Live data from Hacker News

New class of galaxy has been discovered, made almost entirely of dark matter

washingtonpost.com

11–20 of 144 posts

Re: New class of galaxy has been discovered, made almost entirely of dark matter

#11
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing I don't understand and maybe someone can take the time to explain. Why does it have to be this "Dark Matter" causing the mass differences we've been seeing? How do we know it isn't undetectable-through-normal-means normal matter, or aliens, or mistakes in our calculations/observations, or anything else? Since we haven't been able to detect dark matter, it seems from my layman point of view that any of the a…

"undetectable-through-normal-means matter" is by definition not normal matter. We do not know what it is, so we have a placeholder name for it: "dark matter", i.e. matter that does not shine in the EM spectrum. We have theories about what it is, but most of the mundane ideas (like cold dust) have been ruled out by observations. Now we are left with all these stranger ideas. "Once you eliminate the impossible, whateve…

> "Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth."

Unless you made a mistake in your elimination, which is sometimes more probable than the apparently single remaining truth.

Not saying this is the case here, just that this basic principle should be used with great care.

Re: New class of galaxy has been discovered, made almost entirely of dark matter

#13
post #4

This is significant. Now astronomers can study dark matter with less interference from the regular matter background. So you have a more broad range of objects to study, from galaxies with lots of regular matter, to galaxies with almost none of it. Hopefully this will accelerate DM research. It will certainly provide lots more data.

One thing I don't understand and maybe someone can take the time to explain. Why does it have to be this "Dark Matter" causing the mass differences we've been seeing? How do we know it isn't undetectable-through-normal-means normal matter, or aliens, or mistakes in our calculations/observations, or anything else? Since we haven't been able to detect dark matter, it seems from my layman point of view that any of the a…

Dark matter can explain: the large scale evolution of the universe (together with dark energy but whatever), rotational velocities of galaxies, gravitational lensing and other phenomena. No other theory explains all of these things as well or simply.

Also, dark matter is not really so exotic and weird. We already know of one type of dark matter particle, neutrinos. To think that there are other more massive particles that only interact through gravity and the weak force isn't much of a strectch in that light.

Re: New class of galaxy has been discovered, made almost entirely of dark matter

#14
post #4

This is significant. Now astronomers can study dark matter with less interference from the regular matter background. So you have a more broad range of objects to study, from galaxies with lots of regular matter, to galaxies with almost none of it. Hopefully this will accelerate DM research. It will certainly provide lots more data.

One thing I don't understand and maybe someone can take the time to explain. Why does it have to be this "Dark Matter" causing the mass differences we've been seeing? How do we know it isn't undetectable-through-normal-means normal matter, or aliens, or mistakes in our calculations/observations, or anything else? Since we haven't been able to detect dark matter, it seems from my layman point of view that any of the a…

Exoplanets are dark matter. They do not emit light, so they are dark. You can't see an exoplanet, you have to look for stars that wobble.

Asteroid belts are also dark matter. If a remote star has an asteroid belt, it wouldn't be easily detectable, since it probably wouldn't elicit the kepler-style wobbles and flickers, or if it did, perhaps less obvious/detectable events.

Based on this, the astronomical fad terminology is flawed, since it seems to claim that only stars matter because only stars are matter (and the luminous gas of nebulae too, of course). The layperson finds intrigue in the term Dark Matter, because journalists are trying to sell a story.

Re: New class of galaxy has been discovered, made almost entirely of dark matter

#15
post #4

This is significant. Now astronomers can study dark matter with less interference from the regular matter background. So you have a more broad range of objects to study, from galaxies with lots of regular matter, to galaxies with almost none of it. Hopefully this will accelerate DM research. It will certainly provide lots more data.

One thing I don't understand and maybe someone can take the time to explain. Why does it have to be this "Dark Matter" causing the mass differences we've been seeing? How do we know it isn't undetectable-through-normal-means normal matter, or aliens, or mistakes in our calculations/observations, or anything else? Since we haven't been able to detect dark matter, it seems from my layman point of view that any of the a…

"Dark matter" just means "stuff we can't detect except by gravity" so that covers your first case.

There's a theory that "dark matter" isn't matter at all, but some modification to the currently accepted laws of physics. Wikipedia lists some of these ideas:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter#Alternative_theori...

Ultimately, it's generally assumed to be some sort of actual matter because that's what best fits the observations. No alternative explanation has been raised that better fits the observations than the explanation that it's some unknown form of matter that doesn't interact with electromagnetic radiation very much, but still participates in gravity.

As for what those observations are, galaxies are observed to rotate much differently than if they only had the mass that was visible, galaxies cluster as if there was more mass than can be seen, gravitational lensing indicates that galaxies mass more than what's observed with light, the cosmic microwave background spectrum is different from what you'd expect from only the stuff we can see, and a fair bit more mentioned on that Wikipedia page.

Keep in mind that any alternative explanation needs to not only explain the fact that these things are different, but also the exact quantity by which they are different. So far, "dark matter" is the best explanation anyone's come up with.

