Dark matter disappointment

LadyStanley

Registered User
Sep 22, 2004
106,529
19,546
Sin City
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...r-dark-matter-leaves-scientists-empty-handed/

A team of scientists that included a UC Berkeley phycisist have come up empty-handed in their latest effort to find elusive dark matter, the plentiful stuff that helps galaxies like ours form.

For three years scientists have been looking for dark matter nearly a mile underground in a former gold mine in South Dakota.

The group announced Thursday that despite sensitive equipment working better than expected, they couldn’t find the invisible particles that make up four-fifths of the universe’s matter.

:dunno: Win some, lose some. :naughty:
 

Hippasus

1,9,45,165,495,1287,
Feb 17, 2008
5,616
346
Bridgeview
Dark matter is a hypothesis, perhaps compensating for gaps in our understanding of gravity. We have not been able to see direct evidence of it in experiments, such as through CERN's laboratory, even after trying for decades, but it has nevertheless continued to be seen as constituting a significant portion of physical reality (~27%). Recent studies have begun to call into question some of our fundamental assumptions. There could be gaps in our understanding of the standard model of particle physics and distortions in our larger-scale observations of the cosmos, such as in galaxy clusters. As Sagan said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Perhaps using Ockham's razor would be beneficial for astrophysics and cosmology.

Wikipedia said:
In astronomy, dark matter is a hypothetical form of matter that appears not to interact with light or the electromagnetic field. Dark matter is implied by gravitational effects which cannot be explained by general relativity unless more matter is present than can be seen. Such effects occur in the context of formation and evolution of galaxies, gravitational lensing, the observable universe's current structure, mass position in galactic collisions, the motion of galaxies within galaxy clusters, and cosmic microwave background anisotropies.




 
Last edited:

TheGreenTBer

shut off the power while I take a big shit
Apr 30, 2021
9,247
10,905
I have never, ever been comfortable with the notion of dark matter. It always seemed like an ad-hoc hack to explain gravitational observations and I think at least some of the effects can be explained by primordial black holes.

I am actually much more comfortable with the notion of dark energy; vacuum energy is a very approachable concept for anyone with a background in quantum field theory (though obviously different here) and if the vacuum doesn't have energy we have a TON of observations we can't explain right now.
 

Hippasus

1,9,45,165,495,1287,
Feb 17, 2008
5,616
346
Bridgeview
I have never, ever been comfortable with the notion of dark matter. It always seemed like an ad-hoc hack to explain gravitational observations and I think at least some of the effects can be explained by primordial black holes.

I am actually much more comfortable with the notion of dark energy; vacuum energy is a very approachable concept for anyone with a background in quantum field theory (though obviously different here) and if the vacuum doesn't have energy we have a TON of observations we can't explain right now.
I'm a novice when it comes to physics, like most of us, but I suspect similar criticisms could apply to the prospect of dark energy. I wish I knew more to seriously weigh-in on this "stuff", but it's possible that we're taking old theories for granted, such as general relativity. If there are significant enough discrepancies amidst our assumptions, theories, and observations, a paradigm shift could re-emerge, like alchemy transforming into chemistry.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheGreenTBer

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad