The Mystery of Dark Matter Clarified—a Little

What is dark matter? Well, we know what it's probably not: black holes.

  • Share
  • Read Later
ESA / NASA

Astronomers got their first hints that the universe is filled with some invisible, mysterious, massive substance back in the 1930’s—something that must be there and holding things together gravitationally, otherwise the rotation of galaxies would cause them to spin apart. Even now, nobody knows for sure what the mystery stuff is. The leading candidate for the past decade or two has been some sort of exotic elementary particle, forged in the Big Bang—but so far, despite plenty of searching, such a particle has never actually been found.

That means there’s still hope for a dark horse in the dark matter sweepstakes: black holes are certainly dark, and there could be lots and lots of them floating around that we haven’t noticed. But the hope that they’re the answer to the riddle has faded recently with a couple of new papers—one based on what is effectively a thought experiment, the other on an ingenious set of observations with the Kepler space telescope, which was launched in 2009 to search for exoplanets, or worlds orbiting other stars.

One kind of particularly small black hole was already off the table. Such things could have been created in the violent turbulence of very early universe, but would have long since evaporated (some people feared one might be created by the Large Hadron Collider when it switched on in 2008, and go on to swallow the Earth, but since you’re reading this, it didn’t).

(MORE: Fuggedaboudit: Has Dark Matter Disappeared?)

Smallish black holes, however, from about a third the mass of the moon to a third the mass of the sun, were still a possibility. So Harvard astrophysicist Avi Loeb and several colleagues decided to test the idea. Way back in 1974, physicists Bill Press and Saul Teukolsky thought about the fact that a black hole could actually reflect light rather than swallowing it if it were spinning fast and the light came in at an angle. If you could somehow surround the hole with mirrors, the light would bounce back and forth from black hole to mirrors and back again, the energy getting amplified with every bounce. “It would be similar to a laser,” says Loeb, and once the energy got high enough, the whole thing would explode. “They called it a ‘black hole bomb,’” he says.

Good thing for the black holes then that there are no free-floating mirrors in space, meaning that plenty of the smallish bodies should have survived and might still be around today to act as dark matter. But until about 400,000 years after the Big Bang, Loeb realized, the universe was a sea of hot, free-flying particles, including zillions of electrons, and that a dense cloud of electrons can reflect light, just like a mirror. That would spell trouble. If smallish black holes did form back then, they’d almost certainly have been spinning rapidly, and thanks to the electrons, black hole bombs should have been going off right and left.

Some could have survived to make up the dark matter, says Loeb, but the energy released by the ones that exploded would have distorted the cosmic micowave background radiation — the light flash left over from the Big Bang — in ways that should easily be seen today. There’s no such distortion, meaning that no significant numbers of black holes in this size range ever existed in the first place.

(MORE: Crowd-Sourcing Science. Can You Find the Dark Matter?)

That’s the pure-thought basis for the new findings: the direct-observation version comes from Kim Griest, of the University of California, San Diego, and two co-authors. They figured that if smallish black holes were around in any significant numbers today, they should have drifted across the Kepler telescope’s field of view. Kepler’s has done its exoplanet-hunting by searching for the silhouettes of distant planets as they passed in front of their parent stars, slightly blocking the light they emit.

But while planets marginally dim the light of a star, a black hole moving in front of it should have the opposite effect. As Einstein realized in the 1930’s, the gravity of a massive object warps the space around it, bending any light rays that pass by. If something is shining in the background, it will appear to be distorted or magnified. Gravitational lensing has been seen in galaxies and quasars, among other places, and if a black hole wandered in front of any background star, it would  brighten it in the same way (actually, just a part of the star’s surface, since a black hole is so physically small).

This sort of brightening should be evident in Kepler’s observations—if the black holes are there. But it’s not. So they aren’t.

That still doesn’t rule out black holes entirely, according to Loeb. “If they’re somewhere between the mass of an asteroid and a third the mass of the moon,” he says, “they’re still allowed.” If you’re a black hole though, and you aspire to be the source of dark matter, things are getting awfully tough.

