If you mean the usual neutrinos: These are hot dark matter, not the cold dark matter that is actually seen. Or do you mean sterile neutrinos, which haven't been found so far?

@@bjornfeuerbacher5514 Great question! I don’t know. Vagueness was intentional. :D I thought neutrinos as we, “know,” them only interact weakly and apparently have mass? This is the first time I have heard the term hot neutrino. Learned something new! Thank you. ^.^

@@TheMemesofDestruction Yes, they have mass, but only a very tiny one. Hence they usually move around at great speeds, i. e. they are "hot".

@@bjornfeuerbacher5514 Roger that. 👍

MOND is an incomplete scheme to produce something that really and mathematicallly works for dark matter. The evidence of dark matter is overwhelming. Sadly the evidence for the standard model particle of dark matter is completely lacking. Here's the problem. Dark Matter has been around for far longer than standard model particles. Since they are so old and slow moving and neutral and massive they are not found just anywhere. In fact they tend to be found only at the centers of large massive objects like stars and planets and moons and the like. Otherwise, they are found in the halos of galaxies. The exception would seem to be large massive yet fragmented objects, such as the asteroid belt protoplanet between Mars and Jupiter. The masses of dark matter particles may well have several varieties from the least massive and youngest to the most massive and oldest. The least massive and youngest may well fall into the logarithmic scale proportional to that between Gravity and Electromagnetism. This is the hierarchical scale with Hadronic and Leptonic quarks at one end, the bottom end of this scale. This spans 10^36 in a scale proportional to the relative number of dimensions applying to this scale. Clearly there must be several dimensions in this scale. Approximately 7 dimensions seems to be the least massive divisision of this logarithmic scale that makes any sense. Applying a natural scale suggests that at minimum 1/18 of 36 or about 10^2 times as massive as quarks for the least massive initial stages or types of forms of dark matter, while 1/7 of 36 or about 10^5 or more times as massive as quarks for the most massive forms of the initial stages or types of dark matter. Consequentially, small quantities of this novel form of dark matter should be able to be detected, then found, isolated, formally discovered, transported, refined and manufactured. Obviously research and developments in the asteroid belt are going to be instrumental in this discovery. The slow pace of space exploration seems to mean that it's going to be a while before we get this discovery at long last. Of course, the future of dark matter doesn't really begin until its formal discovery, so we'll have to wait till then, whenever that may be. part 2 Ok. So the Chrysanthemum or Mum, sometimes called the Mon when depicted in art, can now be understood in terms of highly temporary but sometimes long lived quark models. It is sometimes well established that early versions of the mum were constricted within 2 dimensions. They were strongly limited, apparently limited to about 21 petals, as predicted by Fibonnacci. However, in later Mon depictions, full blown 3 dimensional mums have been depicted and are apparently grown and are flourishing. These are much larger than previous 2 dimensional models. In counterpart, quark models in the standard model have far exceeded the dark matter models contemplated. For instance, Charm quarks are over 600 times larger than standard Up quarks, and Bottom quarks are over 400 times bigger than standard Strange quarks. In previous models of the Fibonacci model of quark expansion, the numbers (10^2 to 10^5) are well known and within the known potential of this dimension of dark matter. We can expect this dimension of dark matter stable components within isolated dark matter, such as within isolated galactic halos. However, trapped dark matter components such as within stars, planets and moons may be decaying quickly, as exhibited by our own Moon, which has shut down and become locked in its gravitationally stabilized orbit, and the planets Mercury and perhaps even Mars, which apparently have also slowed down, and headed for stopping. This energetic model is shocking, and further dark matter and similar quark models, may be decaying or already gone, so the Mum/Mon model will be an important strategic exploration and investigation. I like the Chrysanthemum model for quarks anyway. It depicts the exponential growth of standard model quarks that we have already seen. However, I think we will see a plateauing of such quark expansions, I think the upper limit of further discoveries such as within the Cern Large Hadron Collider may be reached at about 10,000 times the mass of standard model Up quarks. Spoiler Alert: There may be some new quarks within this range. However, some dimensions or ranges of dark matter quarks may already have expired and would only be available at galactic scales of discovery and investigation. So dark matter research may still have local frontiers to discover, but may stall at this range. The good news is that we have an extremely long time to do this research and discovery of standard model quarks before dark energy expansion catches up with us. Relax. It's cool. I hope that you have enjoyed this Fibonacci mathematical Chrysanthemum experiment in both quarks and dark matter. Thank you for reading. part 3 Ok. So we are now assuming the Fibonnacci based Chrysanthemum model of hyperdimensional dark matter and quarks. Or we still have sluggards or Luddites who can't keep up. In this assumptive model, this structure suggests that such matter would be in the range of 10^5 to 10^8 times the mass of standard model quarks. For regular folks this is from 10,000 times to 100,000,000 times this mass. That is really close to the neutron star category of matter. While this may be amusing consider where this is going, the next phase of dark matter and as yet undiscovered quark masses would have to be in the range of 10^13 to 10^21, or 1,000,000,000,000 to 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 quark masses. Is this in the range of black holes yet? Or are we still stalled at very large neutron stars? Again we must pause and consider where we are. The first stages of dark matter is from 10^2 to 10^3 masses, the 2nd stage would be from 10^3 to 10^5 masses, the 3rd stage would be from 10^5 to 10^8 masses, and the 4th stage would be from 10^8 masses to 10^13 masses. Whew. Theoretically the 5th stage of dark matter would be 10^13 to 10^21 masses. That still leaves us with the 6th stage of the mass of dark matter and quarks. This is the staggering number of 10^21 to 10^34 masses for quarks and dark matter. Wow. This is clearly the end of our Chrysanthemum dark matter models. It is also the end of our hierarchical mass models. What comes after the end of our Electromagnetism model? I dare not postulate. But I suspect outer space models of dark energy. This is the incredible range of from 10^34 to 10^55 masses, a gut wrenching number times the mass of standard model quarks. This is the amount of masses that represents the beginning or the ending of the universe. It's not just a black hole. It's the end. Sorry - not sorry.

