• Thorry84@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    This headline is pretty dumb. Dark matter is not a myth, it’s clearly there in the data, so it exists for sure. Now the name might be completely wrong as it’s neither dark and may not be matter, but it still exists. We should have just called it Pete or something, so the name wouldn’t imply anything about it’s properties. But the press always seem to think dark matter is something thought up to fix something, but that’s not the case at all.

    The numbers in the data don’t match up and the difference is what’s labeled as “Dark matter”, simply putting another label on it or dismissing it doesn’t fix the underlying data not matching up. And it isn’t like a fault in the data, we’ve seen it in ALL the data, no matter what you look at or how you look at it, the signs of dark matter can be seen.

  • Zachariah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    16 days ago

    According to Lieu, the gravity needed to hold some galaxies or clusters together might come from “shell-like topological defects.”

    Topological defects are unique compact structures in space that have a high density of matter.

    Such defects likely first occurred in the early universe during phase transition — an event during which matter throughout the universe goes through a major physical change.

    These defects might appear as long, linear formations called cosmic strings, or as flat, shell-like shapes.

    “The shells in my paper consist of a thin inner layer of positive mass and a thin outer layer of negative mass; the total mass of both layers — which is all one could measure, mass-wise — is exactly zero, but when a star lies on this shell it experiences a large gravitational force pulling it towards the center of the shell,” Lieu explained.

    It is somewhat similar to how photons, which themselves do not have mass, still experience gravity due to the presence of big astronomical entities. This is because when gravity warps space and time, it interacts with everything within the curvature whether it has mass or not.

      • pyr0ball@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        16 days ago

        I’d recommend Stephen Baxter’s “Ring” novel as a primer on cosmic strings, domain walls (the shell-like mass described here) and using wormholes for time travel.

        Basically covers all of the funky science described in this article

    • superkret@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      16 days ago

      the current theory is “not by itself sufficient to discredit the dark matter hypothesis — it could be an interesting mathematical exercise at best, but it is the first proof that gravity can exist without mass,” he added.

      (Quote by the author of the study himself)

      It’s a purely mathematical construct that could explain bending of light without mass.

      • Thorry84@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        16 days ago

        Typical, scientist: “My paper does NOT say THIS”. Press: “Scientist claims THIS!”

      • UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        15 days ago

        Sure, I’m blaming the concerned journalist(s) here. It’s rlly scummy to hype up an evidenceless hypothesis like this. Does injustice to both, the scientists and the public.

      • Tobberone@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        16 days ago

        But per the definition given involving negative mass, it should be “meassurable mass in the presence of exotic matter”. Anywho…

  • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    16 days ago

    My pet hypothesis is that it’s all virtual particles. Sometimes stuff just happens. Literally, stuff happens. Matter spontaneously emerges from a vacuum, as a consequence of quantum fluctuations. A divot and a hole form at the same time. When they rejoin, they zero out. And they will tend to rejoin immediately because they both have mass and there’s nothing else for a zillion miles.

    We observe this as the Casimir effect. Stick two flat surfaces really close together, in total vacuum, and they can act like there’s gas pushing them apart. The divot and hole bounce off separate things. Clever tricks to abuse this have not worked: see every EM engine blasting energy into a vacuum chamber. As an engineer, not a scientist, I suspect some of the particles being blasted get negative momentum, somehow, and that’s why the net force is immeasurable. Virtual particles play by their own rules.

    But virtual particles still have mass. They bend spacetime as gravity. Cancelling that out would require negative mass, and antigravity, which sadly seems too cool to exist. This means all those pseudo-atoms in deep space drag things toward them. It looks like there’s stuff out there, because… there was. Briefly.

    This could also explain universal expansion. This transient noise in the fabric of reality means empty space has mass. So whatever we consider our universe, it’s surrounded on all sides by unfathomable quantities of nothing, and the nothing is tugging it in all directions. It’s not just escape velocity from the initial explosion; things are accelerating.