Anybody... please help! Dark Matter?

I am extremely interested in Dark Matter and Dark Energy and I need to get some feedback from somebody who actually believes that Dark Matter is a “thing” and not just a theory to explain what isn’t there!

I have watched several discovery channel shows that discuss the existence of dark matter as something more, and I also have done limited further study on my own! I know that scientists all over the world are attempting to prove the existence of another “type” of matter that actually has mass and energy but cannot currently be measured by our instruments because this form of matter can pass right through our instruments?

I have also heard the term anti-matter however I don’t think the two are related! If you actually have looked into this subject and you think you can help me out… PLEASE DO!

I would recommend reading these two links as an overview.

Dark Matter
Dark Energy

Make sure you read the related links under See also, as well as where some of the information originates from.

Remember, this is all theory. There is a lot of evidence suggesting they may exist, but nothing that would hold up in a court of law so to speak.

[edit on 2008/2/13 by TLomon]

reply to post by sparda4355



Search is your friend


ATS search on dark matter

ATS search on dark energy

reply to post by TLomon


Well thank both you guys for the links! I was kinda hoping to get some individual opinions on dark matter though! That's why I specified people that actually believe in it! Because I do, I have been sold by the information that is out there and I truly believe that it does exist!

What do you guys think? personally!

I am still undecided. There is more then one theory out there, and not all of them require Dark Matter and Dark Energy to exist for them to work.

The electromagentic model of the universe is very interesting to study, as it explains a possible scenario that exludes the need for these exotics.

I just have a hard time accepting something with mass passing through other objects (such as ourselves) being completely undetected.

Personally, I think we just don't know the answer yet. I still keep up on all reports of it, but I don't think there is enough data to come to a absolute conclusion yet.

Originally posted by TLomon
I am still undecided. There is more then one theory out there, and not all of them require Dark Matter and Dark Energy to exist for them to work.

The electromagentic model of the universe is very interesting to study, as it explains a possible scenario that exludes the need for these exotics.

I just have a hard time accepting something with mass passing through other objects (such as ourselves) being completely undetected.

Personally, I think we just don't know the answer yet. I still keep up on all reports of it, but I don't think there is enough data to come to a absolute conclusion yet.

Well thank you for your reply... (I was hoping to get somebodies personal point of view) and I agree that it's not solid fact yet, but I think the whole idea is that it is a new "undiscovered" type of material (mass or whatever)... and it's only undetected because we don't know "how" to detect it yet! Think about the atom and a quorck (however you spell that?) At one point before we learned how to detect it, we had NO idea of it's existence... but assumed it must exist based on a well thought out "theory" and kept searching until we found a way to detect it!

That's all I am saying, is there is enough "evidence" to create enough "suspition" to attempt to find it, and I honestly believe they WILL

hey there sparda4366,

this short article does not critically explain DarkMatter but the ideamaker
Freese might be a name to look up for other theories or papers etc.



'Dark Matter Powered the First Stars'

news.softpedia.com...

...Freese believes that Population III stars wre not driven by nuclear fusion reactions at the beginning, but shifted towards nuclear fusion as the Dark Matter at their cores depleated through annihilation processes. Such phase was only available for the first stars!'

it seems that models of DarkMatter had an early after the BigBang
anti-DarkMatter counter part
to our present universes' matter-antimatter components....




edit; sorry the link had typo



[edit on 14-2-2008 by St Udio]

Originally posted by sparda4355
... and it's only undetected because we don't know "how" to detect it yet! ...

Well some theorize dark matter is detectable through Gravitational_lensing

I agree with TLomon. Just not enough data, to form concrete opinions.


The universe is not only stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine.

i've heard and i believe that dark matter is just a term that was coined to try to label the inconsistency between calculated mass in the universe and observed mass. it doesn't necessarily mean there's some strange form of matter floating around out there that we can't see, although it's entirely possible at this point.

Dark matter is needed to account for the orbits of stars in galaxies and near large masses like black holes. It is known how much ordinary (baryonic) matter is there because stars can be "weighed" by their luminosity. THere are not enough stars to account for the tight orbits, i.e. galaxies should fly apart. So there must be some dark matter there to account for this.
It is generally though that dark matter could be made of particles. Either very fast light particles (neutrinos) this would be hot dark matter.
Or very massive slower particles (cold dark matter), these particles have not been detected or theorised but they might be one day. Simulations suggest the colder type I think, but I am not up to date with the latest theories.

Dark energy was introduced to explain the apparent acceleration in the expansion of the universe.

Originally posted by Jbird

Originally posted by sparda4355
... and it's only undetected because we don't know "how" to detect it yet! ...

Well some theorize dark matter is detectable through Gravitational_lensing

I agree with TLomon. Just not enough data, to form concrete opinions.


The universe is not only stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine.

AWESOME! I totally agree! we can detect it "in certain ways" we can even measure it by it's gravitational pull... I just meant we can't "detect" it the way we measure, say... an atom for example! thanks for the feedback! I like where this is going!