Please elaborate. How does that explain the flat rotation curves? How does that explain the Bullet cluster? How does that explain structure formation in the universe? How does that explain the BAOs?

@@bjornfeuerbacher5514 if you try imagining time moving slower around mass based on its density and volume. and mass moving along the path of least resistance . slow time being easier to move through. then when you see galaxies that look like hurricanes. with most of the mass in a flat plane of orbit. or the clusters of galaxies that form filaments . moving away from each other as the density increases. pushing time further out. and space with it. drawing in loose mass. what would you expect to see.

@@atticuswalker So you can dream up a thought experiment. Nice for you. And now show the actual math, please. Show an actual calculation how this works. "slow time being easier to move through." Why should that be the case? This is simply word salad, there is no actual physics behind this. And no, galaxies do _not_ look like hurricanes, there is only a ___VERY___ superficial visible resemblance. And a _total_ different structure. And _totally_ different forces which are governing their behaviour. "with most of the mass in a flat plane of orbit." Thanks for confirming that galaxies are not like hurricanes. In hurricanes, there is _not_ most of the mass in a flat plane.

@@bjornfeuerbacher5514 more time to cross the same distance takes less force. have you seen a hurricane. they are not shaped like balls. there is a centre that the rest rotates around. one centre is relatively lower density space. the other is very high density space. sourounded by a relatively flat plane of rotating mass. getting denser to the interior horison of the different centre's.

@@atticuswalker I notice that you did not bother to show any math... So let's try this again: Show your math, please. "more time to cross the same distance takes less force" Pardon? Where did you get that from? More time to cross the same distance takes less velocity (or speed), not less force! Yes, I have seen a hurricane. Yes, they are not shaped like balls. But also no, they are not shaped like galaxies. No, they are not shaped like flat discs. And they have no central bulge. And no halo. And no globular clusters. And the spiral arms have a total different structures. And so on. (Oh, by the way: there are lots of galaxies that _are_ shaped like balls.) "one centre is relatively lower density space. the other is very high density space." And in a galaxy, it's the other way round: it is very dense in the center and less dense in the surroundings. Thanks for confirming that a galaxy is _not_ like a hurricane. "getting denser to the interior horison of the different centre's." Pardon? I can't figure out what this is supposed to mean.

