A Model for Dark Matter and Dark that works!

[Serendipity]

Looks like we've taken a major step forward in understanding dark matter and dark energy see here It certainly explains the halo effect on galaxies.

[It's a pity nobody published my short story, because I could say look at the similarity... grumble, grumble, grumble...]

 

[Venusian Broon]

Looks like we've taken a major step forward in understanding dark matter and dark energy see here It certainly explains the halo effect on galaxies.

[It's a pity nobody published my short story, because I could say look at the similarity... grumble, grumble, grumble...]

Didn't know Google error code 404 was that ubiquitous and explanatory about the universe

 

[Brian G Turner]

This story came up the other day on Phys.org: Bringing balance to the universe: New theory could explain missing 95 percent of the cosmos

Here are a few excerpts:

Scientists at the University of Oxford may have solved one of the biggest questions in modern physics, with a new paper unifying dark matter and dark energy into a single phenomenon: a fluid which possesses 'negative mass." If you were to push a negative mass, it would accelerate towards you.
...
Dr. Farnes's theory also provides the first correct predictions of the behaviour of dark matter halos. Most galaxies are rotating so rapidly they should be tearing themselves apart, which suggests that an invisible 'halo' of dark matter must be holding them together. The new research published today features a computer simulation of the properties of negative mass, which predicts the formation of dark matter halos just like the ones inferred by observations using modern radio telescopes.
...
In notes dating back to 1918, Einstein described his cosmological constant, writing that 'a modification of the theory is required such that "empty space" takes the role of gravitating negative masses which are distributed all over the interstellar space." It is therefore possible that Einstein himself predicted a negative-mass-filled universe.

However, this new approach looks very interesting, a) because it's a theoretical approach that modifies existing theories, and b) initial suggestions suggest it can make valid predictions.

It remains to be seen if it holds up, though - I've seen plenty of similar stories over the years in any aspect of astrophysics where a new model has some initial success but runs into difficulties when applied more widely.

Btw, as an interesting footnote, there was a story this week about a Type 1A supernova with a difference: So, a supernova may have torched a star nearby . That could be important, because it's the assumption that all Type 1A supernova are standard which is the basis for claims of "dark energy".

 

[Matteo]

Didn't know Google error code 404 was that ubiquitous and explanatory about the universe

Heh! mystery-of-dark-matter-may-have-been-solved-by-oxford-scientists

Google says: Not found

Well...we know that!

 

[Venusian Broon]

This story came up the other day on Phys.org: Bringing balance to the universe: New theory could explain missing 95 percent of the cosmos

Here are a few excerpts:



However, this new approach looks very interesting, a) because it's a theoretical approach that modifies existing theories, and b) initial suggestions suggest it can make valid predictions.

It remains to be seen if it holds up, though - I've seen plenty of similar stories over the years in any aspect of astrophysics where a new model has some initial success but runs into difficulties when applied more widely.

Btw, as an interesting footnote, there was a story this week about a Type 1A supernova with a difference: So, a supernova may have torched a star nearby . That could be important, because it's the assumption that all Type 1A supernova are standard which is the basis for claims of "dark energy".

It's interesting, but an initial reading stirs my caution.

So it appears instead of some dark matter, which we've never directly observed, which we only can guess what it's properties are & dark energy...

...It might be some dark matter, which we've never observed, which he guesses has the additional property that it has negative mass (again something we never ever seen) & is being continually created as the universe expands.

Okay, I suppose may be possible, of course, but would interested to see what multiple strands of evidence would be required to ascertain if this theory has legs or not.

 

[Matteo]

I thought it was paperwork?

For something to exist, it has to be observed. For something to exist, it has to have a position in time and space. And this explains why nine-tenths of the mass of the universe is unaccounted for. Nine-tenths of the universe is the knowledge of the position and direction of everything in the other tenth. Every atom has its biography, every star its file, every chemical exchange the equivalent of the inspector with a clipboard. It is unaccounted for because it is doing the accounting for the rest of it, and you cannot see the back of your own head. Nine-tenths of the universe, in fact, is the paperwork.
[Prof. T. Pratchett (UU)]

 

[Venusian Broon]

Here's a nice critique of the actual paper and how it really is a fringe idea with some interesting concepts, but unlikely to be a major step forward in our understanding of the topics:

I like this guy. He's very clued up and has made me look and question areas of my own beliefs regarding physics. Hence I'd put him in the reasonably unbiased camp!