If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Space.com)   Scientists may have finally identified dark matter. That sound you hear is the collective groan of all the other scientists who just realized they won't be winning this year's Nobel Prize   (space.com) divider line 60
    More: Spiffy, dark matter, Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer, exotic particle, WIMPs, annihilations, positrons, International Space Station, Nobel Prize  
•       •       •

5964 clicks; posted to Geek » on 19 Feb 2013 at 12:38 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



60 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-18 11:51:46 PM
Turns out it's fudge.
 
2013-02-18 11:54:27 PM
I was pretty sure that "dark" matter is just matter that isn't emitting or reflecting much energy.
 
2013-02-18 11:59:21 PM
That would be good.  I still think dark matter and dark energy is just a stupid crutch of a placeholder for incomplete theories.
 
2013-02-19 12:08:19 AM
I assumed there would be a Nibbler reference in the headline.
 
2013-02-19 12:09:12 AM

GAT_00: That would be good.  I still think dark matter and dark energy is just a stupid crutch of a placeholder for incomplete theories.


Ummm... That's because it is?
 
2013-02-19 12:10:02 AM
And I thought Peter Higgs had the Nobel sown up this year anyway.
 
2013-02-19 12:12:39 AM
Sounds like he's trying to drum up funding. Detecting positrons and electrons isn't Hawking Radiation-level physics.
 
2013-02-19 12:13:56 AM

SJKebab: GAT_00: That would be good.  I still think dark matter and dark energy is just a stupid crutch of a placeholder for incomplete theories.

Ummm... That's because it is?


I'm not convinced either exist.  It seems more likely we don't understand gravity completely.
 
2013-02-19 12:30:55 AM
But Dark Eco does exist.
 
2013-02-19 12:36:23 AM

Asa Phelps: I was pretty sure that "dark" matter is just matter that isn't emitting or reflecting much energy.


Not quite. You can't touch it either. It's like the frame and structure of the universe in many ways with its mass, but baryonic matter can barely interact with it.
 
2013-02-19 12:45:37 AM
No, no subby.  If this gets the Nobel it will be the Nobel of 2030+, at least if recent history is any indication.

Also, maybe I misunderstood the article, but are they basically just detecting positrons and assuming they come from WIMP interactions?  I'm reserving judgement for when the paper comes out.
 
2013-02-19 12:49:37 AM
Yeah, seems like only the literature prizes are given out for very recent work.
 
2013-02-19 12:52:23 AM

GAT_00: That would be good.  I still think dark matter and dark energy is just a stupid crutch of a placeholder for incomplete theories.


Well, it's hard to conduct proper research when the radiation from the sun keeps burning out your equipment and the Geth won't leave you alone.
 
2013-02-19 12:56:00 AM

GAT_00: SJKebab: GAT_00: That would be good.  I still think dark matter and dark energy is just a stupid crutch of a placeholder for incomplete theories.

Ummm... That's because it is?

I'm not convinced either exist.  It seems more likely we don't understand gravity completely.


I'll pass on telling the biggest brains working on the problem that pbs and a stephen hawking dvd have me convinced they don't know their ass from their elbow.

Ymmv.
 
2013-02-19 12:59:38 AM
Let's just hope this doesn't turn out like the Higgs Boson 'discovery', with them saying they found something that could be it, but also could be several other things, and the entire world declaring the mystery finally solved.
 
2013-02-19 01:02:24 AM
Dark Matter isn't a real thing. Your equations are wrong. Deal with it.
 
2013-02-19 01:18:37 AM

President Merkin Muffley: Dark Matter isn't a real thing. Your equations are wrong. Deal with it.


No one is in a hurry to admit all the years spent memorizing and understanding those equations were a waste of time.

Really should be rules about theoretical fields. Maybe just spend a little time on other peoples theories, but don't encourage people to build on them so much, because if it's wrong, the whole house of cards comes down with them, including what might be your life's work.
 
2013-02-19 01:18:50 AM
I am guessing that physicists are smart enough to include the stretching of space in their calculations. As space contracts time slows down, as space expands(stretches) time speeds up... which may explain most if not all of the faster expansion of "space".

If not, they should get a brain, morans!
 
2013-02-19 01:19:33 AM

SN1987a goes boom: No, no subby.  If this gets the Nobel it will be the Nobel of 2030+, at least if recent history is any indication.


I was gonna say maybe 2020-2025... maybe 2030 as an upper bound.  Schmidt/Reiss/Perlmutter took about, what, 14 years to get it for Dark Energy?
 
