What is dark matter?

[admin]

Basic facts about the unknown material called dark matter.

What is dark matter? : Read more

 

[FB36]

IMHO, Dark Matter is just a side effect caused by Dark Energy!

Think of how rising dough/bread creates bubbles & (so) a web-like structure! & now imagine that, Dark Energy creates (keep growing) large bubbles of intergalactic voids & so the Cosmic Web!

(Imagine that, spacetime is a superfluid medium that made of (gas-like) virtual particles of quantum vacuum! & now imagine that, the Cosmic Web is made of denser spacetime superfluid (because of constant push from bubbles created by Dark Energy)!)

If you THINK, this view would easily explain:
Why there is no such thing as any kind of "Dark Matter Particle" to find!
Why a small percentage of galaxies appear to have no DM!
Why some galaxies could appear to have too much DM!

 

[TorbjornLarsson]

Thermal generated weakly interacting massive particles [WIMPs] during the hot big bang would give a perfect fit to current cosmology.

But now we have 3 results that reject that - LHC collider absence of thermal WIMPs, ACME electron sphericity absence of thermal WIMPs, and now recently Fermi-LAT Milky Way core absence of annihilation radiation from thermal WIMPs [ https://www.universetoday.com/14791...extra-radiation-at-the-core-of-the-milky-way/ ] - so it looks like a dead end. The recent Fermi-LAT constraint on dark matter mass is the best, so dark matter could be a gravitationally acting particle with mass above the standard matter masses up to the inflation field particle mass - a huge range.

At the same time, a minority of scientists believe that dark matter is a mirage. They subscribe to an idea known as modified version of inertia, or MOND, which conjectures that on large scales, gravity acts differently than expected and this accounts for the observed rotations of stars and galaxies. But most experts aren't convinced of the need to take such a radical departure from known physics, which would also require modifications to our understanding of large parts of reality.

Worse, nature isn't convinced, the first multimessenger observation of a binary neutron star merger effectively killed of the field:

New observations of extreme astrophysical systems have “brutally and pitilessly murdered” attempts to replace Einstein’s general theory of relativity.

[ https://www.quantamagazine.org/trou...ives-to-einsteins-theory-of-gravity-20180430/ ]

 

[TorbjornLarsson]

IMHO, Dark Matter is just a side effect caused by Dark Energy!

If you THINK, this view would easily explain:

That unproven, unmodeled effect wouldn't work out since they are different phenomena.

Dark matter has dominated matter since the hot big bang as seen in the cosmic background spectra, while dark energy was early on insignificant but with universe expansion now dominates.

Matter-dominated era
Between about 47,000 years and 9.8 billion years after the Big Bang,[11] the energy density of matter exceeded both the energy density of radiation and the vacuum energy density.[

Dark-energy-dominated era
In physical cosmology, the dark-energy-dominated era is proposed as the last of the three phases of the known universe, the other two being the matter-dominated era and the radiation-dominated era. The dark-energy-dominated era began after the matter-dominated era, i.e. when the Universe was about 9.8 billion years old.

[ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scale_factor_(cosmology) ]

In fact, since dark energy is the vacuum energy of the universe it can by definition not generate particles, that is the particle-less state of the quantum fields.

It isn't a matter of opinion ("think") but what we can observe and show by quantifying scientific theories. No one can generally do anything with unsupported, unquantified claims - but in this case it was easy to show from pre-existing knowledge that it wouldn't work in any case.