Notices
Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Please help me understand dark matter

  1. #1 Please help me understand dark matter 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5
    I've been trying to get my head around dark matter for a while now and it's apparent that I either need a smaller head or perhaps some help.

    Is dark matter just the space where current theory falls short, making it purely hypothetical? Or is there some 'hard' evidence for it?

    Thanks


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Posts
    101
    hypothetical


    .................................................. ...............
    The truth is difficult to obtain.
    They conceal it in books.
    *************************************
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5
    lol, short and to the point! I was hoping there was some 'hard' evidence. Otherwise I have the feeling that dark matter is just hand waving and might as well be called God matter and evidence of His love of the universe. I don't mean that to be inflammatory, I'm just saying that when I hear 99% of the universe is made up of something purely hypothetical it makes me question things.

    So here's a follow-up question: Is there a predictive payout to dark matter that doesn't exist in other hypothetical constructs?

    Thanks
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the circuitous haze of my mind
    Posts
    1,028
    It appears that there is matter in places where we cannot detect any emission of the electromagnetic spectrum. Everything we know up to this point seems to insinuate that there is matter there that only cannot be detected; dark matter is the easy way of describing the source of the gravitational lensing and distortion that we see when we look into the universe. Other theories, like that of dark energy, correspond to dark matter allowing for a descriptive system to be created, solving many questions in turn. The number of questions answered based off of dark matter theory is so appealing to many scientists that it appears as if they are satisfied with it entirely. Though, other theories exist as explanations to the gravitational distortion; one was described in a post that I cannot find for some reason (I'm bad at searching for things....)-it said that gravitons (also theoretical) could be leaking through from separate dimensions, or even other "membranes". This would explain the excess of gravity, since gravity itself would be filling up the empty space; and of course, you cannot see gravity.
    Of all the wonders in the universe, none is likely more fascinating and complicated than human nature.

    "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."

    "Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence"

    -Einstein

    http://boinc.berkeley.edu/download.php

    Use your computing strength for science!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    414
    I just read a book on why Cold Dark Matter is a theory and why. It's called Our View from the Center of the Universe and although a couple of the sections aren't really well read the middle section, which is the focal point of the book, is really well done.

    It states every planet in our solar system travels slower the farther you go out because as gravity decreases the escape velocity for a travelling object lessens. Otherwise, if Pluto travelled at the same velocity as Mercury it would be flung out of the solar system because the gravity from the sun would be too weak to keep it within. Galaxies however do not work in the same way.

    Every item in a galaxy travels at exactly the same speed no matter how far or how close you are to the center of the super massive black hole in the center. They theorize that the reason why glaxies don't fall apart is because some other form of matter must be keeping them glued together. That's where dark matter comes in.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Yeah. Basically, the law of gravity as we know it only works if we insert Dark Matter into the picture. Otherwise what they see happening in a galaxy wouldn't match up with it.

    What I think is most likely: The law of gravity as we understand it is probably only accurate at certain distances. (Just like how Gallileo's laws of motion only work within a certain range of velocities)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5
    So in reseraching this topic I came across something interesting regarding electricity in space... I made a new topic over in psudoscience for it if anyone's interested.

    http://www.thescienceforum.com/viewt...=11003&start=0

    -Deej
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Kalamazoo, MI
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by BumFluff
    I just read a book on why Cold Dark Matter is a theory and why. It's called Our View from the Center of the Universe and although .
    that is a great book!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9 Re: Please help me understand dark matter 
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Deej
    I've been trying to get my head around dark matter for a while now and it's apparent that I either need a smaller head or perhaps some help.

    Is dark matter just the space where current theory falls short, making it purely hypothetical? Or is there some 'hard' evidence for it?

    Thanks
    I wrote an article on this subject and have recovered it from the Archives. See below:

    http://www.thescienceforum.com/viewt...ht=dark+matter

    I tried the URL above but it does not come up on the screen.
    I also tried copy and paste and that does not work either.
    The Article name is 'Mysterious Dark Matter'.


    Mike C (formerly Mike NS
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Deej

    I just checked that URL out now and 'copy and paste' works. So now you can access that URL and get my view on this topic.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    It seems like a bit of a stretch, but at least it's creative. Creativity seems to be noticeably lacking in the astronomy field today. I think individual scientists, and the scientific community at large, both just worry too much about losing their credibility if they're wrong, or if they admit they don't already have all the answers.


    I think they also worry that if they admit the math doesn't actually prove the existence of dark matter, then people will begin to doubt other mathematically based proofs that stand on firmer foundations.

    The assumption of Dark matter (and the Big Bang theory) look to me like the refusal to allow any mystery in the universe to appear "unsolved". It just seems wonderfully arrogant to deny the universe it's right to fascinate us.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    414
    Another book I've been reading is Dark Cosmos by Dan Hooper. At the tail end of the book it gives an alternate theory to dark matter and dark energy. In 1983 an Israeli physicist by the name of Mordechain Milgrom proposed that the problem with rotating glaxies that didn't coincide with general relativity and gravity could have been a new feature of gravity. He showed that by changing the laws of Newtonian physics under conditions of small acceleration the problem of rotating glaxies could be matched without dark matter. But the problem was that he used Newtonian physics rather than Einsteins general theory of relativity. He called it MOND for short.

    However in 2004 a man by the name of Jacob Bekenstein took Einsteins general theory of relativity and added the MOND approach to the universe and came back with something that coincided somewhat with the way the universe looked from an observational perspective. However it is still a work in progress and there are still some aspects of the observational universe that need to be reconciled before the theory becomes plausible.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Kojax and Fluff

    My creativity is based on an observation. It is not just pure fantasy.

    I interpreted the information provided by the S&T article that the xray satellite had detected.
    The nuclei stripped of all the outer electrons and sent into space by the solar eruption (explosion) was the information that I based my theory on.

    These 'separated' electric charges are agiin trying to reattach themselves to the nuclei they were separated from.
    This is the coulomb forcc attraction that is enhancing the gravity to give it that extra power.

    So that is how I interpret the 'dark matter' problem.
    In other words, there is no added 'mass!

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    354
    http://www.esi-topics.com/cosmic/int...sLBennett.html

    “WMAP data were also only consistent with a substantial amount of nonbaryonic cold dark matter.”

    The latest hard evidence supports CDM and not MOND or something else. The theory for CDM was not a “fudge factor” for gravity to work. It was the direct result of observational data leading to a discovery that was proved by more observational data, i.e., by the scientific method.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,114
    Quote Originally Posted by Arch2008
    http://www.esi-topics.com/cosmic/interviews/CharlesLBennett.html

    “WMAP data were also only consistent with a substantial amount of nonbaryonic cold dark matter.”

    The latest hard evidence supports CDM and not MOND or something else. The theory for CDM was not a “fudge factor” for gravity to work. It was the direct result of observational data leading to a discovery that was proved by more observational data, i.e., by the scientific method.
    I do not know why you brought this article above into this discussion.
    \
    The author himself admits that they have no solution for the CDM and do not know what is still driving the space expansion.
    If they still do not have solutions to these two major problems, I did not think it was worth finishing.

    So I did not finish reading the article.

    Cosmo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16 Read it. Believe it. 
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    354
    Most of this discussion about Deej's question was information that is outdated. We still don’t know what CDM or dark energy is, but we know these are the answers and not something else, like MOND. No one has ever directly seen an electron or a quark. That doesn’t mean you should advise people to light their houses with candles or throw their computers away. Electromagnetism and quantum field theory work and so does the theory of CDM. Skepticism is a good tool, but at some point the skeptic has to start pounding nails or get out of the way.
    Reply With Quote  
     

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