2013-02-19 01:20:57 AM
Einstein didn't get his for the miracle year papers for 20 years.
 
2013-02-19 01:21:58 AM
Once space reaches an expansion of C(the speed of light) space MIGHT tear.
 
2013-02-19 01:23:08 AM
Attractive and successful matter, please
 
2013-02-19 01:39:29 AM

SJKebab: GAT_00: That would be good.  I still think dark matter and dark energy is just a stupid crutch of a placeholder for incomplete theories.

Ummm... That's because it is?


No more improbable than MOND when you get right down to it. Dark Matter invokes an unknown type of matter while MOND depends on altering Newton's laws. Both make many scientists uncomfortable (with good reason). Dark Matter has managed to predict behaviors better than MOND so far on a wider range of scale, as well as predicting certain measurable phenomena, but it's no more strange than antimatter was 70 years ago.
 
2013-02-19 01:41:01 AM

dbirchall: I was gonna say maybe 2020-2025... maybe 2030 as an upper bound. Schmidt/Reiss/Perlmutter took about, what, 14 years to get it for Dark Energy?


The COBE satellite was launched in 89 and George Smoot got the Nobel for his findings on cosmic background radiation in 2006.

President Merkin Muffley: Einstein didn't get his for the miracle year papers for 20 years.


Einstein got his Nobel in 21 and his Nobel was for his work as a whole and in particular his theoretical work on the photoelectric effect.
 
2013-02-19 01:45:33 AM

J. Frank Parnell: but don't encourage people to build on them so much, because if it's wrong, the whole house of cards comes down with them, including what might be your life's work.


The best theoreticians don't worry much about other people's work often enough, they just realize what's what and work out the math. Einstein figured out the special theory of relativity in his head well before he had the math worked out. Same for well pretty much all his theoretical work, the math was just to show he was right and give people something to look for to show he's right.

Oh and as for the Higgs Boson, they found it, thing is, the theory allows for their to be more than one Higgs boson, they just found one of them, the others may still be there to be found.
 
2013-02-19 01:45:54 AM
That sound I hear is the words "may have" being pronounced by all those scientists.
 
2013-02-19 01:46:36 AM

Smackledorfer: I'll pass on telling the biggest brains working on the problem that pbs and a stephen hawking dvd have me convinced they don't know their ass from their elbow.

Ymmv.


I've been trying to find the words to say exactly that for some time now. well said.
 
2013-02-19 01:48:04 AM

WhyteRaven74: dbirchall: I was gonna say maybe 2020-2025... maybe 2030 as an upper bound. Schmidt/Reiss/Perlmutter took about, what, 14 years to get it for Dark Energy?

The COBE satellite was launched in 89 and George Smoot got the Nobel for his findings on cosmic background radiation in 2006.

President Merkin Muffley: Einstein didn't get his for the miracle year papers for 20 years.

Einstein got his Nobel in 21 and his Nobel was for his work as a whole and in particular his theoretical work on the photoelectric effect.


Which was a part of his 1905 miracle year papers. 16 years then.
 
2013-02-19 01:54:03 AM

GAT_00: That would be good.  I still think dark matter and dark energy is just a stupid crutch of a placeholder for incomplete theories.


this
 
2013-02-19 02:00:48 AM

log_jammin: Smackledorfer: I'll pass on telling the biggest brains working on the problem that pbs and a stephen hawking dvd have me convinced they don't know their ass from their elbow.

Ymmv.

I've been trying to find the words to say exactly that for some time now. well said.


I have my flashes of brilliance from time to time :)
 
2013-02-19 02:12:11 AM

WhyteRaven74: Einstein figured out the special theory of relativity in his head well before he had the math worked out. Same for well pretty much all his theoretical work, the math was just to show he was right and give people something to look for to show he's right.


Einstein himself was never as happy and content with his work as those who came after him and believed every word of it. He always felt it was incomplete, and everyone now considers it complete.

WhyteRaven74: Oh and as for the Higgs Boson, they found it, thing is, the theory allows for their to be more than one Higgs boson, they just found one of them, the others may still be there to be found.


I think what you may mean is that there are lots of Bosons. There is just the one Higgs Boson. They found a Boson in the particular range they expected to find the Higgs Boson, but it could still be another Boson. In the press conference they chose their words very carefully, and it was only the media who made definite statements about it being found.
 
2013-02-19 03:18:14 AM
The big question remains unanswered... is it creamy or chunky?
 
2013-02-19 03:22:21 AM

GAT_00: SJKebab: GAT_00: That would be good.  I still think dark matter and dark energy is just a stupid crutch of a placeholder for incomplete theories.

