The Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter • Hacker News Board

Re: The Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter

#81

Post by raverbashing » Sat, Oct 13, 2018, 2:37 PM UTC

sandworm101 wrote: post #76

gmjoe wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed 100%. Indeed, this is one of the best articles I've come across which covers several of the reasons we believe dark matter exists, as opposed to us just needing to modify the theory of gravity. For whatever reason, dark matter seems to repeatedly rub people the wrong way today, more so than any other scientific concept I can think of. I actually wonder if it's something psychological -- if the universe is only…

>> dark matter seems to repeatedly rub people the wrong way today, more so than any other scientific concept I can think of. Because, while interesting to a great many scientists, the practical implications of this knowledge are centuries away. Defining dark matter, understanding the backbone of our universe, isn't going to cure cancer. It isn't going to fix global warming. It isn't going to get us to Mars. So when p…

Time from discovery of nuclear physics to nuclear devices was less than 50 years

Same for experimental planes to first commercial flights.

So it might take centuries, but it also might not.

Re: The Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter

#82

Post by mabbo » Sat, Oct 13, 2018, 2:38 PM UTC

tomp wrote: post #54

The simplest “proof” of dark matter - Kepler’s Laws dictate that objects with smaller orbits (closer to center) move faster (in terms o fangular velocity). Our solar system works like that. Our galaxy doesn’t - its spiral shape indicates that the angular velocity varies minimally with radius.

You need more than this. The alternative is modified gravity, meaning gravity rules are different at different scales. Most people arguing against dark matter use that one example as their battle ground, aha, I can get the same result with just a tweak to Newton's laws.

It's when you add in all the other problems that a little tweak to Newton's won't be enough.

Re: The Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter

#83

Post by krapp » Sat, Oct 13, 2018, 2:39 PM UTC

everdev wrote: post #71

krapp wrote: post #56

I like how we have an article explaining the rationale behind dark matter and the scientific principles that lead to the conclusion that it exists, but most of the threads here are simple declarations that no, they must all simply be wrong or not considering some simple alternative. Can people maybe, just maybe not assume that scientists are idiots or, as once dead commenter puts it, charlatans? If you disagree with…

Almost all of our current scientific knowledge has come from challenging the consensus of the times. Scientific skepticism is always healthy and should be welcomed. Even if the original theory is correct, that doubt will simply help science better explain and prove the current understanding. I'd actually be more worried if everyone agreed about something. Even gravity we thought was fully solved until Einstein doubte…

I'm not asking anyone to put the consensus on dark matter beyond doubt, only for people to realize that the consensus exists for a reason. Even the Wikipedia page for dark matter mentions alternatives, so it's not even an absolute consensus, and scientists have considered possibilities like "gravity is just different at large scales." The problem is, none of those alternatives can yet explain the data as well as the dark matter hypothesis.

But unless we apply the principle of charity to fields that may lie outside our areas of expertise, then discussion won't move beyond the typical middlebrow dismissals HN seems to be fond of.

Re: The Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter

#84

Post by ISL » Sat, Oct 13, 2018, 2:39 PM UTC

sandworm101 wrote: post #76

gmjoe wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed 100%. Indeed, this is one of the best articles I've come across which covers several of the reasons we believe dark matter exists, as opposed to us just needing to modify the theory of gravity. For whatever reason, dark matter seems to repeatedly rub people the wrong way today, more so than any other scientific concept I can think of. I actually wonder if it's something psychological -- if the universe is only…

>> dark matter seems to repeatedly rub people the wrong way today, more so than any other scientific concept I can think of. Because, while interesting to a great many scientists, the practical implications of this knowledge are centuries away. Defining dark matter, understanding the backbone of our universe, isn't going to cure cancer. It isn't going to fix global warming. It isn't going to get us to Mars. So when p…

The technology spinoffs from DM-hunting are notable for the broader community.

The high-power dilution refrigerator that ADMX uses is of the same sort that the quantum-computing industry needs more and more of. Indeed, the students and staff being trained by ADMX are finding homes in both academia and across industry.

The high-sensitivity detector technology developed for WIMP searches have alternative use in nuclear non-proliferation monitoring. Improved detector ideas may continue to rattle down into medical imaging in the long run, improving some combination of sensitivity and dose.

The real prize, however, is what happens when the nature of dark matter is understood. It is a long-game play, but the technological implications might be on par with subjects like electricity, nuclear physics, quantum mechanics, etc. We won't know until we get there.

Re: The Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter

#85

Post by jpfed » Sat, Oct 13, 2018, 2:40 PM UTC

gmjoe wrote: post #63

krapp wrote: post #56

I like how we have an article explaining the rationale behind dark matter and the scientific principles that lead to the conclusion that it exists, but most of the threads here are simple declarations that no, they must all simply be wrong or not considering some simple alternative. Can people maybe, just maybe not assume that scientists are idiots or, as once dead commenter puts it, charlatans? If you disagree with…

Agreed 100%. Indeed, this is one of the best articles I've come across which covers several of the reasons we believe dark matter exists, as opposed to us just needing to modify the theory of gravity. For whatever reason, dark matter seems to repeatedly rub people the wrong way today, more so than any other scientific concept I can think of. I actually wonder if it's something psychological -- if the universe is only…

I think one reason may be that people are used to the "completeness" of physics; it's the science that people seem historically most ready to declare "done", and it does explain a lot very well. This may make it particularly unsettling to learn about this vast frontier of ignorance.

