Does dark matter actually exist?

[supton]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
LOL, I raised dark matter in the ghost thread.

To me, if you need to invent something that's 9 times as big as everything that we CAN touch and see, is all pervasive and permeating to get the rules to work properly, you probably need to review your rules first.


Smacks of special pleading, almost like... religion.

I get that it fills a hole in the calculations, and have nothing against it nor dark energy. But one wonders where the theories will go next.

 

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted By: KingCake
Blackholes are dark matter. Dark matter exists. We just don't know what makes up all the dark matter in the universe.


I'm not sure that black holes are dark matter. They can be visually observed by their accretion discs right up to the event horizon and their local gravitational effects are certainly observable.
One theory of the structure of our galaxy is that there is a super massive black hole at its center.
Black holes are another thing that we have yet to have a good understanding of.
Where does all of this matter go?
I know that the theory of Hawking radiation was invented to address this problem, but how can matter simply accrete without limit without the pressure of the resulting gravity eventually causing an explosion, similar to what happens with a very massive star once all of the energy radiating fusion reactions come to en end?

 

[Bandito440]

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Originally Posted By: Garak
You don't have to. If you want to learn about it, you're free to do so. If you want to get a PhD in theoretical physics, and do a thesis on the topic, theorizing a universe with it or lacking it, you're free to do that, too. In any event, the concept doesn't require "belief." It either is, or it isn't. As it stands, it's a construct to account for certain observations.
The physical world is made up of protons, neutrons, and electrons; that's it.
There's no dark matter and there's no imaginary strings holding everything together.

Our knowledge of physics has been updated since you were given this very basic information in high school.

 

[Balrog006]

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Originally Posted By: Garak
You don't have to. If you want to learn about it, you're free to do so. If you want to get a PhD in theoretical physics, and do a thesis on the topic, theorizing a universe with it or lacking it, you're free to do that, too. In any event, the concept doesn't require "belief." It either is, or it isn't. As it stands, it's a construct to account for certain observations.


The physical world is made up of protons, neutrons, and electrons; that's it.
There's no dark matter and there's no imaginary strings holding everything together.


Denial won't make it go away. Not believing or not understanding something makes it no less real.

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Originally Posted By: Garak
You don't have to. If you want to learn about it, you're free to do so. If you want to get a PhD in theoretical physics, and do a thesis on the topic, theorizing a universe with it or lacking it, you're free to do that, too. In any event, the concept doesn't require "belief." It either is, or it isn't. As it stands, it's a construct to account for certain observations.


The physical world is made up of protons, neutrons, and electrons; that's it.
There's no dark matter and there's no imaginary strings holding everything together.


Yeah...and you've got proof of this because you've seen the protons and neutrons (or Baryons, in the standard model)? And you reject the idea of quarks, or string theory, because you've not seen them? You've studied particle physics then? Cosmology?

I think that an opinion, derived without serious study (which would include a university level class or two, not just some pop-science books) is utterly worthless. It's not even poorly informed.

 

[Cujet]

My guess is that "invisible" dark matter does not exist. If 23% of the universe is invisible dark matter, we should be able to interact with it, via gravity on a local basis. It's "out there" and not here? Really?

Instead, I'd guess that dead stars, planets and other mass exist in abundance. The fact that we can't see it is due to lack of illumination.

 

[chiefsfan1]

We watched that too. It probably does exist. CERN is interesting. I noticed 60 Minutes did not show the Hindu god of destruction Shiva at the entrance.

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted By: Cujet
My guess is that "invisible" dark matter does not exist. If 23% of the universe is invisible dark matter, we should be able to interact with it, via gravity on a local basis. It's "out there" and not here? Really?

Instead, I'd guess that dead stars, planets and other mass exist in abundance. The fact that we can't see it is due to lack of illumination.


We DO interact with it. The existence is inferred from gravitational effects (lensing, galactic rotation) that cannot be accounted for by the visible (baryonic) matter. This was first noticed over 90 years ago - gravity behaved in a way that wasn't explainable by what was observed. Therefore, there must be more mass than what we could see...mass that was "dark". By definition, it's not visible.

But the precise nature of it is still a matter of debate and research.

 

[fdcg27]

There is a school of thought that holds that if you can't see something then it isn't real.
Since you can't see thrust, I'd guess that it must not be real by that standard.
Wonder what makes all of those aircraft fly?

