The horror! A few days ago, in a study released in one of my favorite light reading mags, the *Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences*, two mathematicians proposed that dark energy might simply be an illusion we observe from our spot in a massive space-time expansion wave. There’s a nice writeup of the research in National Geographic here.

Does this mean the entire concept of this website, that brand, culture, and community form the dark matter and dark energy of organizations, breaks down too? That all this hippie brand-building, culture-growing, community-creating stuff is also an illusion, and the traditional visible mechanics of business alone are the stuff of which great companies are made?

I know. I know. It rocked my foundation too. Well, as my favorite fortune cookie fortune once told me, “all is not *yet* lost.” It is just a theory.

And it turns out that for the theory to be true, for the math to work, *we must be at the center of the universe*, a caveat that one physicist describes as “unusual.” I’d say so. Didn’t Copernicus have something to say about that in, like, 1543?

If you are still concerned and want to learn more, go read the abstract of the report. I’ll give you a taste to whet your appetite:

*We derive a system of three coupled equations that implicitly defines a continuous one-parameter family of expanding wave solutions of the Einstein equations, such that the Friedmann universe associated with the pure radiation phase of the Standard Model of Cosmology is embedded as a single point in this family. By approximating solutions near the center to leading order in the Hubble length, the family reduces to an explicit one-parameter family of expanding spacetimes, given in closed form, that represents a perturbation of the Standard Model.*

These guys seem pretty smart, and it sounds like we stand to learn a lot from their findings. And what’s good enough for the National Academy of Sciences is good enough for me.

As for our little Dark Matter Matters website, I’m no mathematician, but I see a lot of prominent mathematicians and physicists calling these results controversial. For now, I’m still thinking dark matter and dark energy might matter, people. Carry on.

### Like this:

Like Loading...

*Related*

## About Chris Grams

Chris Grams is President & Partner of New Kind, where he builds sustainable brands, cultures, and communities in and around organizations. He is the author of

*The Ad-Free Brand: Secrets to Successful Brand Positioning in a Digital World* and is the Community Guide on the Management Innovation Exchange (hackmanagement.com).

This is not the firs time we have come up with a medium to provide an answer to tough questions. Check out luminiferous Ether.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether

During Victorian times this was a theory for the constituents of space.

So the question is does Luminiferous Aether matter, Matter?

Sure, conceptual mechanisms which allow for permissive exploration of an environment are necessary steps in the discovery process. Even if Dark Matter joins Aether as an anachronism of science it stands as a stepping stone in the process of understanding our universe.

Sean Kelley

The first theory is “The light bends the gravity”.

The second theory is “The matter produces the gravity field, and the energy of emission produces the separation field”.

—————————————————————————

Let’s change the Einstein field equation a bit.

Einstein original Rab – 1/2 * Rgab = 8paiG/c^4 * Tab

Modified version Rab – 1/2 * Rgab = 8paiG/c^4 * (Tmab + i*Teab)

Here: Tmab is the stress tensor by matter

Teab is the energy tensor by emission energy

Then this should be the Modified Einstein Field Equation (MEFE).

It is said by all the people that the gravity has the same intensity regardless of the direction of measurement and that it is isotropic. But I think that the gravity will work not only three dimensionally but also two or one dimensionally. In the two or one dimensional gravity, the gravity will be concentrated in one plane or line and will have a stronger effect than three dimensional gravity has. Then the separation forces are necessary in order to smash the gravity into two or one dimension.

Then the imaginary factor is necessary.

According to the Einstein Theory;

Matter warps the continuum according to the amount (or mass) which exists in any locality. Then all motion along world lines in the vicinity must follow the warp.If world lines must follow warps in space, beams of light passing near the mass should be deflected with a certain angle.

But here for me, the light can’t be deflected one-sidedly. It should also affect back the gravity field. Beams of light will loosen the gravity field to the orthogonal direction slightly. And huge amount of beams of light or emissions will shove away the gravity field in a thin-depth disk.

There are three phases of the relation of gravitation and separation.

elliptical galaxy e.g. NGC4881 “Three Dimension” -> ordinary Newton’s equation

GM( new New1ton’s equation

G”M( new New2ton’s equation

G’M(<r)m/r = mv^2/r

gravitationally stable

There are also phase-shifts among those three phases.

—————————————————————————

The Law of Universal Gravitation and Separation

It is the universal force which unifies gravity and separator into one. No one ever knows about the separator force. So now, I give a definition of the law of universal separation at first.

Fs = – Sp Ea Eb / r^2 F ; the separation force

Ea ; Energy which belongs to the point a

Eb ; Energy which belongs to the point b

r ; the distance between a and b

Sp ; the separation constant

This force will not be detected on the Earth. It can be negligible even in the solar system. But it will work in the galactic scale.

Next step is to unify Gravitation and Separation into one law.

Fg = G Ma Mb / r^2 —————–Then,

Fg+s = G Ma Mb / r^2 – Sp Ea Eb / r^2

And assume that Sp = G / c^4, because E = mc^2.

Fg+s = G Ma Mb / r^2 – (G / c^4) Ea Eb / r^2

One step forward by using the complex number formula.

F = G ( Ma + i Ea / c^2 ) ( Mb + i Eb / c^2 ) / r^2

F = G Ma Mb / r^ – (G / c^4) Ea Eb / r^2 + i ( G Ea Mb / ( r^2 c^2 ) + G Ma Eb / ( r^2 c^2 ))

The real part is Re( F ) = Fg+s, but I don't know how to deal with the imaginary part ; Im( F ) = G Ea Mb / ( r^2 c^2 ) + G Ma Eb / ( r^2 c^2 ).

So an existing substance is to be described as S = M + i E / c^2 .

In a certain independent area, if M + E / c^2 = constant ( in other words when M decreases by ΔM, E will increases by ΔE = ΔM c^2 ), then abs( S ) = will be minimum when M = E / c^2, because abs( S ) = root( M^2 + E^2 / c^4 ).

"Energy" is the emission of light. In the beginning there was only the light with the energy ( = Eo ). At present equilibrium, the total matter in the space is (1/2)Eo/c^2 and the total energy has decreased to (1/2)Eo.

http://www.geocities.jp/imyfujita/galaxy/galaxy01.html

Iori Fujita