Ummm... That's because it is?

I'm not convinced either exist.  It seems more likely we don't understand gravity completely.


Of course we don't. General Relativity is a classical field theory, but we know that the universe is quantum in nature. The world's quantum theorists have been trying for 80 years to come up with a quantum theory of gravity but it's hard. In the rest of QFT, "space" is an inert background upon which things happen, whereas a quantum GR theory requires that space and things interact dynamically.

Asa Phelps: I was pretty sure that "dark" matter is just matter that isn't emitting or reflecting much energy.


It absolutely is not. We know how matter behaves at low energies, and there's no way matter could fail to leave a detectable fingerprint on light passing through it. Nor could it replicate the observed dynamics in e.g. the Bullet Cluster.

SN1987a goes boom: No, no subby.  If this gets the Nobel it will be the Nobel of 2030+, at least if recent history is any indication.

Also, maybe I misunderstood the article, but are they basically just detecting positrons and assuming they come from WIMP interactions?  I'm reserving judgement for when the paper comes out.


They're looking for X + X -> ? -> e- + e+ behaviors. If the "?" part of the Feynman diagram plays nicely, there may be a very sharp spike in detected particle energies at the mass of the WIMP particles. Something like X+X -> Z0 -> e- + e+ would have to result in a razor-sharp line, for example.

The presence of a signal will be a strong indicator of beyond-the-standard-model physics, and its absence will significantly constrain plausible BTSM theories/interactions. We'd also expect a directionality with preferential emission from the galactic center since that's where the local dark matter halo is expected to be densest.
 
2013-02-19 03:36:11 AM
Meh. Let me know when they find Red Matter. Then I can really get my Automated Crafting Tables producing!
 
2013-02-19 05:18:01 AM

Asa Phelps: I was pretty sure that "dark" matter is just matter that isn't emitting or reflecting much energy.


If it was normal matter that simply wasn't emitting or reflecting light, it would still act to obscure light.  Which it isn't.  So either it doesn't exist or it does but it is fundamentally different from baryonic matter.
 
2013-02-19 05:22:42 AM

the8re: Meh. Let me know when they find Red Matter. Then I can really get my Automated Crafting Tables producing!


They have automated crafting tables now?


/really want an automatic mining bot.
 
2013-02-19 05:51:55 AM
"We believe this will be the decade of the WIMP."
farm3.staticflickr.com
 
2013-02-19 07:13:45 AM

syrynxx: Sounds like he's trying to drum up funding. Detecting positrons and electrons isn't Hawking Radiation-level physics.


Yes, because people that run major cosmological experiments hosted on the ISS always do their drumming up by teasing forthcoming papers. And NASA always puts trivial experiments on the ISS because the whole thing is basically a throwaway. Except when it's a funding boondoggle. *rolls eyes*
 
2013-02-19 07:32:34 AM

namatad: GAT_00: That would be good.  I still think dark matter and dark energy is just a stupid crutch of a placeholder for incomplete theories.

this


agreed

Me thinks, if they find "dark matter", they'll end up just having more dark matter.

Basically, you'll note that the universe is filled to the brim with more than we currently know,
yet we're expanding faster and faster...hmm

Could it be that Everything has yet another layer to its onion to make our arrogant scientists cry more???
 
2013-02-19 07:39:48 AM

GAT_00: SJKebab: GAT_00: That would be good.  I still think dark matter and dark energy is just a stupid crutch of a placeholder for incomplete theories.

Ummm... That's because it is?

I'm not convinced either exist.  It seems more likely we don't understand gravity completely.


As far as dark matter is concerned the current evidence favors unknown particle(s) over a modified description of gravity.  Obviously, the experiment in the article would provide crucial support in favor of the particle view.
 
2013-02-19 07:42:24 AM

Smackledorfer: log_jammin: Smackledorfer: I'll pass on telling the biggest brains working on the problem that pbs and a stephen hawking dvd have me convinced they don't know their ass from their elbow.

Ymmv.

I've been trying to find the words to say exactly that for some time now. well said.

I have my flashes of brilliance from time to time :)


This. I love the way some folks think that a physics thread is just like a "Starbucks coffee is too bitter" thread or a "Mumford and sons are so fake" thread. There are no hipster points for having an edgy, indie opinion on cosmology that defies stodgy mainstream science with its equations and experiments and stuff.
 
2013-02-19 07:51:43 AM
42

/look... i just solved it
 
2013-02-19 07:56:31 AM

J. Frank Parnell: Einstein himself was never as happy and content with his work as those who came after him and believed every word of it. He always felt it was incomplete, and everyone now considers it complete.