Originally posted by Dr X
Dark matter is needed to account for the orbits of stars in galaxies and near large masses like black holes. It is known how much ordinary (baryonic) matter is there because stars can be "weighed" by their luminosity. THere are not enough stars to account for the tight orbits, i.e. galaxies should fly apart. So there must be some dark matter there to account for this.
It is generally though that dark matter could be made of particles. Either very fast light particles (neutrinos) this would be hot dark matter.
Or very massive slower particles (cold dark matter), these particles have not been detected or theorised but they might be one day. Simulations suggest the colder type I think, but I am not up to date with the latest theories.

Dark energy was introduced to explain the apparent acceleration in the expansion of the universe.

Now we are talking! This is why I believe in dark matter! We can only account for I think the number is 30% of what is necessary to "hold our galaxy" and other galaxies together! The other 70% is made up of 20-30 % dark matter, and 70-80% dark energy (gathered from some general references I have studied) I might be off on the exact % but the idea is the same...

again... thanks for the feedback, please keep it coming!

Here's the link (I couldn't find, at the time) to back up the previously mentioned dark matter lensing theory
Hubble Finds Double Einstein Ring

NASA's Hubble Space Telescope has revealed a never-before-seen optical alignment in space: a pair of glowing rings, one nestled inside the other like a bull's-eye pattern. The double-ring pattern is caused by the complex bending of light from two distant galaxies strung directly behind a foreground massive galaxy, like three beads on a string.

More than just a novelty, this very rare phenomenon can offer insight into dark matter, dark energy, the nature of distant galaxies, and even the curvature of the universe.

(emph. mine)

And a relatively recent ATS thread discussion Double BULL'S-EYE for Einstein

reply to post by Jbird


Thank you for the link... I will check it out!

i think it would make sense, that if we could see matter, then we could not see dark matter. For every action, thwere is an equal and oppostie reaction. These are the laws of reality. If thats the case, then for every peice of matter, there is a piece of anti/dark matter. darm matter would also nullify matter theoretically. For every peice of matter coming into contact with dark matter, there would be an equalization, and thus the two would cancel each other out and leave a bllank space. or maybe i am inccorrect.

Dark matter is a band aid to fix a fatally flawed theory. I think the work of various dissident astronomers and physicists (e.g. Hoyle or Arp) or the work of the electric sun and electric universe guys (plasma physicists) will end up making a more consistent theory. I am convinced that red shift theory is completely wrong. I've seen some evidence that it forces the distribution and velocities of stars and galaxies to be 'earth centric' and highly non isotropic.

These bogus theories will fall like a house of cards. Right now they are being propped up by the usual arrogance and political power plays of the scientific establishment. All dissidents are viciously attacked in science, especially if their theory might be correct.

Originally posted by SevenThunders
Dark matter is a band aid to fix a fatally flawed theory. I think the work of various dissident astronomers and physicists (e.g. Hoyle or Arp) or the work of the electric sun and electric universe guys (plasma physicists) will end up making a more consistent theory. I am convinced that red shift theory is completely wrong. I've seen some evidence that it forces the distribution and velocities of stars and galaxies to be 'earth centric' and highly non isotropic.

These bogus theories will fall like a house of cards. Right now they are being propped up by the usual arrogance and political power plays of the scientific establishment. All dissidents are viciously attacked in science, especially if their theory might be correct.

Although I respect your disbelief... I think you are pretty close minded to the possibility that it might exist! I am not knocking your stance... honestly; I just think you are a little too positive that it is completely bogus! But hey... it might be bogus!

I might believe in it too much because deep down inside I am excited about this new discovery taking place during my lifetime! I think it is pretty conceivable that there is more to this universe than meets the eye, so to speak... The models and explanations that I have seen are more than convincing... I believe that even if you are not completely sold on the concept there is enough data and theoretical evidence to granite curiosity!

reply to post by sparda4355


Fair enough. Let the most accurate theory win! I only speak with a tinge of bitterness here after seeing what they've done to dissidents in the hard sciences. Let's never forget that Scientific American published an article debunking the Wright brothers heavier than air flight a year after Kitty Hawk! It's not that scientists are especially bad, it's just human nature to hold on to our paradigms at all costs, especially if we've invested a lifetime in them. The priesthood of various religions fell into the same trap, thinking that their interpretation of scriptures was correct.

Originally posted by SevenThunders
reply to post by sparda4355

 

Fair enough. Let the most accurate theory win! I only speak with a tinge of bitterness here after seeing what they've done to dissidents in the hard sciences. The priesthood of various religions fell into the same trap, thinking that their interpretation of scriptures was correct.

I like the way you think! It's not that I believe what I have seen as fact... i am not foolish enough to believe almost anything as fact, it's just that I find what I have seen to be believable!

(just so you know, if there are a lot of typos... I am really drunk right now)!

I just watched a show on the History Channel, Dark Matter/Dark Energy last night. After watching it the third time (fell asleep the first 2 times), I have come to the conclusion they still don't have a clue what dark matter is.

Now, the gravitational lensing was rather interesting. It was the first time I saw a graphical representation of how it works, so now I understand how ti works, and I will acknowledge that based on the evidence, something has to be there...

So, here is my theory...

There is no dark matter, but rather matter in another dimension. For example, our matter covers dimensions 1-3, travelling along 4. Couldn't there be matter that is 5-7? etc.? That should be capable of warping space creating the gravitational lensing effect we see without the need for the unseen particles that are massive yet undetectable passing through our Earth billions of times a second (which is what show was explaining to us).