, then the wave equation for energy comes from:

so identically

Then the momentum is given by

If the particles do not interact, , so p = 0 (there is no momentum transfer) Such energy-conserved photons are "counted" simply by multiplying m' by integers n E_{n}= n*m' = hv

Other values of [tex]\theta[\tex] are evaluated around the unit circle in the complex plane.

For functions such as ,sin \theta] (i.e., Fourier series), note that (e.g.) p = d/dt [tex](cos \theta) = sin \theta[\tex], so that there is a momentum transfer at either end of each cycle, which means infinite momentum (and thus infinite energy) for such linear functions, unless m_{0}= 0.

(One can introduce a cutoff, however, and include a lifetime in the characterization, but this introduces other complications- gravity as curved lines in Feynman diagrams)

When analyzed further, the effect of light-on- light interactions are due to spin/polarization - we only see the photons that are "spun" along the geodesic towards us, the others are spun away. Einstein interprets this as gravity without specifying a massive gravitating object, since he is only concerned with local action along the geodesic. If we interpret such an interaction, it must be in terms of constants observed on earth (or in the Solar System) where "experiments" are performed using observable material bodies (e.g., the "precession" of Mercury, where Mercury assumes the role of a photon relative to the mass of the sun).

These are all observed at the BB temperature of the earth, heavily influenced by the sun on our local EM environment. Applying cosmological interpretations to locally derived mathematics interpreted in terms of locally measured constants (e.g. C) is IMO fuzzy thinking, especially since many of such interpretations also include Boltzmann's constant, etc.....

So instead of "dark Matter/Energy" the model should be "photons we may or may not see interacting with other photons we may or may not see) - a "gravitating mass) in the sense of a planet is an (almost) "hidden variable", and is hidden outside our ability to observe it by spectral shifts..... (invisible planets circling visible stars - and even those are only visual at a tiny, tiny range compared to the size of our own galaxy, not to mention galaxies far away...)

So I guess I call bullshit on all such percentages cosmologically .... IMO, YMMV ...

(Nevertheless, if one MUST do religion in the name of physics, such percentages (or others like them, with different parameters and error bars) are probably the best we have.

## Bookmarks