These people specialize in physics, not whatever you're talking about. If all our "intellectual capital" focuses on one thing, there will be development delays in the other fields. + Every field has their respective amount of scientists/researchers. Stop being a silly goober and bringing that debate to a video where it's literally about physics/dark matter.

Climate change isn’t a tech problem, it’s a political problem. Sequestration or other tech solutions are likely to need lots of time and lots of bountiful free energy which won’t make the problem better fast enough before we’re at already highly disastrous effects. Scientists, on average, do not have the kind of intelligence that allows them to persuade people into action.

"JWST has long ruled out all cold dark matter theories" Pardon? What are you talking about? Strange that most astrophysicist disagree with you on that, don't you think? :D And what is EZPE?!? I tried googling that acronym, but found nothing that fits here.

@bjornfeuerbacher5514 EZPE is electro-zero-point energy. It is part of a theory that dark energy also acts as a fluid that builds dark matter. Initiated by net charges in a cosmic plasma, zero point energy can condense on mass concentrations. No longer causing expansion, it is called EZPE. I have seen no evidence for this but it does apparently make testable predictions.

@@michaelharper8503 Thanks for the explanation. I looked it up... Ok, contrary to most stuff one finds in the commentary section of KZfaq videos, this actually seems to be a sensible scientific hypothesis, proposed by someone who knows what he is talking about. We'll see in the future if there will be evidence for that.

Dark matter is dilated mass. General Relativity predicts dilation, not singularities. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" Einstein wrote - "The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General Relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star clusters) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light." He was referring to the phenomenon of dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. It's the phenomenon behind the phrase "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". Time dilation is just one aspect of dilation, it's not just time that gets dilated. Dilation is the original and correct explanation for why we cannot see light from the galactic center. Einstein's reasoning on why singularities do not exist is solid as a rock. He is known to have repeatedly spoken about this. Nobody believed in them when he was alive including Plank, Bohr, Schrodinger, Dirac, Heisenberg, Feynman etc. Dilation will occur wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass because high mass means high momentum. There is no place in the universe where mass is more concentrated than at the center of a galaxy. It can be inferred mathematically that the mass at the center of our own galaxy must be dilated. In other words that mass is all around us. Sound familiar? This is the explanation for the abnormally high rotation rates of stars in spiral galaxies, the "missing mass" is dilated mass. Einstein wrote about dilation occurring in "large clusters of stars" which is basically a very low mass galaxy. For a galaxy to have no/low dilation it must have very, very low mass. To date, 6 very, very low mass galaxies have been confirmed to show no signs of dark matter. This also explains why all planets and all binary stars have normal rotation rates, not 3 times normal. There was clarity in astronomy before television and movies started to popularize singularities in the 1960's

