It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Depends on how you define "measurable". The mass of dark matter is deduced from observation so in that sense it's "measured" but it's not a precise measurement because there are some unknowns. The popular theory calls it "cold dark matter" where the "cold" implies it has less energy than something "hot", but I can't say much about its energy other than that.
originally posted by: dashen
a reply to: Arbitrageur
Does dark matter have measurable mass or energy?
This would suggest that Jessica Simpson would agree with you, but I'm not sure if everyone else does:
originally posted by: dashen
If something makes up most of the universe I would imagine it would taste like chicken.
Everything taste like chicken.
Via things like galaxy rotation curves and gravitational lensing as discussed earlier in this thread.
originally posted by: BASSPLYR
how are we detecting it?
Since we live on baryonic dark matter (Earth) I was interested to see if dark matter might be just more stuff like Earth, what astronomers call massive compact halo objects or MACHOs, but gravitational microlensing experiments seem to rule out MACHOs explaining all the dark matter, though they certainly account for some fraction of it. Modified gravity theories have attempted to try to explain observations but they fail on things like the bullet cluster etc. It doesn't seem to interact electromagnetically. So while we don't know what it is, we do know some things about it and some things it isn't.
Couldn't dark matter really be anything
That's the hypothesis that Eros and his team are trying to test I believe. There are others.
originally posted by: dashen
a reply to: Arbitrageur
Is dark matter quantified in any sort of way? Do they postulate that it is made of particles
originally posted by: BASSPLYR
If a neutrino is neutral and has no charge then why does Neutron Decay into a proton and eject a anti neutrino?
Why even call it an anti neutrino?
Why not just call a neutrino a L-Neutrino and a Anti neutrino a R-Neutrino?
Why because an electron gets ejected during beta decay does it shoot out a anti neutrino just to keep things balanced? Wouldn't it rather want to spit out a positron instead?
originally posted by: Arbitrageur
That's like asking "What gives the Earth's north magnetic pole a north magnetic pole?"
originally posted by: BASSPLYR
what gives protons a negative charge?
The answer to both questions is:
It doesn't have that.
The quarks inside with fractional charges. One of those is negatively charged, but the other two are positively charged so they win. In the neutron the positive and negative quark charges cancel each other out.
originally posted by: BASSPLYR
doh! meant positive charge. what gives a proton a positive charge?
Opinions vary:
originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: Phage
yeah but God don't play dice.