Re: The Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter

#86

Post by gbrown » Sat, Oct 13, 2018, 2:41 PM UTC

krapp wrote: post #56

I like how we have an article explaining the rationale behind dark matter and the scientific principles that lead to the conclusion that it exists, but most of the threads here are simple declarations that no, they must all simply be wrong or not considering some simple alternative. Can people maybe, just maybe not assume that scientists are idiots or, as once dead commenter puts it, charlatans? If you disagree with…

People somehow feel uniquely qualified to speculate wildly about theoretical physics. It's bizarre in a forum full of technical-minded people.

Re: The Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter

#87

Post by maxxxxx » Sat, Oct 13, 2018, 2:42 PM UTC

dTal wrote: post #62

krapp wrote: post #56

I like how we have an article explaining the rationale behind dark matter and the scientific principles that lead to the conclusion that it exists, but most of the threads here are simple declarations that no, they must all simply be wrong or not considering some simple alternative. Can people maybe, just maybe not assume that scientists are idiots or, as once dead commenter puts it, charlatans? If you disagree with…

I was about to post something similar. Before you act on the urge to go pontificating about how the scientists have clearly got it wrong for this reason or that reason, ask yourself - do you really think they haven't thought of that? Don't you think that, if there is mileage in your idea, there would certainly be scientists pushing it? Addendum: Science (and more generally, specialization) requires that we trust that…

I think the backlash against "experts" comes from the fact that way too many things get mixed into "science". When you look at fields like social sciences, nutrition and economics there are a lot of "scientists" that get publicity for results of very undisciplined work. They don't crosscheck their result for contradictions and often just seem to look for confirmation of their own biases.

This contrasts to most physics I read about. Physicists seem to make a big effort to reconcile all their measurements and if they contradict they admit that and say "we don't know yet".

So physics and other hard sciences suffer from being put together with a lot of other bad science in the public.

Re: The Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter

#88

Post by auntienomen » Sat, Oct 13, 2018, 2:42 PM UTC

dTal wrote: post #57

drewg123 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That assumes that it is "matter". Maybe there is something we just fundamentally don't understand about gravity.

They've thought of that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modified_Newtonian_dynamics It doesn't really work. Overwhelmingly the evidence points to mass, which is gravitationally affected by other mass, and nothing else. I know the mind rebels against the notion of invisible matter, but is it really so much more implausible than the invisible spookiness of gravity to begin with? If the scientific evidence points that wa…

Of course, neutrinos are invisible, and no one seems to have much of a problem with them anymore.

Re: The Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter

#89

Post by gbrown » Sat, Oct 13, 2018, 2:44 PM UTC

everdev wrote: post #71

krapp wrote: post #56

I like how we have an article explaining the rationale behind dark matter and the scientific principles that lead to the conclusion that it exists, but most of the threads here are simple declarations that no, they must all simply be wrong or not considering some simple alternative. Can people maybe, just maybe not assume that scientists are idiots or, as once dead commenter puts it, charlatans? If you disagree with…

Almost all of our current scientific knowledge has come from challenging the consensus of the times. Scientific skepticism is always healthy and should be welcomed. Even if the original theory is correct, that doubt will simply help science better explain and prove the current understanding. I'd actually be more worried if everyone agreed about something. Even gravity we thought was fully solved until Einstein doubte…

That's precisely why we should be open to new theories and novel experiments... something which happens all the time in the scientific community. It's not a case for wild and uninformed speculation (as is happening all over this thread).

Re: The Reason We Haven’t Directly Detected Dark Matter

#90

Post by sandworm101 » Sat, Oct 13, 2018, 2:47 PM UTC

ISL wrote: post #84

sandworm101 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> dark matter seems to repeatedly rub people the wrong way today, more so than any other scientific concept I can think of. Because, while interesting to a great many scientists, the practical implications of this knowledge are centuries away. Defining dark matter, understanding the backbone of our universe, isn't going to cure cancer. It isn't going to fix global warming. It isn't going to get us to Mars. So when p…

The technology spinoffs from DM-hunting are notable for the broader community. The high-power dilution refrigerator that ADMX uses is of the same sort that the quantum-computing industry needs more and more of. Indeed, the students and staff being trained by ADMX are finding homes in both academia and across industry. The high-sensitivity detector technology developed for WIMP searches have alternative use in nuclear…

I know this. We know this. The public does not. DM hunters never talk about such things. All the public gets is "we used a massive detector to look something in this narrow spectrum, didn't find it, and will try again next year with an even bigger detector."

Any new detector should be described in terms of the new technologies it will require and how those new technologies will be used elsewhere. That gives it value regardless of whether it detects anything or not.