This does not address the strange behavior throughout a given galaxy. Momentum of large entire galaxies is not properly addressed with the "dilation" model. Dark matter seems to quantified in its model. Of course find hard evidence of it might be hard to get. The evidence of dark matter is overwhelming. Sadly the evidence for the standard model particle of dark matter is completely lacking. Here's the problem. Dark Matter has been around for far longer than standard model particles. Since they are so old and slow moving and neutral and massive they are not found just anywhere. In fact they tend to be found only at the centers of large massive objects like stars and planets and moons and the like. Otherwise, they are found in the halos of galaxies. The exception would seem to be large massive yet fragmented objects, such as the asteroid belt protoplanet between Mars and Jupiter. The masses of dark matter particles may well have several varieties from the least massive and youngest to the most massive and oldest. The least massive and youngest may well fall into the logarithmic scale proportional to that between Gravity and Electromagnetism. This is the hierarchical scale with Hadronic and Leptonic quarks at one end, the bottom end of this scale. This spans 10^36 in a scale proportional to the relative number of dimensions applying to this scale. Clearly there must be several dimensions in this scale. Approximately 7 dimensions seems to be the least massive divisision of this logarithmic scale that makes any sense. Applying a natural scale suggests that at minimum 1/18 of 36 or about 10^2 times as massive as quarks for the least massive initial stages or types of forms of dark matter, while 1/7 of 36 or about 10^5 or more times as massive as quarks for the most massive forms of the initial stages or types of dark matter. Consequentially, small quantities of this novel form of dark matter should be able to be detected, then found, isolated, formally discovered, transported, refined and manufactured. Obviously research and developments in the asteroid belt are going to be instrumental in this discovery. The slow pace of space exploration seems to mean that it's going to be a while before we get this discovery at long last. Of course, the future of dark matter doesn't really begin until its formal discovery, so we'll have to wait till then, whenever that may be. part 2 Ok. So the Chrysanthemum or Mum, sometimes called the Mon when depicted in art, can now be understood in terms of highly temporary but sometimes long lived quark models. It is sometimes well established that early versions of the mum were constricted within 2 dimensions. They were strongly limited, apparently limited to about 21 petals, as predicted by Fibonnacci. However, in later Mon depictions, full blown 3 dimensional mums have been depicted and are apparently grown and are flourishing. These are much larger than previous 2 dimensional models. In counterpart, quark models in the standard model have far exceeded the dark matter models contemplated. For instance, Charm quarks are over 600 times larger than standard Up quarks, and Bottom quarks are over 400 times bigger than standard Strange quarks. In previous models of the Fibonacci model of quark expansion, the numbers (10^2 to 10^5) are well known and within the known potential of this dimension of dark matter. We can expect this dimension of dark matter stable components within isolated dark matter, such as within isolated galactic halos. However, trapped dark matter components such as within stars, planets and moons may be decaying quickly, as exhibited by our own Moon, which has shut down and become locked in its gravitationally stabilized orbit, and the planets Mercury and perhaps even Mars, which apparently have also slowed down, and headed for stopping. This energetic model is shocking, and further dark matter and similar quark models, may be decaying or already gone, so the Mum/Mon model will be an important strategic exploration and investigation. I like the Chrysanthemum model for quarks anyway. It depicts the exponential growth of standard model quarks that we have already seen. However, I think we will see a plateauing of such quark expansions, I think the upper limit of further discoveries such as within the Cern Large Hadron Collider may be reached at about 10,000 times the mass of standard model Up quarks. Spoiler Alert: There may be some new quarks within this range. However, some dimensions or ranges of dark matter quarks may already have expired and would only be available at galactic scales of discovery and investigation. So dark matter research may still have local frontiers to discover, but may stall at this range. The good news is that we have an extremely long time to do this research and discovery of standard model quarks before dark energy expansion catches up with us. Relax. It's cool. I hope that you have enjoyed this Fibonacci mathematical Chrysanthemum experiment in both quarks and dark matter. Thank you for reading. part 3 Ok. So we are now assuming the Fibonnacci based Chrysanthemum model of hyperdimensional dark matter and quarks. Or we still have sluggards or Luddites who can't keep up. In this assumptive model, this structure suggests that such matter would be in the range of 10^5 to 10^8 times the mass of standard model quarks. For regular folks this is from 10,000 times to 100,000,000 times this mass. That is really close to the neutron star category of matter. While this may be amusing consider where this is going, the next phase of dark matter and as yet undiscovered quark masses would have to be in the range of 10^13 to 10^21, or 1,000,000,000,000 to 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 quark masses. Is this in the range of black holes yet? Or are we still stalled at very large neutron stars? Again we must pause and consider where we are. The first stages of dark matter is from 10^2 to 10^3 masses, the 2nd stage would be from 10^3 to 10^5 masses, the 3rd stage would be from 10^5 to 10^8 masses, and the 4th stage would be from 10^8 masses to 10^13 masses. Whew. Theoretically the 5th stage of dark matter would be 10^13 to 10^21 masses. That still leaves us with the 6th stage of the mass of dark matter and quarks. This is the staggering number of 10^21 to 10^34 masses for quarks and dark matter. Wow. This is clearly the end of our Chrysanthemum dark matter models. It is also the end of our hierarchical mass models. What comes after the end of our Electromagnetism model? I dare not postulate. But I suspect outer space models of dark energy. This is the incredible range of from 10^34 to 10^55 masses, a gut wrenching number times the mass of standard model quarks. This is the amount of masses that represents the beginning or the ending of the universe. It's not just a black hole. It's the end. Sorry - not sorry.

@@MrConstitutionDay It's not a matter of opinion, dark matter is dilated mass