(MORE: Look Close. Something’s Strange in the Photo of the Universe)

31 comments
KevinThomasNixon
KevinThomasNixon

There is no dark matter. There were two big bangs. The first one was gigantic and I will call it the "outer-verse". Most of it escaped into deep "space". Some of the pre-mass didn't escape and was drawn back to the origin. The compression of the collapsing pre-mass caused another smaller big bang. That smaller big bang is us. Lets call it the "inner-verse". 

  The outer-verse is collapsing now.  It's encroaching gravity is causing the inner-verse to expand faster and faster. We can't see it yet, but someday the light of the outer-verse will finally reach us. There will be a new increasingly bright night sky. 

   There is no dark matter.

MohammadShafiqKhan
MohammadShafiqKhan

Let everybody read the comments and see for yourselves that nobody believes there non-sense. Alternative theory is already proposed and there is a standing open challenge. Instead of wasting public money on mad research they should accept the standing open challenge.

khi.mah.uk
khi.mah.uk

They disproved the Aether theory incorrectly and now they want to replace it with some thing else.
The Aether is stationary to you and me because it passes very easily through us. The Earth attenuates electromagnetic waves and it can easily drag the local Aether with it.
Like a box with holes in it. Move it about and the air inside will begin to move even though the box has holes.


secretuser
secretuser

So by "mystery clarified" the author means "mystery deepened?"

NileshModhwadia
NileshModhwadia

It is surprising that ever so often scientists change their findings that shows a lack of fundamental theory based on logical rigor. The reason is that space is not recognised and defined as a real continuum containing real components. If that was done then the next logical step would have shown that all manifestation must be a holographic state of those components. These components in space are dynamic as they interactively oscillate at an axiomatic rate of 296575969 cycles per axiomatic cycle of 10 interactions. When two such components oscillate together or simultaneously the rate density increases and appears as a holographic phenomena .

. If scientists can for a moment shed their ideologiclal inhibitions and re look at space a substantial medium, they will find its elemental contents is in a dynamic state of perpetual harmonic oscillation that contributes the mass factor at critical matter density of 3.6 E minus 25 kg/cu.m . Every central node of the hologram has Planck mass densities .the cuurent experiment at Cern's only found the fundamenta quanta in space at matter density of 3.6 E minus 25 kgs / cum that is required to keep universal space in eternal equilibrium for the quanta t at planck density in planck time has the maximum pressure 4.6 E + 35 kgn/ sm/ sec which expands to 3.6 E minus 25 kgs/ cum in the next half of the PHO cycle. Internally no phenomena can exist as these are holographic states that would be destroyed like in a tornado.There 7 Neutrinos in every photon radiated. On being detected by any receiver, the displacement due to angular momentum is absorbed and the balance is measured as mass/ Therefore 7/(2^.333) = 5.56 relative mass that is undetectable.The characteristics of space is such that both gravitation waves and EMW have a frequency of 299792458 cycles per second at a meter wavelength.That difference rate of 1.010845 is indeed the log value of the ratio of Suns radius to earth orbital radius as 1/214 .That spectral range is in GEV .939, 17.5, 35, 52.5, 70, 87.6 ,105.1 '122.6, 140.13, 157.7 . Hence future experiments could create any of these momentarily . Explore www.kapillavastu which has unite four forces through numerical axioms.

MichaelL.WallaceJr.
MichaelL.WallaceJr.

Truth of Dark Matter Revealed : 10;00 am on any ocean, the sunlight reflects off of the water & into your eye as your standing on a boat, in that very same moment a scuba diver underwater witnesses the suns rays entering the water. This is the physical properties of sunlight with Matter - A % always reflects while in the same moment a % passes through. As the light goes deeper into the ocean the pressure builds & light smashes, the colors remain separated by to our eyes it is perceived as black. When light passes through all matter it causes the particles within to vibrate giving it it's distinctive energy signature. Recap : Darkness is Light is Dark Matter ( Further Physical Proof can be found when rain clouds compress & Black Rays can be found underneath ) Dark Matter is a Source of Energy BUT NOT an Energy Source to be Exploited. I Expect Non Believers of the Obvious just like Chris Columbus & Galileo's Dilemma 

mpc755
mpc755

Aether has mass, physically occupies three dimensional space and is physically displaced by particles of matter.

