Web of Dark Shadows

Cold Dark Matter (CDM) comprises approximately 27% of the universe, yet its true nature remains unknown. Add that to the 68% of the universe made up of dark energy, an even greater mystery, and we arrive at an unsettling realization: 95% of the cosmos remains unexplained.

Socrates famously said, “The only thing I know is that I know nothing.” Over two millennia later, physicists might agree. But two researchers from Dartmouth propose a compelling possibility: perhaps early energetic radiation, such as photons, expanded and cooled into massive fermions, which later condensed into cold dark matter, the invisible force holding galaxies together. Over billions of years, this dark matter may be decomposing into dark energy, the force accelerating cosmic expansion.

Their theory centers on super-heavy fermions, particles a million times heavier than electrons, which behave in an unexpected way due to chiral symmetry breaking: where mirror-image particles become unequally distributed, favoring one over the other. Rather than invoking exotic physics, their model works within the framework of the Standard Model but takes it in an unexpected direction.

In the early universe, these massive fermions behaved like radiation, freely moving through space. However, as the cosmos expanded and cooled, they reached a critical threshold, undergoing a phase transition, much like how matter shifts between liquid, solid, and gas.

During this transformation, fermion-antifermion pairs condensed—similar to how electrons form Cooper pairs in superconductors, creating a stable, cold substance with minimal pressure and heat. This condensate became diffuse dark matter, shaping galaxies through its gravitational influence, acting as an invisible web counteracting their rotation and ensuring they don’t fly apart.

However, dark matter may not be as stable as once thought. The researchers propose that this condensate is slowly decaying, faster than standard cosmological models predict. This gradual decomposition feeds a long-lived energy source, possibly contributing to dark energy, the force responsible for the universe’s accelerated expansion.

A more radical interpretation, mine not the researchers, suggests that dark matter is not merely decaying, but evolving into dark energy, just as energetic fermion radiation once transitioned into dark matter. If this is true, dark matter and dark energy may be two phases of the same cosmic entity rather than separate forces.

If these hypothesis hold, we should be able to detect, as the researchers suggest, traces of this dark matter-to-dark energy transformation in the cosmic microwave background (CMB). Variations in density fluctuations and large-scale structures might reveal whether dark matter has been steadily shifting into dark energy, linking two of cosmology’s biggest unknowns into a single process.

Over billions of years, as dark matter transitions into dark energy, galaxies may slowly lose their gravitational cage and begin drifting apart. With dark energy accelerating the expansion, the universe may eventually reach a state where galaxies unravel completely, leaving only isolated stars in an endless void.

If dark matter started as a fine cosmic web, stabilizing galaxies, then over time, it may fade away completely, leaving behind only the accelerating force of dark energy. Instead of opposing forces locked in conflict, what if radiation, dark matter, and dark energy were simply different expressions of the same evolving entity?

A tetrahedron could symbolize this transformation:

  • Radiation (Energetic Era) – The expansive force that shaped the early universe.
  • Dark Matter (Structural Phase) – The stabilizing gravitational web forming galaxies.
  • Dark Energy (Expansion Phase) – The force accelerating cosmic evolution.
  • Time (Governing Force) – The missing element driving transitions between states.

Rather than the universe being torn apart by clashing forces, it might be engaged in a single, continuous transformation, a cosmic dance shaping the future of space.

Source: CDM Analogous to Superconductivity by Liang and Caldwell, May 2025, APS.org. Graphic: Galaxy and Spiderweb by Copilot.

Mamma Mia

Bohemian Rhapsody” was the eleventh track, and the first single released from Queen’s 1975 album, A Night at the Opera. Written by Freddie Mercury, the song has become the band’s signature tune and is hailed as one of the greatest rock songs ever recorded. Initially, critics were unsure what to make of the song, with some labeling it as a novelty, campy, calculated, and a brazen hodgepodge. However, they were all wrong. Rolling Stone ranked it 17th in its list of the 500 greatest songs in 2021, and Time ranked it among the top 100 songs written since 1923.

Mercury started writing the song in the 1960s, and it is a combination of three songs with multiple parts, including a cappella ballad, opera, and hard rock. This six-minute lament appeals to many, but everyone has their own interpretation of the song’s meaning. The band has never fully explained the lyrical meaning of the song, only stating that Freddie was a complicated individual with mercurial personality traits and habits. In the album’s Iranian release, it was mentioned in the liner notes that Freddie Mercury, of Indian and Persian descent, explained that ‘Bohemian Rhapsody‘ is about a young man who accidentally kills someone, makes a Faustian bargain by selling his soul to the devil, and ultimately calls upon God, Bismillah, to reclaim his soul.

Source: …Bohemian Rhapsody by Lily Rothman, Time, 2015. Graphic: Bohemian Rhapsody, Cover and Video by Queen, 2008.

