Regarding the Cosmic Dark Sector

 Intelligent minds consider the cosmos, before any inception that we are familiar with, started in the dark. Likely, with the accelerated expansion/ big freeze and other current end theories, it will end as dark after all the ephemeral light material, stars and all, have burned up their fuel, or by other means. Scientists marked in the early 2000's that the rate of ignition of optic sources like star birth is significantly dropped since the early times of the cosmos (see "Universe Today", ~2/11/2009, "look back to cosmic dawn" and report in "Space. com", Feb. 17, 2009. The study was conducted by Alvaro Orsi at Durham University, UK. A similar report has been submitted to the magazine, "Science" in late 2018.) An earlier paper by Fred C. Adams and Gregory Laughlin, "A Dying Universe' has detailed treatment. Scientists say already the universe is 94% darkness, at least.

We currently observe the cosmos which is lit. We focus and primitively dote on what is the optic sector. It was not always around. It wasn't in the primeval stage and won't be after all the stellar energy is burned away and produces no more.

We understand that for there to be light, hydrogen and other elements need to congeal at a location and then ignite. Darkness does not require that formulation, nor need it necessarily be visible. It can be spread everywhere without a specific formulation and pervade, which ephemeral, limited light sources cannot do. When the lights of stars are exhausted and the universe is dark, that does not mark the end of the universe or its processing. Nor does it mean in such a case that all that was involved or produced since the cosmic inception is undone or void. The electromagnetic spectrum range consists of more than the visible spectrum.

This does not mean that there is nothing in the dark sector, it's not only cold and dark. There are many things in the dark and processes. It is just to us that they are not seen. They are not yet lit, if at all because some bodies don't generate enough threshold energy or right composition to light up or have ultra dense gravity which does not emit light and so they remain as dark bodies and remain unlit in the beginning, present, and future. But they can precede the existence or absence of illumination, even as lower energy bodies. Nor does it mean that what is in the dark is simply a counterpart of the optic cosmos. Yet it seems relying on just the optic data is not a thorough going way to understand the universe. (It is not the purpose here to explain the presence of cosmic bodies.) Much is being discovered and lot of tracking and clarification lies ahead in this field and others. As some have said, we are not only from stardust, considering how stars come about, then we are also compositionally from dark...

Another related term applied is antigravity or repulsion. From Alexander Friedmann's work, it can be said, "This is how antigravity of the vacuum appears if the effective density is negative, the corresponding gravitational mass Mefv is negative as well, and therefore this mass will repel particles rather than attract them." A dynamic workup can be seen: arxiv.org 1402.4522

After some evaluations about the Dark sector and its relations, it may be said, "one is free to contemplate dark chemistry and beyond. Dark matter constitutes a large majority of the matter density of the universe, and there is no reason to assume a priori that physics there is any less rich and interesting than that of ordinary matter."

A Dark Genesis:

[The cosmos began in the dark, thereby, earliest processes were dark nuclear synthesis. It is also believed that before the 'last scattering', the cosmos was in the dark.]

There are processes going on in the dark, they are just not lit. There are Dark nuclei, dark quarks and anti quark, Dark Stars, Dark galaxies, and Dark baryogenesis,  Dark electromagnetic process, Dark gas, Dark Flow, etc. They may not operate in the same capacities as we are used to with the optic cosmos. In the dark, which preceded light, they developed differently in some cases, see example on violation of Lorentz gravity, Jiayin Shen and Xun Xue, arxiv: 1802.03502 release Oct. 13, 2018. In some, like Dark gas, Dark Radiation, Dark Energy,  e.g. on Cosmic Dark Radiation Background (CDRB), arxiv:1105.3246 by Tristan Smith, also arxiv:1109.2767 by Melchiorri and Maria Archidiacono, they do not directly interact with our electromagnetic processes and so even though Dark Energy is the prominent mover of the universe, it does not interact with our positive particles. In this way, some of the natures of the Dark Sector are described as "collisionless",. "e.g. "Due to the high-order interaction between gamma and SM particles, we cannot expect to directly observe dark radiation". It is also said Dark Energy does not emit or absorb light. Their genesis in the pervading dark may have arisen differently and with different values and different quantum spin on their elements and composition than what we perceive with our optic cosmos.