The Milky Way's halo is what is referred to as the curvature of spacetime.

The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether.

The geometrical representation of gravity as curved spacetime physically exists in nature as the state of displacement of the aether.

Displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward matter is gravity.

mpc755
mpc755

Aether has mass, physically occupies three dimensional space and is physically displaced by particles of matter.


There is no such thing as non-baryonic dark matter anchored to matter.


Matter moves through and displaces the aether.


Displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward matter is gravity.


A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and the associated wave in the aether passes through both.

BillBacurat
BillBacurat

Lets spend another 200 billion of tax money to find out.  Whada say?

Whatanotion
Whatanotion

Dark matter is the three dimensional kettle the big bang took place in.  That's why the speed of light and electrons are what they are.  I think.  

reidh
reidh

They had no theory of Dark Matter back in the 30's That is just a flat out lie. I know, because I took astronomy classes in the 60's before they posited the Big Bang theory, and there was no such thing as the theory of dark matter. As a matter of fact, they were dissing such theories as the Universal Aether through which Light was supposed to have traveled, back in the 30's. And then in the 60's discovered tunneling electrons, which beg the question of Tunnel through What? And then the Einstein Rosen bridge was presented as valid, but they still had no DARK MATTER. So By Chuck Todd and Shawna Thomas, Who told you that lie?

DanBruce
DanBruce

I still think that light (photons) are responsible for what is being called dark matter and dark energy. The universe is saturated with photons. I think it possible that scientists will one day discover new properties of light that will allow them to explain the effects that are now being attributed to dark matter and dark energy.

JohnForsthoffer
JohnForsthoffer

Many think that all matter was created at the time of the big bang, created from nothing. I think there was in fact a big bang, but the explosion displaced something. (like a nuclear bomb displaces air and creates a vacuum etc.) Eventually the matter that was displaced is going to show up somewhere, sometime. Just my .02 cents.

John
John

This is one of the better articles I've seen.  Usually, when there is an article on 'black matter', it implies that it has already been detected.  This is not true.  However, phenomena caused by some artifact of nature that causes the EFFECTS of 'black matter' has been detected time and again.

mpc755
mpc755

@khi.mah.uk'Move' is an incorrect term when describing the aether. Aether has mass, physically occupies three dimensional space and is physically displaced by particles of matter.

'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein' (http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html)

"the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places" 

The state of the aether at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the state of displacement of the aether.

'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein' (http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html)

"Think of waves on the surface of water. Here we can describe two entirely different things. Either we may observe how the undulatory surface forming the boundary between water and air alters in the course of time; or else-with the help of small floats, for instance - we can observe how the position of the separate particles of water alters in the course of time. If the existence of such floats for tracking the motion of the particles of a fluid were a fundamental impossibility in physics - if, in fact nothing else whatever were observable than the shape of the space occupied by the water as it varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that water consists of movable particles. But all the same we could characterise it as a medium."

if, in fact nothing else whatever were observable than the shape of the space occupied by the aether as it varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that aether consists of movable particles. But all the same we could characterise it as a medium having mass which is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.

mpc755
mpc755

@secretuser Only if you insist on not understanding aether has mass, physically occupies three dimensional space and is physically displaced by particles of matter.

mpc755
mpc755

@NileshModhwadia You are correct, space is a substantial medium.

[1105.3005] Matter Distribution around Galaxies
http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.3005


"the Universe is filled with the material associated with tails of galaxies, and we then call the peaks of the matter distribution galaxies. Inter-galactic space is filled with matter. Tails of galaxies extend to great distances without cutoff" 

'Non-baryonic dark matter' fills 'empty' space. 'Non-baryonic dark matter' has mass. Meaning 'space' has mass. Meaning aether has mass.