Exploration 17: Time

I have a few questions. If time didn’t exist–

  • How old would you be when you die?
  • How would you separate your birth from that of your mother’s?
  • Would you be self-aware?
  • Or in a slightly diffent form, would life be possible?
  • What form would E=mc2 and F=ma take?
    • E and F=m–some form of a n-dimensional black hole?
    • E and F=0–absolute zero temp, nothingness? This seems silly.
  • What form would physics, the universe, and everything take without time?
  • Would mathematics be any different?
    • If mathematics is constant what would the metaphysical ramifications be?

Is time artificial, a construct, a rationalization for something we do not understand?

I’ll stop now.

It Happened Already

The Stars and The Earth or Thoughts upon Time, Space, and Eternity

By Felix Eberty

Translator: Josephine Caruana

Published by Comino-Verlag

Copyright: © 2018

A short read reflecting on the information carried by a photon as it reaches your eye from the far reaches of space.

Originally the book was published in two volumes, both together totaling less than 80 pages, in 1846 and 1847. The book sought the union of physics and religion, metaphysics; for God sees the past and the present as a single point in the space time continuum, time stopping when moving with the light, observing all in three dimensions rather than four. Eberty continues his thesis from an all-seeing God to a time when man’s technological progress allows him to see as God sees or the child of God becomes a god.

Eberty knowing that the speed of light was finite, about 300,000 km/s, contemplated that all visuals captured by any type of eye, human or otherwise, happened in the past. The past including an inconceivably, insignificantly small amount of time in the past, such as a plate of mac and cheese in front of you, is still in the past, what you see has already occurred. Jurgen Neffe, author of a biography of Albert Einstein, stated it succinctly “time travels with light”. Observing light traveling from a billion light years away exhibits events as they happened a billion years ago but if you traveled with those photons for those billion years the past occurs at the same time as your present.

Eberty’s thoughts on the meaning of time and space were recognized at the time not only as novel but metaphysical in nature, maybe not so much today.

A Waste in Time

A Wrinkle in Time   M Wrinkle 2018

Rated:  PG

Runtime:  109 minutes

Genre:  Adventure – Family – Fantasy – Science Fiction

Theaters:  February/March 2018

Streaming:  NA

els:  1.5/10

IMDB:  4.1/10

Amazon:  NA/5 stars

Rotten Tomatoes Critics:  5.2/10

Rotten Tomatoes Audience:  2.5/5

Metacritic Metascore:  52/100

Metacritic User Score:  2.9/10

Awards: NA

Directed by: Ava DuVernay

Written by:  Jennifer Lee, Jeff Stockwell (screenplay), Madeleine L’Engle (book)

Music by:  Ramin Djawadi

Cast: Oprah Winfrey, Reese Witherspoon, Mindy Kaling, Storm Reid, Levi Miller, Chris Pine

Film Locations:  Eureka, Los Angeles, Santi Clarita – California – US;  Hunter Valley, Wanaka – Otaga – New Zealand

Budget: $103,000,000

Worldwide Take: $39,000,000 (Opening Weekend)

Dr. Murray (Pine), an astrophysicist, referred to as Mr. Murray for reasons not stated, tells an audience of his peers that he can transverse 93 billion light years in the wink of an eye using a concept called tessering.  He is laughed off the stage. Later he disappears without a trace leaving his wife and two children adrift in the world without him. Charles Wallace (Deric McCabe), youngest sibling of the two Dr. Murrays and a child prodigy, discovers the three Ws: Mrs. Which (Oprah), Mrs. Whatsit (Reese Witherspoon) and Mrs. Who (Mindy Kaling); shape shifting, time travelers who are in search of a hero to save the universe. Charles Wallace introduces his socially inept sister, Meg (Storm Reid) to the Ws and they all convince her to be that hero; to search for her father and save the universe before the evil thing, It, destroys all that is light and good.

B Wrinkle 1962The movie is based on the Madeleine L’Engle’s 1962 book A Wrinkle in Time, a children’s book that was rejected 26 times before eventually finding a publisher: Farrar, Straus & Giroux. The book has been  in continuous print ever since.  The book, as with the movie, deals openly with evil while simultaneously equating Jesus with Buddha and other notable humans.  Publishers felt these topics too heavy for children and too anti-Christian for adults.  Later L’Engle hinted, because the hero was female, that misogyny also contributed to its multiple rejections. Elizabeth Bennett, Jane Eyre, Scott Finch, Dorothy Gale, Anna Karenina, Joe March, Lady Macbeth, and Natasha Rostova could not be reached for comment.

