Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: December 22, 2024, 8:28 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Dark matter vs. MOND
#1
Dark matter vs. MOND
The earliest evidence for dark matter (1930s) was galaxies moving in clusters were seen to have a higher average velocity than could be attributed to the total amount of visible matter. This was improved in the 1970s by observations of the velocities of stars within galaxies.  They didn't fall off as a function of their distance from the central core, which suggested that most of the matter in galaxies actually lay in their periphery. More recently gravitational lensing has permitted astronomers to actually map where the dark matter must lie. 

But the best evidence for dark matter comes from the first 370,000 years of time when large regions of space rung like a very large, very low frequency bell. Waves of normal matter were damped by photons carrying energy away, but the waves of dark matter were not damped, because they do not interact with photons.  And these two kinds of waves interfered with each other gravitationally.  This tale is told by the power spectrum of the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation.

So when you see an article claiming that dark matter does not exist, and the data can be explained by some alteration to the theory of gravitation (sometimes called MOND, Modified Newtonian Dynamics), and the article only talks about explaining the oldest data, not the best data, you can ignore it.

If their claim takes the metric tensor of General Relativity and adds additional structure in the form of vectors or scalars, that's just another field, which is to say more particles, and they're right back to dark matter again.

[Image: 0060.jpg]
Reply
#2
RE: Dark matter vs. MOND
It would be interesting to see if the theory that luminous deeply redshifted objects seen by Hubble and JWST that were previously interpreted as earliest galaxies were in fact hydrogen clouds supported against further gravitational collapse by dark matter annihilation, will grain ground.
Reply
#3
RE: Dark matter vs. MOND
Superstring guy: Particles are really strings vibrating in nine dimensions.

LinuxGal: But I only see three dimensions.

Guy: Six of them are too small to see. And each boson has a fermionic partner.

Gal: But I only see twenty-five fundamental particles.

Guy: The partners are too massive to see...
Reply
#4
RE: Dark matter vs. MOND
Absence of evidence may not be evidence of absence, but it is definitely still absence of evidence.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Rethinking Dark Matter/Dark energy.... Brian37 11 3019 January 26, 2018 at 7:50 pm
Last Post: Jehanne
  Origin of Matter RedSox 50 20569 June 13, 2017 at 10:10 am
Last Post: Mister Agenda
  Anti-Matter at CERN chimp3 24 4234 December 21, 2016 at 7:12 am
Last Post: I_am_not_mafia
  Newest super-sensitive test failed to catch a Dark Matter particle. Why? theBorg 40 8414 August 21, 2016 at 2:13 pm
Last Post: Alex K
  A dark bulb ErGingerbreadMandude 29 3819 July 11, 2016 at 2:09 pm
Last Post: Jake Long
  Could this explian what Dark matter and Dark energy is? Blueyedlion 49 8500 June 13, 2016 at 10:28 am
Last Post: Jackalope
  Does the Law of Conservation of Matter/Energy Disallow Time Travel? Ari Sheffield 52 12417 March 24, 2016 at 5:04 am
Last Post: robvalue
  How are Dark Mtter and Consciousness different from Spirit? Rhondazvous 100 20298 February 12, 2016 at 11:41 am
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Can Matter be Created or Destroyed? Rhondazvous 52 11085 December 12, 2015 at 11:51 am
Last Post: Edwardo Piet
  Does Dark Matter give merit to the Bible? wolfclan96 29 8554 March 19, 2015 at 11:15 am
Last Post: Minimalist



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)