"It is ironic that Einstein's most creative work, the general theory of relativity, should boil down to conceptualizing space as a medium when his original premise [in special relativity] was that no such medium existed [..] The word 'ether' has extremely negative connotations in theoretical physics because of its past association with opposition to relativity. This is unfortunate because, stripped of these connotations, it rather nicely captures the way most physicists actually think about the vacuum. . . . Relativity actually says nothing about the existence or nonexistence of matter pervading the universe, only that any such matter must have relativistic symmetry. [..] It turns out that such matter exists. About the time relativity was becoming accepted, studies of radioactivity began showing that the empty vacuum of space had spectroscopic structure similar to that of ordinary quantum solids and fluids. Subsequent studies with large particle accelerators have now led us to understand that space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal Newtonian emptiness. It is filled with 'stuff' that is normally transparent but can be made visible by hitting it sufficiently hard to knock out a part. The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo." - Robert B. Laughlin, Nobel Laureate in Physics, endowed chair in physics, Stanford University

"If a hidden sub-quantum medium is assumed, knowledge of its nature would seem desirable. It certainly is of quite complex character. It could not serve as a universal reference medium, as this would be contrary to relativity theory." - Louis de Broglie, Nobel Laureate in Physics 

"According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is unthinkable; for in such space there not only would be no propagation of light, but also no possibility of existence for standards of space and time (measuring-rods and clocks), nor therefore any space-time intervals in the physical sense." - Albert Einstein, Nobel Laureate in Physics

The relativistic ether referred to by Laughlin is the hidden sub-quantum medium referred to by de Broglie is the ether which propagates light referred to by Einstein.

The Milky Way's halo is what is referred to as the curvature of spacetime.

The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether.

The geometrical representation of gravity as curved spacetime physically exists in nature as the state of displacement of the aether.

Displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward matter is gravity.

A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and the associated wave in the aether passes through both.

What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double slit experiment; the aether.

Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's pilot-wave; both are waves in the aether.

benyaminshaker
benyaminshaker

@BillBacurat u are a disgrace, u spend far more than that on useless military spending , yet for scientific knowledge , you say stop the funds. What art thou, Christian

teviet
teviet

@DanBruce If it were photons, we would have seen it.  If you mean some other form of "light" that has properties very different from "light" as we currently understand it, that's the same as saying it's some other (unknown) fundamental particle.

teviet
teviet

@John Well technically it has been detected, via its gravitational effects.  Visible light isn't the only tool we use to detect things anymore.  (Have distant stars ever been "detected"?  We've seen their light but never actually extracted a sample for analysis...)

 As with most things in science, "cold dark matter" is a label we apply to something with certain observed properties: low velocity dispersion ("cold"), no observed direct interaction with photons ("dark"), and generates a gravitational effect ("matter").  The nature of the constituent particles is, of course, still unknown.

NileshModhwadia
NileshModhwadia

@mpc755

@NileshModhwadia

  Glad to see you are recognizing error in currant understanding.

The Universal substratum has been defined and derived from axioms more accurately .There 7 Neutrinos in every photon radiated. On being detected by any receiver, the displacement due to angular momentum is absorbed and the balance is measured as mass/ Therefore 7/(2^.333) = 5.56 relative mass that is undetectable. Neutrino with mass of 9.5 E minus 35 kgs is 1/7 th volume of the photon or Planck's constant. When 7 neutrinos are accelerated to radiate simultaneously or within a single cycle interval it forms a self sustaining  photon, which when delayed by a prism splits into seven colours or neutrinos in motion. See hoe the neutrino mass is built up by the Moolaparakriti  mass of 1.34 E minus 51 kgs x C^2 simultaneous cycles and then that turns into electrons, protons, neutrons and quarks etc.