The director, Ava DuVernay, opened the movie with a brief comment on making the film and thanking the viewers for watching, almost begging them to like it.  This was a tact that I have never experienced before, at least that I can remember (maybe Walt Disney did the same with his movies).  At some level, I suspect, she was warning us that what was to follow was an absolute rotter.  She has managed to make a movie where not one single thing clicks.  It’s all strung together scenes with no audience connection, no avenues provided to bring the viewers into the movie. She gives us no reason to like this movie, just reasons to hope it ends soon.  DuVernay along with the writers Lee and Stockwell seem to have a lot of ideas to make great movies but using them all in one film is probably not wise.  The long drudgery of scene on the planet Uriel comes across as an excuse to film in 3D and imitate the 2009 film Avatar. Sorry, but James Cameron did it better.  For a children’s movie the writing was childish. The Ws tell Meg that her faults are her strengths.  Later Meg tries telling her brother that she is uncoordinated and we are supposed to believe that this is a strength that will conquer the big bad evil thing, It.

This is the first movie that a female director was given a $100 million for a budget.  I’m sure it’s not the last big budget for a woman but hopefully its the last for DuVernay.  As for Jennifer Lee it appears animation is where her talents are best utilized.

There is very little good to say about the acting. Oprah is thoroughly wooden throughout the movie and never quite figures out where to look when using the green screen.  Mindy Kaling reads her lines with no delivery —  sad. Meg has no ability beyond deer in the headlights wonder. Witherspoon was charming and excellent but not enough to cancel out the bad acting going on all around her.  Zach Galifianakis, playing the Happy Medium, was also fun and he had the only line in the movie that made me laugh.  He is lecturing Meg and she tells him he sounds like her mother.  Galifianakis responds in all seriousness, “Why is she a baritone?”.

My family watched this movie together at a theater, which we very seldom do anymore; streaming at home is so much easier.  With my wife and I were our 26 year-old daughter, 15 year-old son, and 3 year-old granddaughter. Not one of us 5 liked the movie.  Not the kid, not the teenager, not the young adult, not us slightly older folks.

The granddaughter didn’t exactly say the movie was bad, she just didn’t watch it.  While the movie was playing she found a better use of her time; passing out popcorn to the rest of us one kernel at a time.  In the end I’m not sure who Disney made this movie for or why they wasted everyone’s time with it.  Save your time and cherish your time, see something else with your precious time.  I haven’t seen a movie this bad in long time.

Dying Young

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (Theaters – December 2008; Streaming – May 2009) M Button 2008Rated: PG  —  Runtime: 166 minutes

Genre: Drama – Fantasy – Mystery – Romance – Suspense

els – 7.5/10

IMDB – 7.8/10

Amazon – 4.6/5 stars

Rotten Tomatoes Critics – 7.1/10

Rotten Tomatoes Audience – 3.7/5

Metacritic Metascore – 70/100

Metacritic User Score – 7.3/10

Awards:  3 Academy Awards – Nominated for 13

Director:  David Fincher

Written by:  Eric Roth (story and screenplay), Robin Swicord (story), F. Scott Fitzgerald (story)

Music by:  Alexandre Desplat

Cast:  Brad Pitt, Cate Blanchett, Julia Ormond

Film Locations:  Cambodia; Montreal, Canada; India; Burbank, Los Angeles, California – Donaldsonville, Laplace, Mandeville, Morgan City, New Orleans, Louisiana, US; St. Thomas, US Virgin Island

Budget:  $167,000,000

Worldwide Take:  $379,000,000

Mr. Gateau, the best clockmaker in all of the southern US, is commissioned to build a clock for a new train station set to open in 1918. When the clock is unveiled, it is running backwards. Mr. Gateau, who lost a son to the recent war, affirms that it is running as designed; to  grant those lost to the war a way back to life and the living.  On 11 November 1918, Armistice Day, Benjamin Button (Brad Pitt) is born, wrinkled and worn, losing his mother to his birth and his father, abandoning him on the porch of an orphanage. Benjamin is a consistent contradiction, experiencing life in a counter-clockwise direction.

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button took 20 years, 7 potential directors prior to Fincher, 3 lead actors before Pitt, 3 different possible producers, and 2 production companies to finally deliver a product for the viewing public to consume. David Fincher brings his visual effect expertise to the forefront, as he usually does, with this enchanted story of love and time. He balances the CGI with a spellbinding collage of romance and courage that moves beyond the flesh. The visual effects are absolutely stunning, keeping this fantasy real and believable.  Fincher was likely the only director that could make this movie and keep the audience interested.

Brad Pitt contributes a somewhat predictable performance, detached but lovable, low-key and restrained, letting his body language provide the message, more so than his dialogue. It works and adds to the mystic of the film but it’s Cate Blanchett’s Daisy that draws you into this movie.  Daisy is a very complex character and Blanchett handles it with grace, charm, and a natural style that holds you in a delightful, enamored state of wonder throughout the film. Sad that she wasn’t even nominated for her more than deserving efforts by the Academy or the Golden Globes.

Benjamin Button is beautifully made, telling a story of true love that outstrips the concepts of time.