Challenge: Average Gravity vs. Dark Matter?

Home ／ EFT Popular Science Article

Dark matter has never been directly confirmed, while over a hundred unstable particles are already known. If such short-lived particles continually appear and vanish, their masses can sum to an average gravity across cosmic volumes. A density on the order of 2 g per trillion cubic kilometers could reproduce “dark-matter-like” effects. A joint study of 50 galaxy-cluster mergers shows consistent evidence for this pattern.

I. Dark Matter vs. Average Gravity

Astronomers observe “missing gravity” phenomena that account for roughly 85% of the Universe’s matter budget.

• Mainstream physics:
• It posits long-lived, as-yet undetected dark matter particles that provide the extra pull.
• Energy Filament Theory (EFT):
• Stable particles have mass; unstable particles do too. These “short-lived actors” pull here and there. Over cosmic scales, their effects add up to an average gravity comparable to dark matter. (Order of magnitude: ~2 g per 10^12 km³.)

II. A Head-On Test: Early Supermassive Black Holes

Observations reveal supermassive black holes as early as 470 million years after the Big Bang—UHZ1 is about ten times the mass of the Milky Way’s central black hole.

• Average gravity (EFT):
• In the early Universe, once the average gravity from abundant unstable particles crosses a threshold, collapse to black holes can occur directly.
• Mainstream physics:
• Reaching UHZ1-scale in only 470 million years requires a chain of demanding assumptions: very massive seeds, uninterrupted rapid accretion, sustained super-Eddington phases, and frequent mergers. In short, to fix “they grow too fast,” one must first add more premises.

III. Predictive Consistency in Galaxy-Cluster Collisions

EFT predicts that average gravity leaves four co-occurring, falsifiable signatures:

• Event-Driven: It rises prominently during major events such as mergers or shocks.
• Delayed Response: The change in overall gravitational pull lags behind the shock fronts and cold fronts.
• Accompanied Emission: Non-thermal radiation—radio halos or relics, with ordered polarization—appears alongside the effect.
• Rolling Boundaries: At the edges, one sees ripples and shear; brightness and pressure show a granular, wavy pattern.

Concretely, when clusters collide, dark-matter gravity would respond immediately, whereas average gravity should trail by a beat and come with non-thermal emission and medium “rolling.” In a joint analysis of 50 cluster mergers, these four features show an average correlation of ~82% with the predictions. This is exactly where average gravity and dark matter differ.

IV. Why Average Gravity Deserves Attention

1. No new cast—use known ingredients:
2. Laboratories have already cataloged hundreds of unstable particles. Counting their mass toward gravity is a natural step.
3. One idea, many wins:
   • Dark matter: Often needs different patches to explain different phenomena—rotation curves via halo profiles and feedback, merging-cluster offsets via self-interaction cross-sections, early structures via initial conditions, and so on.
   • EFT’s average gravity: With one mechanism, it can address rotation-curve boosts, lensing excess, and the “pull refill” timing seen in merger chronologies.
4. Explaining linked phenomena:
   • Dark matter: Synchrony across signals usually calls for extra models (for example, plasma or turbulence frameworks).
   • EFT / average gravity: It predicts four features that arrive together and in a specific sequence.

V. Conclusion and Next Steps

Our position:

• Occam’s razor:
• EFT does not introduce ad-hoc new components. It uses average gravity to interpret more phenomena with fewer assumptions. Such unifying explanations should be prioritized for testing—and for attempts at falsification.
• Falsifiable handle:
• Across 50 cluster mergers, we observe the predicted four-feature linkage with ~82% average correlation. If larger samples fail to reproduce this pattern, or if systematic counter-examples appear, that would count against the proposal.
• Parallel, not adversarial:
• We do not deny dark matter. We offer a parallel, mechanism-clear, falsifiable explanation.

A concise reading guide, full figures, and methodological details are available on our website for independent checks and rebuttals.

Official site: energyfilament.org (short domain: 1.tt)

Tip: Readers interested in early black holes and cluster collisions can consult sections 2.3, 3.8, and 3.21 on the site.

Support

We are a self-funded group. Studying the universe is not a hobby but a personal mission. Please follow us and share this article—your single act of sharing is vital to the development of this new physics under Energy Filament Theory. Thank you!