Re: New class of galaxy has been discovered, made almost entirely of dark matter

#16
post #14
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing I don't understand and maybe someone can take the time to explain. Why does it have to be this "Dark Matter" causing the mass differences we've been seeing? How do we know it isn't undetectable-through-normal-means normal matter, or aliens, or mistakes in our calculations/observations, or anything else? Since we haven't been able to detect dark matter, it seems from my layman point of view that any of the a…

Exoplanets are dark matter. They do not emit light, so they are dark. You can't see an exoplanet, you have to look for stars that wobble. Asteroid belts are also dark matter. If a remote star has an asteroid belt, it wouldn't be easily detectable, since it probably wouldn't elicit the kepler-style wobbles and flickers, or if it did, perhaps less obvious/detectable events. Based on this, the astronomical fad terminolo…

im pretty sure this isnt true - if any of those things were massive enough to substitute for the gravitational effects that have been observed they would emit infrared radiation at least.

Re: New class of galaxy has been discovered, made almost entirely of dark matter

#17
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing I don't understand and maybe someone can take the time to explain. Why does it have to be this "Dark Matter" causing the mass differences we've been seeing? How do we know it isn't undetectable-through-normal-means normal matter, or aliens, or mistakes in our calculations/observations, or anything else? Since we haven't been able to detect dark matter, it seems from my layman point of view that any of the a…

Basically, dark matter is something that has gravitational pull, but shows no other evidence of its existence. We have seen evidence for dark matter in galaxy rotation curves, galaxy cluster interactions, and the cosmic microwave background fluctuations, so we know it's not a mistake (each of these measurements are independent and do not share common systematic errors). We know it's not normal matter (e.g. black hole…

There was a recent idea that small, primordial black holes might be related to dark matter http://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/nasa-scientist-sugg...

Basically the idea that theyre smaller and more common than previously expected - it would be really hard to observe them if they weren't in-between us and something else or snacking on something.

Re: New class of galaxy has been discovered, made almost entirely of dark matter

#18
post #4

This is significant. Now astronomers can study dark matter with less interference from the regular matter background. So you have a more broad range of objects to study, from galaxies with lots of regular matter, to galaxies with almost none of it. Hopefully this will accelerate DM research. It will certainly provide lots more data.

One thing I don't understand and maybe someone can take the time to explain. Why does it have to be this "Dark Matter" causing the mass differences we've been seeing? How do we know it isn't undetectable-through-normal-means normal matter, or aliens, or mistakes in our calculations/observations, or anything else? Since we haven't been able to detect dark matter, it seems from my layman point of view that any of the a…

(PhD student in astrophysics answering here.)

This is a great question! You're addressing the idea (roughly along the lines of Occam's razor) that if there's any way to explain the "extra mass" without invoking a new form of matter, it should be preferred.

Most of these other possibilities have been largely ruled out via careful observations, which are detailed here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter#Composition

One of these possibilities, for example, is that the missing matter is actually contained in a great many small, dark, massive objects scattered throughout galaxies -- such as failed stars, planets, or even black holes -- rather than in a diffuse, invisible material. This possibility has actually been largely ruled out through a number of statistical "microlensing" surveys that are sensitive specifically to the presence of massive, dark bodies (via their gravitational lensing of background stars -- a rare event, but measurable statistically).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massive_compact_halo_object#De...

I think the wikipedia Dark Matter article is actually super well written and should address these issues, too!

Re: New class of galaxy has been discovered, made almost entirely of dark matter

#19
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exoplanets are dark matter. They do not emit light, so they are dark. You can't see an exoplanet, you have to look for stars that wobble. Asteroid belts are also dark matter. If a remote star has an asteroid belt, it wouldn't be easily detectable, since it probably wouldn't elicit the kepler-style wobbles and flickers, or if it did, perhaps less obvious/detectable events. Based on this, the astronomical fad terminolo…

im pretty sure this isnt true - if any of those things were massive enough to substitute for the gravitational effects that have been observed they would emit infrared radiation at least.

So go ahead and observe this all-too-obvious infrared, that exoplanets must surely emit.

Meanwhile, their gravity is now well known to induce wobble on their parent stars, which are much more luminous, and probably outshines any exoplanet in the infrared.

Re: New class of galaxy has been discovered, made almost entirely of dark matter

#20
post #14
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing I don't understand and maybe someone can take the time to explain. Why does it have to be this "Dark Matter" causing the mass differences we've been seeing? How do we know it isn't undetectable-through-normal-means normal matter, or aliens, or mistakes in our calculations/observations, or anything else? Since we haven't been able to detect dark matter, it seems from my layman point of view that any of the a…

Exoplanets are dark matter. They do not emit light, so they are dark. You can't see an exoplanet, you have to look for stars that wobble. Asteroid belts are also dark matter. If a remote star has an asteroid belt, it wouldn't be easily detectable, since it probably wouldn't elicit the kepler-style wobbles and flickers, or if it did, perhaps less obvious/detectable events. Based on this, the astronomical fad terminolo…

I am pretty sure this is satire. But this is the internet, so it is hard to tell.

To be clear: to an astrophysicist, "dark" means "does not interact with electromagnetic radiation except through the curvature of space-time by gravity". It only interacts with normal matter in that it affects gravity. It is otherwise completely transparent.

It does no mean "is not currently reflecting or producing visible light". Your closet does not contain dark matter when you close the door.

Post reply on HN