The Higgs boson is not the last bit. An axiomatic theory Sankhya defines the ultimate mass of component forming space as 0.9149 kgs /nanosecond cycle or 2.2 E minus8 kgs / second cycle. The Higgs boson has a range of states from 80 GEV to max at 149.6 GEV above which it becomes the nucleon thus shedding 151 GEV as binding energy converted to nucleon mass. Sankhya has derived mass of Proton. Neutron, Electron, Planck mass from axioms accurately. No measured inputs. Similarly neutrino is accurately defined as having 9.528Eminus35 kgs or 53.45 EV and at radius ratio .259921 it is 13.6 EV thus dignifying hydrogen spectrum range. see website for complete details http://sankhyakarika.webstarts.com/?r=20120214083051

mpc755
mpc755

@NileshModhwadia

The aether is, or behaves similar to, a supersolid.

The Michelson-Morley experiment looked for an absolutely stationary space the Earth moves through. The aether is not an absolutely stationary space. Aether is displaced by particles of matter.

Watch the following video starting at 0:45 to see a visual representation of the state of the aether. What is referred to as a twist in spacetime is the state of displacement of the aether.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9ITt44-EHE

The analogy is putting a mesh bag full of marbles into a supersolid and spinning the bag of marbles. If you were unable to determine if the supersolid consists of particles you would still be able to detect the state of displacement of the supersolid.

The supersolid connected to and neighboring the mesh bag of marbles is in the same state throughout the rotation of the bag in the supersolid.

The aether connected to and neighboring the Earth is in the same state, or almost the same state, throughout the Earth's rotation about its axis and orbit of the Sun.

The state of which as determined by its connections with the Earth and the state of the aether in neighboring places is the state of displacement of the aether.

NileshModhwadia
NileshModhwadia

@mpc755

@NileshModhwadia

Consider these facts. The Sun is throwing out trillions of
neutrinos and we cannot deny that for we have tunnels all over the earth trying
to catch this elusive creature that has enough force to creep through even miles
of rock. Hence one cannot deny that this slippery neutrino must be driven by a
much greater force from its starting point of about 5800 deg K . Hence that
greater pressure at source must also reflect a greater frequency of transmission
compared to that near the earth. Michelson Morley recorded 299792458 m/s (as
velocity) but at a wavelength of 1 meter that figure also becomes the
frequency. Could that be the remnant of a higher frequency from which the
neutrinos are radiated? Then what would be the real frequency of a light wave
that Michelson should have measured? The correct answer comes out of of an
axiomatic derivation. The actual axiomatic frequency of a light wave in space is
296575967 cycles per second that gives the Michelson figure a larger ratio of 1.010845 times the latter. So what?But would you believe it that of all the
possibilities 1.010845 is exactly equal to 10 raised to Rs/ Ro where Rs is the
Solar surface radius and Ro the earth's orbital radius from the Sun. As though that was not enough here is another mind bender. The frequency of light from the sun is measured as 4.7 E+14 cycles /sec. and again another blessed coincidence puts finis to Senor Hubble and the
telescope named after him. The light frequency is exactly equal to 5800 (/ .0029
x 1.26 ) = 4.7E+10. where .0029 is Planck's radiation wavelength constant/deg
and the corresponding radial increase as the cube root of two. As a result no light photon can be detected beyond 6.4 billion years because the critical matter density in space is 3.6E minus 25 kgs/cum thus establishing the time ti the universal light boundary as 2 E + 17 secs . The Hubbles constant is in fact the above time added to the 5800 deg potential needed to radiate any photon from a stellar source See and read PHO state in "www kapillavastu dot com index html"

mpc755
mpc755

@NileshModhwadia The mistake in mainstream physics is much more fundamental. The notion non-baryonic dark matter is anchored to matter is incorrect.

Aether has mass, physically occupies three dimensional space and is physically displaced by particles of matter.

The Milky Way's halo is what is referred to as the curvature of spacetime.

The Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether.

The geometrical representation of gravity as curved spacetime physically exists in nature as the state of displacement of the aether.

Displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward matter is gravity.

A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and the associated wave in the aether passes through both.

What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double slit experiment; the aether.

Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's pilot-wave; both are waves in the aether.