They only consider it "complete" in the sense that he's dead, and therefore not producing any more research.   Given that he committed a large portion his life (after publishing on GR) to the unification of forces, it's fair to say that his work is, as yet, unfinished.  Just because QM turned out to be such a gold mine of experimental data that it completely derailed the entire field of physics doesn't mean that anyone considers Einstein to have "wrapped up" gravitation.
 
2013-02-19 08:05:04 AM

czetie: This. I love the way some folks think that a physics thread is just like a "Starbucks coffee is too bitter" thread or a "Mumford and sons are so fake" thread. There are no hipster points for having an edgy, indie opinion on cosmology that defies stodgy mainstream science with its equations and experiments and stuff.


Yeah, I LOLd.

"I find quantum theory to be totally obvious and intuitive, but this 'dark matter' thing really strains credibility".
 
2013-02-19 08:46:17 AM
Cool Nerd fight!

I don't believe that physics is a constant across the universe anyways.
 
2013-02-19 08:55:47 AM

rogue49: namatad: GAT_00: That would be good.  I still think dark matter and dark energy is just a stupid crutch of a placeholder for incomplete theories.

this

agreed

Me thinks, if they find "dark matter", they'll end up just having more dark matter.

Basically, you'll note that the universe is filled to the brim with more than we currently know,
yet we're expanding faster and faster...hmm

Could it be that Everything has yet another layer to its onion to make our arrogant scientists cry more???


Maybe dark matter is matter slightly out of our dimension. Too far to be visible but close enough for gravity to have an effect. As spacetime expands and becomes stretched maybe the repulsion between dimensions that stops all of the dimensions just flowing together reduces to the point that gravity overcomes it and new particles of matter will appear in our dimension causing our physics to change (maybe even reducing entropy in the local area) and dark matter is just an indicator of where that will happen.

maybe not.
 
2013-02-19 08:59:21 AM

Baryogenesis: As far as dark matter is concerned the current evidence favors unknown particle(s) over a modified description of gravity. Obviously, the experiment in the article would provide crucial support in favor of the particle view.


Yep. The simplest explanation is a particle that, frankly, behaves an awful lot like a species of neutrino, so it's physical properties are really not that implausible.

To date MOND theories have either been completely arbitrary modifications at low accelerations with no underlying physical mechanism; or a poor fit for anything except galactic rotation; or both. However, there is an interesting new approach involving the Unruh effect, which would actually predict modifications at low accelerations rather than merely inserting it. (It would also provide a neat explanation for why gravitational mass and inertial mass are connected.) Of course, the devil is in the details -- if it can't quantitatively reproduce things like the Bullet Cluster, it's no good.

Incidentally, it seems that a lot of people are conflating two different things when they talk about MOND. There are theories that modify gravity, typically tweaks to General Relativity (and note, these have nothing to do with reconciling GR with QM: the problems that Dark Matter attempts to address occur at very small gravitational accelerations.) And there are theories that modify Newtonian dynamics directly, e.g. by suggesting that all acceleration, not just gravitational acceleration, is modified, such as the one mentioned above.

And of course, there's always the possibility that both things are going on: that there is dark matter (just not as much of it as we currently think) and acceleration is modified at very low values (just not as much as the MONDians think). Only experimental data will tell. And that's why I love science.
 
2013-02-19 09:20:19 AM
Look here. I'm just gonna call it what it's ALWAYS been called. Magic. I believe in the original methods. These witches are going to be burned at the stake.  If they're right, the history books will fix everything.

/nods.
 
2013-02-19 09:56:32 AM

GAT_00: SJKebab: GAT_00: That would be good.  I still think dark matter and dark energy is just a stupid crutch of a placeholder for incomplete theories.

Ummm... That's because it is?

I'm not convinced either exist.  It seems more likely we don't understand gravity completely.


Wow, I agree with you rather emphatically... granted this is 2 tabs over.  Gotta love science
 
2013-02-19 10:06:19 AM

J. Frank Parnell: No one is in a hurry to admit all the years spent memorizing and understanding those equations were a waste of time.

Really should be rules about theoretical fields. Maybe just spend a little time on other peoples theories, but don't encourage people to build on them so much, because if it's wrong, the whole house of cards comes down with them, including what might be your life's work.


I don't think you understand how science works.

J. Frank Parnell: Einstein himself was never as happy and content with his work as those who came after him and believed every word of it. He always felt it was incomplete, and everyone now considers it complete.


Case in point.
 
Displayed 50 of 60 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report