"if one wishes to produce an increase in Neff in the CMB, but retrain the standard-model value for Neff in BBN, then an obvious possibility is the production of relativistic, non-electromagnetically interacting particles from the decay of a massive relic particle after BBN. Such a scenario for the dark radiation was considered by Ichikawa, et al..." from paper of Menestrina and Robert J. Scherrer, 2011.

 As presently said with Dark gas,Dark Radiation and Dark Energy which do not process with current physics explanations, if they don't proceed with the same operations then it should be found how they proceed differently and what that makes of influential, relational interaction with the cosmos and future events. What is described as repulsive energy blew the cosmos into its expanding existence and repulsive energy will continue acceleration and expansion long after the universe is no longer lit, since it appears the repulsive energy is not dependent on development of the baryons or positive elements. It is noted at least with Dark Energy, ala negative pressure, its repulsive force will drive galaxies further apart. Eventually, the bodies will be so far apart that they will no longer interact with each other, i.e. there will be no more galactic collisions and hence no more interchange of gasses, etc. With some of the dark elements, there may arise a different nucleosynthesis different from Big Bang Nucleosynthesis, e.g. darkleosynthesis. A strong, dynamic interaction is presented by Sourich Dutta and Robert J. Scherrer in a paper, "Dark Radiation as a signature of dark energy" arxiv. 0902.4699, which among other things says the universe has left the false vacuum and is in the true vacuum.

It can be a question of the "Big" Bang, which is said to start minutely, whether a tiny point can survive and survive long enough without being smothered for a "hot" inflation to save and bolster it. The macroverse likely emerged from an obscure background. It could be there were a collection of points instead of one which coalesced and contributed to the start of the cosmos. (Presently, there are reports of very early star growth found at various locations and various evolvement.) There likely are other processes unseen or unfound that contribute to the arising of a cosmos. A dark nucleosynthesis may not run the risk of forming an anthropic principle that the optic one currently experiences.

Presumably, the Dark Higgs would follow from the background. "Dissipation becomes longer than the Hubble time." This can be useful because the Dark Higgs lasts longer, 0.1 seconds which is a longer lifetime than the positive Higgs, and helps improve its detection. Jonathan L. Feng of U of Cal, Irvine says the Dark sector for its detected activities has to be contemplated as real and cannot be dismissed.  This may add to the Dark sector's presence and population which shows that it may have more duration in the cosmos. The Dark sector elements  can interact with one another and may even form amongst themselves. Yet, there may be some particle that even precedes Higgs on the make up of the  cosmos matter to be discovered.

"Darkness there was: at first concealed in darkness this ALL was indiscriminated chaos

"All that existed then was void and formless"

Hindu Creation Hymn CXXIX

After the first age:

 [Although acknowledged "our" cosmos is preceded by dark, the "first age" has been designated for entropy and stellar activity by myopic, modern scientists.]

The lights have gone out everywhere. What is left? It may indeed be difficult to discern any activity in the second age. When there is no light, by what gauge will the measurements of the universe be determined?

If it goes the way of the big freeze, then there is the presence of the immensely expanded albeit unlit universe. There will be much more volume than at the inception.

So, at that time, what scenario would there be? Perhaps bodies with geothermal retention may remain for a while. Certainly, cold bodies may drift in the voluminous, unlit second age, the expansion can continue. Likely to be very cold, so there will be contraction. With such greatly distanced bodies of over 1 billion light years between any, could sound be of any measure of interaction? Indeed, could time be meaningfully measurable in such a vast void? Some micro processes will continue for a while, especially those not related to bodies.

It may well be a cosmic historical wonder what will be perceptible at that very far future, if anyone is around. It is claimed the cosmos started in a dousing of light and especially energy. Then that is expected to be greatly diminished come the second age, especially if the scenario of big freeze and  immense dissipation come about. It started out with a bang and then what will be found of that bright energy in the second age. Those characteristics are not to be the same in the far future. Darkness dominates due to expansion and the nuclear heat is banked. Those landmarks we associate the universe with will not be evident later and probably irreconcilably so. 

If the world started in darkness, the world may also end the same, in darkness.

Note:The material herein is not necessarily a reflection of entropy of current societies.