Starts With A Bang

>"Calcium copper titanate (also abbreviated CCTO, for calcium copper titanium oxide) is an inorganic compound with the formula CaCu3Ti4O12. It is noteworthy for its extremely large dielectric constant (effective relative permittivity) of in excess of 10,000 at room temperature.[1]"

Also: https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/the-last-barrier-to-ultra-miniaturized-electronics-is-broken-thanks-to-a-new-type-of-inductor-eb5c1a2c7460

>"The photograph shows the large grains of a practical energy-storage material, calcium-copper-titanate (CCTO), which is one of the world’s most efficient and practical ‘supercapacitors.’ The density of the CCTO ceramic is 94 percent of the maximum theoretical density."

Here's a wierd idea:

When we think about capacitors -- we think about the ability (of a material) to hold an electrical charge.

But, what if it's not an electrical charge that the material is actually holding?

What if what the material is really holding -- is the deformation of space (compression, expansion, twisting, rarefaction, pressure, ?)

Or, what if the material was really holding -- was some kind of vibration or vibrations, just we can't detect them with our instruments just yet?

Or maybe both of the above, just that what it is, depends on how we look at it, what we measure, how we measure it...

Then, that in turn brings up the electrical field.

In theory, all capacitors should have some kind of electric field surrounding them.

In other words, let's suppose you had…

sigh I wouldn't have replied to this if you hadn't posted half a dozen comments. When I was 16 I thought special relativity was a hoax and I tried to demonstrate this with triangular diagrams scribbled in pencil in my notebooks. I ended up just rediscovering the Doppler effect. I never showed it to anyone, but when I think back, I still cringe a little. Relativity and time dilation are real things with real theory and real experiments.

You'd do well to do a little more research on the topic before posting so many comments on HN.

There is a ton of evidence for dark matter. We still don't know exactly what it is, but we do know lots about it (e.g. it is not baryonic matter because observation differs from theoretical models of how it would interact with ordinary baryonic matter). As for all that other evidence, the first hit on Google is for laymen:
https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/five-reasons-we-think-dark-matter-exists-a122bd606ba8

TLDR: gravitational lensing, missing mass, and three other really good reasons that dark matter is a serious subject of study.

Disclaimer: I am not a physicist. And I'm trying not to represent myself as one on HN.

Talking about this stuff is fun, sure. It's great to learn! But please don't spread ignorance with such high confidence. As for "just" Newtonian physics, there's a whole research field called "Modified Newtonian Dynamics" (MOND). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modified_Newtonian_dynamics

TLDR; there are lots of problems with…

> Space expands everywhere, also right in front of you, it is just a very small effect over short distances ... .07 nanometers per year but two points one kilometer apart move away with 70 nanometers per year because there are a thousand meters in between them

No, what you wrote is contradicted by evidence from within the inner solar system (MESSENGER's observations of solar mass loss were highly sensitive; we have excellent VLBI too), from other star systems, especially eclipsing binaries and systems with occluding planetary systems) and from galactic dynamics (LSR tests, peculiar motions, and lots of DM/dynamics evidence for galaxies at different redshifts). It is not how the standard model of cosmology works either. Grossly, 0.07 nanometers per metre per year expansion everywhere would be impossible to hide from solid state physics, and even several everyday polymers and ceramics; an expansion term would have to appear in accurate descriptions.

We cannot say there is no expansion at these scales, but the expansion is highly constrained and evidence requires that it effectively vanishes. A fifth-force mechanism like quintessence requires a shutdown mechanism inside galaxies that contain star systems like ours or TRAPPIST-1 or PSR~J0337+1715. Additionally it likely would need a shutdown in small structures (like asteroids) ejected from galaxy clusters by violent events, although we will not spot those in practice any time soon. Where there's a shutdown mechanism…

> There have been a longstanding problem that the history of the universe and cosmological distance scale haven't made sense. https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/the-hubble-tension-sti...

> When I was getting my PhD in condensed matter physics I was going to the department colloquium all the time and seeing astrophysics talks about how some people thought the hubble constant was 40 km/s/Mpc and others thought it was 80 km/s/Mpc. With timescape cosmology maybe they were both right.

You're (mis)remembering a different (old) problem and confusing it with a new one. The problem in the 1970s and 1980s was: what is the local expansion rate of the universe? Where "local" mean "within a few hundred megaparsecs". There were two main groups working on the problem: one group tended to find values of around 50 km/s/Mpc and other values of around 100. Gradually they began to converge (in the early 1990s, the low-H0 group getting values of around 60, the high-H0 group values of around 80), until a consensus emerged that it was in the low 70s, which is where we are now.

The "Hubble tension" is a disagreement between what we measure locally (i.e., a value in the low 70s) and what theory (e.g., LCDM) says we should measure locally, if you extrapolate the best-fitting cosmological models -- based on cosmological observations of the CMB, etc. -- down to now (a value in the upper 60s). This has only become a problem very recently, because the error bars on the local measurement and the…

>Although "Quantum Teleportation" could that theoretically be used to "teleport" a spacecraft FTL?

Everything I've ever read about quantum teleportation says no [0..2]. Even if state changes are instantaneous, the transmission of information itself is still limited to the speed of light (and a ship counts as "information" in this case), and the process of quantum teleportation would require some classical communication channel to transmit state.

All that notwithstanding the amount of energy you would need to "entangle" an entire ship in the first place.

[0]https://www.quora.com/Is-the-any-possibility-that-Quantum-Teleportation-may-eventually-enable-FTL-communication

[1]https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/ask-ethan-can-we-use-quantum-entanglement-to-communicate-faster-than-light-e0d7097c0322

[2]http://www.askamathematician.com/2013/01/q-what-is-quantum-teleportation-why-cant-we-use-it-to-communicate-faster-than-light/

Well, in this case they're not just inventing nonsense to fix one little thing. There are a lot of various pieces of evidence, all pointing to this fix. If you want to patch up a lot of little pieces of evidence, each with it's own magic, that would be even more "un-parsimonious".

The evidence for dark matter is pretty solid.

As this [1] article states, while giving 5 independent reasons scientists think dark matter exists, "No other idea explains even two of these".

Wikipedia lists eleven different places it shows up.

The research literature has more. And AFAIK there is no other unified (or even close to unified) explanation for all these observational pieces of evidence.

[1] https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/five-reasons-we-think-dark-matter-exists-a122bd606ba8

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter