Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Does Dark Matter?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    11

    Does Dark Matter?

    I've been given a warning about posting against the main stream by a very gentle and kind man. Having no questions regarding "established" arithmetic, I do go back on my word to Peter and have one question to the general public here, as I find a different place to spend my study time.
    Having established that the known universe consists of just 4% visible, measurable matter/mass as we know it , with galaxies and galaxy clusters shrouded in a known 27% mass from Dark Matter, and another excepted by main stream science 69% mass from Dark Energy : Knowing that Einstein called his own paper on Dark Matter , "his greatest Blunder" How can we ignore all the additional movement, and beautiful structure we can now see, with our own eyes, using modern equipment? Some scientific estimates include movement that would require 150 times the gravity in our currently "mainstream excepted " equations.
    So,, to the question. Do any of you suffer anxiety , or stress over such enormous irregularities? I mean I lose sleep because of the slow pace at which people are willing to admit the anomaly does not look like it just needs a band-aid. We are on the cusp of something huge, a complete re-righting If I were to take a guess. It is very exciting! Or am I alone here?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    2,845
    I honestly don't understand your question.

    Einstein's didn't write a paper on Dark Matter (his "greatest blunder" as he described it was to include a cosmological constant to counteract the contraction of the universe that would otherwise have seen his equations result in an unstable universe, when he believed that the universe was static. He described it as a blunder because subsequent observations showed that the universe is not static so the correction was not required - however, the Cosmological Constant has been revived conceptually because the effects of it mathematically seem to mirror the observed effects of so-called 'Dark Energy' in explaining an apparent acceleration of the rate of cosmic expansion).

    What is "all the additional movement" that you believe is being ignored? Do you mean the nature of Dark Energy (in which case it is most certainly not being ignored - it is the focus of considerable cutting edge research)?

    Sorry, I'm just really unclear over what aspect of this you are losing sleep.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Anzakistan
    Posts
    10,477
    A: No, I don't lose sleep over this. There's still stuff to figure out. People (actual experts) are working on it. No biggie.
    Measure once, cut twice. Practice makes perfect.
    Yes, Einstein said "It should be possible to explain the laws of physics to a barmaid", and he made some good Gedanken experiments. That doesn't mean one can simply drink a few beers, tell a story that makes 'sense', and go ask for a Nobel prize.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    a long way away
    Posts
    9,811
    Quote Originally Posted by DanielAShinerock View Post
    So,, to the question. Do any of you suffer anxiety , or stress over such enormous irregularities? I mean I lose sleep because of the slow pace at which people are willing to admit the anomaly does not look like it just needs a band-aid.
    It sounds like you think that dark matter and dark energy are "band-aids" (just ad-hoc "fixes") whereas what we should do is completely change our model of how gravity works. Is that correct?

    The thing is that "dark matter" and, even more so, "dark energy" are just placeholder names for whatever it is that causes the unexpected and so far unexplained observations.

    There are several possible explanations being investigated. For the case of dark matter, people are looking at it being some new form of matter that doesn't interact with light (and there a many different hypotheses for what that could be), others are looking at changing the way gravity works (and there are several different ways of doing that), and yet others are looking at even more "way out" ideas (some of which could explain both dark energy and dark matter, if they were correct).

    The same is true of dark energy - many different possible explanations are being investigated.

    In the case of dark matter, there is a lot of independent evidence that suggests it is most likely to be some form of matter. But that hasn't;t stopped the people looking at modifying gravity, etc.

    So, yes, we live in exciting times. Although I wouldn't lose any sleep over it. But I hope some of these questions are answered in my lifetime. (So they need to get a move on!)

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    The Wild West
    Posts
    9,196
    Quote Originally Posted by DanielAShinerock View Post
    How can we ignore all the additional movement, and beautiful structure we can now see, with our own eyes, using modern equipment?
    I don't know what "additional movement" you're talking about, but the question of structure formation has been investigated for at least the past 50 years, and not just by one person with a single expectation or agenda. The answer to your "question" is, in a word, gravity. Gravity has been at work for 13 billion years, resulting in the structures we see.
    Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    a long way away
    Posts
    9,811
    And, recent simulations show that dark matter is needed to accurately model the large scale structures and galaxies that we actually see. (And the same amount of dark matter as is needed to explain the rotation curves of galaxies and the orbits in galaxy clusters).
    For example: http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/060713/darkmatter.shtml

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    The Wild West
    Posts
    9,196
    Quote Originally Posted by Cougar View Post
    Gravity has been at work for 13 billion years, resulting in the structures we see.
    Well, if dark matter turns out to be cold weakly interacting particles, then gravity would have been working on the dark matter even before recombination at 380,000 years after the beginning, since the dark matter would be unaffected by the baryonic matter that remained in thermal equilibrium until recombination.
    Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Wellington, New Zealand
    Posts
    3,423
    Quote Originally Posted by DanielAShinerock View Post
    ... So,, to the question. Do any of you suffer anxiety , or stress over such enormous irregularities?
    These "enormous irregularities" are not listed in your post, obviously the answer is no.