 

[LoneRanger]

Some one felt the need to bash religion as a rejection of science. Since the door was opened, it might surprise many that the Vatican is quite aligned with science and especially Astronomy, as they have an observatory and encourage scientific discussion. An example is given by a contributor to their blog, a scientist from Fermilab which is one of the institutions collaborating on the international Dark Energy Survey.

http://www.vofoundation.org/blog/new-map-reveals-the-universes-dark-matter/

 

[ragtoplvr]

It's a bunch of hokus pokus [censored]. Don't buy into it. [/quote

Many of us judge intelligence by knowing what you do not know and trying to learn about it. There are some physicists that know they do not know about gravity, and they are attempting to learn. Dark matter and dark energy are constructs that they are currently using to make predictions about how large scale structures in the universe move. Being able to predict movements is useful. They use this ability to see other unexplained things and devise experiments to make more accurate predictions.

You do not care. That is fine. Post elsewhere.

Rod

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
Originally Posted By: Garak
You don't have to. If you want to learn about it, you're free to do so. If you want to get a PhD in theoretical physics, and do a thesis on the topic, theorizing a universe with it or lacking it, you're free to do that, too. In any event, the concept doesn't require "belief." It either is, or it isn't. As it stands, it's a construct to account for certain observations.


The physical world is made up of protons, neutrons, and electrons; that's it.
There's no dark matter and there's no imaginary strings holding everything together.


Try reading the wiki on it:

The standard model of cosmology indicates that the total mass–energy of the universe contains 4.9% ordinary matter, 26.8% dark matter and 68.3% dark energy. Thus, dark matter constitutes 84.5% of total mass, while dark energy plus dark matter constitute 95.1% of total mass–energy content. The great majority of ordinary matter in the universe is also unseen, since visible stars and gas inside galaxies and clusters account for less than 10% of the ordinary matter contribution to the mass-energy density of the universe.

 

[Triple_Se7en]

Originally Posted By: Nick1994
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
It's a bunch of hokus pokus [censored]. Don't buy into it.
Yeah, and the world is 6,000 years old right?

Whoever said the world is 6K years-old? Where did you get that from?

 

[Triple_Se7en]

Originally Posted By: LoneRanger
Some one felt the need to bash religion as a rejection of science. Since the door was opened, it might surprise many that the Vatican is quite aligned with science and especially Astronomy, as they have an observatory and encourage scientific discussion.



Some felt the need to bash Science as a rejection of Religion.
Also, Many top Scientists are aligned with the Vatican's view on things. You don't need to be an Einstein to figure out the Big Bang and all the energy behind it came from....... um....... "You know Who".

 

[BrocLuno]

Originally Posted By: Wolf359
Originally Posted By: skyactiv
What does mankind have to gain theorizing dark matter?


And for that matter, there's also dark energy.

Maybe it will lead to better understanding that will lead to the singularity.


Assuming parallel universes, matter and energy in forms we cannot see is entirely possible, and very likely. The more we "learn", the more we realize that we are a long way from the end of the journey ...

 

[Panzerman]

Well, I think they are messing with something they really don't know. We are not talking about technology here, we are talking about opening black holes and possible time tunnels. Not to mention, wether you believe in demons, God's, or ghosts we may be opening up a porthole. This may be what scifi movies are made of, but now it is real. Fire is one thing, atom bombs is another, creating a black hole that could swallow a planet, that might be just a little too much for the natives to fiddle with.

 

[BrocLuno]

Originally Posted By: Merkava_4

The physical world is made up of protons, neutrons, and electrons; that's it.
There's no dark matter and there's no imaginary strings holding everything together.


Not my universe ...

 

[Oldmoparguy1]

Originally Posted By: Urshurak776
You guys must be much smarter than I. All I can think of in this subject is Big Bang Theory........

Isn't that a TV show?

 

[Yah-Tah-Hey]

Originally Posted By: Nick1994
Originally Posted By: Merkava_4
It's a bunch of hokus pokus [censored]. Don't buy into it.
Yeah, and the world is 6,000 years old right?

I got myself into a lot of trouble the first day I ever talked to my 8th grade American history class. Decided when I put together my lesson plans to discuss how long man had been in New Mexico by reviewing the Folsom culture(Folsom,NM) which dated to about 10/11,000 BC(carbon dating).Principal called me into his office the next day and inquired "what the [censored] are you telling those kids?" Seems that one student's family belonged to a church that believed that the world was only 6,000 years old. We discussed the lesson plan and I was told just follow the *&%$#@ book.There I was, 28 years old with a college education and had never,ever heard that some people believed that man had came into existence 6,000 years ago. Here we have a case of science versus medieval, superstitious mumbo jumbo. I started the school year four more times with that presentation and dared that principal to fire me. Leaving was my choice, not the school system's. And oh hey, a flying saucer crashed near Corona,NM in the summer of 1947 and the "government" is in possession of alien bodies from that crash.If you want to see how mumbo jumbo nonsense gets started, this is the classic example.

 

[Al]

Originally Posted By: HosteenJorje
I started the school year four more times with that presentation and dared that principal to fire me. Leaving was my choice, not the school system's.

Good for you! Risky move as the Principle was looking to get rid of you