    There is no "150 times the gravity" required in mainstream equations. There are observations that need mass that does not come from visible matter: Observational evidence for dark matter. No one ignores the "additional movement, and beautiful structure" - galaxy velocity curves, galaxy clusters, large scale structure are some of the evidence that dark matter exists.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by DanielAShinerock View Post
    I've been given a warning about posting against the main stream by a very gentle and kind man. Having no questions regarding "established" arithmetic, I do go back on my word to Peter and have one question to the general public here, as I find a different place to spend my study time.
    Having established that the known universe consists of just 4% visible, measurable matter/mass as we know it , with galaxies and galaxy clusters shrouded in a known 27% mass from Dark Matter, and another excepted by main stream science 69% mass from Dark Energy : Knowing that Einstein called his own paper on Dark Matter , "his greatest Blunder" How can we ignore all the additional movement, and beautiful structure we can now see, with our own eyes, using modern equipment? Some scientific estimates include movement that would require 150 times the gravity in our currently "mainstream excepted " equations.
    So,, to the question. Do any of you suffer anxiety , or stress over such enormous irregularities? I mean I lose sleep because of the slow pace at which people are willing to admit the anomaly does not look like it just needs a band-aid. We are on the cusp of something huge, a complete re-righting If I were to take a guess. It is very exciting! Or am I alone here?
    I agree with the general thrust of your viewpoint, but you have been given some excellent answers here.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,364
    I don't lose a lot of sleep over it, but my own preference is for direct answers, and I find it particularly unsatisfying that experts will stubbornly claim to have excellent models of everything, yet those models have gaps that are fives times as large as all the "known" values. Simply assigning a placeholder seems weak. And that position is made weaker since the two most popular assumptions are complete opposites. 1) Even though all known particles fit into 16 or so slots, all other (5 times as much matter) fits into a single slot unlike all the others, defined mostly by what it is not. or 2) The theory of how gravity works is wrong. As someone who sees choices as black or white, right or wrong, etc. having 95% of all things as "unknown" is an awful position.

    On the other hand, I am able to sleep because I have my own solutions. They work. The math works. The loose ends don't make up 95% of the solution like the popular theories. I'm satisfied. I don't feel obligated to explain them to anyone else, neither do I feel the need to argue them against mainstreamers. I don't owe that to anyone. But having a solution allows me to sleep, and that's good enough.
    Depending on whom you ask, everything is relative.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    The Wild West
    Posts
    9,196
    Quote Originally Posted by mkline55 View Post
    As someone who sees choices as black or white, right or wrong, etc. having 95% of all things as "unknown" is an awful position.
    You're clearly not a scientist! Things not yet known mean.... employment! Or at least a problem to be solved.
    Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Clear Lake City, TX
    Posts
    11,522
    This subject seems less suited for Q&A - where mainstream answers to specific questions are required - and more for S&T - where some speculation, but not ATM advocacy, is permitted. Moved.
    Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
    Isaac Asimov

    You know, the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They donít alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit their views.
    Doctor Who

    Moderation will be in purple.
    Rules for Posting to This Board

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,364
    Quote Originally Posted by Cougar View Post
    You're clearly not a scientist! Things not yet known mean.... employment! Or at least a problem to be solved.
    Do you mean that it's financially beneficial for scientists to not solve as many problems as possible, but to merely work toward solutions? If so, then you're right. I'd make a terrible professional scientist. I define success as reaching a goal, not as striving toward one. I'd be afraid my career would be cut short if I succeeded. In that case, I definitely would lose sleep.
    Depending on whom you ask, everything is relative.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    6,400
    Quote Originally Posted by mkline55 View Post
    ...1) Even though all known particles fit into 16 or so slots, all other (5 times as much matter) fits into a single slot unlike all the others, defined mostly by what it is not...
    Pretty sure there is no constraint that says dark matter has to be 100% one particle. The constraints are on how it interacts. If you look at it like that you get:
    Quarks: Interact via Strong, Electroweak and gravitational forces
    Leptons: Interact via Electroweak and gravitational forces
    Dark Matter: Interact via gravitational forces
    With a possibility that actually DM fits into the Lepton box of being weakly interacting too.

    Quote Originally Posted by mkline55 View Post
    ...2) The theory of how gravity works is wrong. As someone who sees choices as black or white, right or wrong, etc. having 95% of all things as "unknown" is an awful position....
    It's incomplete. If you want to be binary about it then every single theory we have is wrong and, since we have no way to actually check if any theory is actually 100% right, may never be right. We just take the best we can get and work hard to be in a less wrong position in the future.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Kennewick, Washington
    Posts
    52
    Quote Originally Posted by mkline55 View Post
    Do you mean that it's financially beneficial for scientists to not solve as many problems as possible, but to merely work toward solutions? If so, then you're right. I'd make a terrible professional scientist. I define success as reaching a goal, not as striving toward one. I'd be afraid my career would be cut short if I succeeded. In that case, I definitely would lose sleep.
    As an engineer, my job is to design solutions to long-standing or emergent problems. My tools (fundamentally) are science and math. The scientists I work with also solve problems. Their solutions involve discovery and publication of how nature works. They establish new science, as it were, for which people like me can create new processes or products. And since the world always contains unanswered questions, there is always room for new scientific investigation. Every modern scientist knows this. Not since the 19th century has their been serious speculation that there was nothing new left to discover (and maybe not then, since a statement to that effect has been mistakenly attributed to Lord Kelvin).

    Sent from my SM-G920R4 using Tapatalk

  16. 2017-Apr-07, 04:50 PM

  17. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    The Wild West
    Posts
    9,196
    Quote Originally Posted by mkline55 View Post
    Do you mean that it's financially beneficial for scientists to not solve as many problems as possible, but to merely work toward solutions?
    No, I mean it in the sense that Rocky Kolb said:


    "It is rather ironic that the job of a scientist is to understand nature, and if the scientist completely succeeds, the reward is unemployment. But of the many things that concern me in the day-to-day existence of a scientist, waking up one morning and discovering that there are no problems to solve is rather low on the list."
    Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •