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.

(The New York Times)   Dark matter experiment has found nothing. Why that's terrible. How would you know dark matter exists if...oh. Well played, science   (nytimes.com) divider line 38
    More: Cool, dark matter, Nobel Prize in Physics, experiments, WIMPs, gold mines, xenon, supersymmetry, LHC  
•       •       •

3226 clicks; posted to Geek » on 31 Oct 2013 at 9:10 AM (39 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



38 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-10-31 09:05:25 AM
"The announcement at the Homestake site capped a morning of ceremony, which included Gov. Dennis Daugaard of South Dakota and members of the State Legislature, at what amounted to a coming-out party for LUX ..."


Wait.  Are they saying the LUX is gay?!
 
2013-10-31 09:15:35 AM
You would think with it making up some 70% of the universe we would see some kicking around in this neck of the woods.
 
2013-10-31 09:28:58 AM
Wait, what?

They ran an experiment to look for neutrino collisions in on a few hundred kilograms of cryogenically cooled xenon? And when they saw none, decided they didn't exist?

What a shiatty experiment.

IIRC neutrino detectors need to be incredibly massive to even have the slightest chance of seeing a neutrino collide with an atomic nucleus. On the scale of cubic kilometers of clear ice, where sensors look for the most minute of flashes of radiation from the collisions.
 
2013-10-31 09:31:24 AM

EvilEgg: You would think with it making up some 70% of the universe we would see some kicking around in this neck of the woods.


By definition, if we see it, it's not dark matter.  The 'dark' means it neither emits nor absorbs electromagnetic radiation that we can detect.
 
2013-10-31 09:35:38 AM

RecentGrad: Wait, what?

They ran an experiment to look for neutrino collisions in on a few hundred kilograms of cryogenically cooled xenon? And when they saw none, decided they didn't exist?

What a shiatty experiment.


It's like the luminiferous aether experiments. After a certain number of experiments the repeated inability to measure anything is a result in itself.

Also, this isn't a neutrino detector and they're not trying to detect neutrinos so I'm pretty sure the experiment was well thought out. Measuring neutrinos is pretty standard at this point.
 
2013-10-31 09:36:20 AM

Sum Dum Gai: EvilEgg: You would think with it making up some 70% of the universe we would see some kicking around in this neck of the woods.

By definition, if we see it, it's not dark matter.  The 'dark' means it neither emits nor absorbs electromagnetic radiation that we can detect.


But it's matter, so shouldn't we bump into it?
 
2013-10-31 09:45:33 AM
Winner of 2014 Nobel Prize for Physics

beforeitsnews.com

"I see NOTHING!"
 
2013-10-31 09:49:45 AM

EvilEgg: But it's matter, so shouldn't we bump into it?


We have, indirectly.  We've mapped where dark matter exists based on its gravitational interaction with normal matter.
 
2013-10-31 09:50:22 AM
If we don't know what it is how can we measure it.  We don't even know what gravity is, we only know what it can do to other objects.
 
2013-10-31 09:58:25 AM

The Crepes of Wrath: EvilEgg: But it's matter, so shouldn't we bump into it?

We have, indirectly.  We've mapped where dark matter exists based on its gravitational interaction with normal matter.


But no, "Ouch, wtf was that?"
 
2013-10-31 10:04:34 AM

Sum Dum Gai: EvilEgg: You would think with it making up some 70% of the universe we would see some kicking around in this neck of the woods.

By definition, if we see it, it's not dark matter.  The 'dark' means it neither emits nor absorbs electromagnetic radiation that we can detect.


It's like, how much more dark could it be?... and the answer is "None.. none more dark"
 
2013-10-31 10:08:30 AM
So scientists observed nature, found that some, unseen force must be at work for this all to make sense, and instead of vehemently denying it, figured out how to find it?

Science, you're a dick.

/LOL
 
2013-10-31 10:13:50 AM
No one has ever claimed to have seen such a heavy WIMP

They obviously didn't see me in high school.
 
2013-10-31 10:15:12 AM
"They have not found dark matter," he said. "There is nothing smacking you in the face to make you think there is something there."

Checkmate /r/Atheists.
 
2013-10-31 10:16:17 AM

s2s2s2: So scientists observed nature, found that some, unseen force must be at work for this all to make sense, and instead of vehemently denying it, figured out how to find it?

Science, you're a dick.

/LOL


Not only that, but everyone assumes it's mass causing excess gravitation within galaxies that's keeping them together, when the expansion of space within the galaxy can explain the same phenomenon.
 
2013-10-31 10:17:10 AM
Or they could use a sonic screwdriver.
 
2013-10-31 10:21:29 AM
"Liquid Xenon" would be an excellent name for something.
 
2013-10-31 10:43:34 AM

Cybernetic: "Liquid Xenon" would be an excellent name for something.


Anal lube?
 
2013-10-31 10:58:30 AM
Dark Matter? WTF?  I think they mean pink matter.

/dats racist
 
2013-10-31 11:37:42 AM

EvilEgg: You would think with it making up some 70% of the universe we would see some kicking around in this neck of the woods.


I don't know the specfics (maybe no one does), but it might work like matter and anti-matter where the two can't really co-exist. Matter and anti-matter, for example, annihilate each other if they com into contact and convert to energy. So, any anti-matter in our universe exists in isolated pockets away from matter. May be a similar thing with dark matter.
 
2013-10-31 11:47:42 AM
img.fark.net

"I call them glavinos..."
 
2013-10-31 11:48:25 AM

EvilEgg: You would think with it making up some 70% of the universe we would see some kicking around in this neck of the woods.


These things are SO massive that they account for the majority of the gravitational effects in the universe.
But they dont interact with normal matter.

I am holding out for a different theory.
 
2013-10-31 12:03:34 PM

To The Escape Zeppelin!: RecentGrad: Wait, what?

They ran an experiment to look for neutrino collisions in on a few hundred kilograms of cryogenically cooled xenon? And when they saw none, decided they didn't exist?

What a shiatty experiment.

It's like the luminiferous aether experiments. After a certain number of experiments the repeated inability to measure anything is a result in itself.

Also, this isn't a neutrino detector and they're not trying to detect neutrinos so I'm pretty sure the experiment was well thought out. Measuring neutrinos is pretty standard at this point.


That was probably my favorite thing that I learned early on in school.
The light that failed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelson%E2%80%93Morley_experiment#Sub se quent_experiments
I love that people have continued to refine the measurements.
 
2013-10-31 12:13:38 PM

ltdanman44: If we don't know what it is how can we measure it.  We don't even know what gravity is, we only know what it can do to other objects.


Dude, gravity IS dark matter.
 
2013-10-31 12:35:55 PM

ltdanman44: If we don't know what it is how can we measure it.  We don't even know what gravity is, we only know what it can do to other objects.


It's a lot like women
 
2013-10-31 12:59:35 PM

serial arseonist: ltdanman44: If we don't know what it is how can we measure it.  We don't even know what gravity is, we only know what it can do to other objects.

Dude, gravity IS dark matter.


yet we still don't know what it is, we only know by observation what it does
 
2013-10-31 01:17:32 PM

ltdanman44: serial arseonist: ltdanman44: If we don't know what it is how can we measure it.  We don't even know what gravity is, we only know what it can do to other objects.

Dude, gravity IS dark matter.

yet we still don't know what it is, we only know by observation what it does


But in the end, that is true for EVERYTHING if you look deeper and deeper.
All of science and understanding is a struggle to understand the next layer underneath the layer that we just explained.

/and yes, gravity sucks. we can describe it PERFECTLY, calculate it, account for it in everything that we do. And have no idea certain idea WHY it works.
/Other than the FSM and his noodlely appendages
 
2013-10-31 02:13:29 PM
Ive seen neutrinos before. They were from Dimension X.
 
2013-10-31 02:50:06 PM

namatad: But in the end, that is true for EVERYTHING if you look deeper and deeper.


No way.  The last time someone told me to look deeper and deeper, I woke up two hours later on the interstate, with no pants, clucking like a chicken.
 
2013-10-31 03:54:37 PM
One possible motivation for "string theories" is that they can explain dark matter (under-determined theories explaining something about which little is known)

Michio Kaku: String Theory and Dark Matter
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQijxtP0_IU
"Why is it that most of the universe [dark energy and matter] is missing?
Most of the universe may be higher octaves of a vibrating string."


We don't hear much about work being done in string theory (and related fields) these days because the people doing the work hardly ever use the words "string theory" any more.

Here is a just released 800 page monster paper related to string theory.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1310.7930

Differential cohomology in a cohesive infinity-topos
Urs Schreiber (Submitted on 29 Oct 2013)
    We formulate differential cohomology and Chern-Weil theory -- the theory of connections on fiber bundles and of gauge fields -- abstractly in the context of a certain class of higher toposes that we call "cohesive". Cocycles in this differential cohomology classify higher principal bundles equipped with cohesive structure (topological, smooth, synthetic differential, supergeometric, etc.) and equipped with connections, hence higher gauge fields. We discuss various models of the axioms and applications to fundamental notions and constructions in quantum field theory and string theory. In particular we show that the cohesive and differential refinement of universal characteristic cocycles constitutes a higher Chern-Weil homomorphism refined from secondary caracteristic classes to morphisms of higher moduli stacks of higher gauge fields, and at the same time constitutes extended geometric prequantization -- in the sense of extended/multi-tiered quantum field theory -- of hierarchies of higher dimensional Chern-Simons-type field theories, their higher Wess-Zumino-Witten-type boundary field theories and all further higher codimension defect field theories. We close with an outlook on the cohomological quantization of such higher boundary prequantum field theories by a kind of cohesive motives.
 
2013-10-31 03:56:00 PM
Did the consider mass repels dark matter, like an antigravity..
Perhaps only a massless instrument in the depths of space is the only way.
I'll be having my nobel now.
 
2013-10-31 04:01:28 PM

namatad: yes, gravity sucks. we can describe it PERFECTLY


I'm pretty sure that we can only do so within the bounds of general relativity. Special Relativity is still highly speculative.

/Believing in dark matter is like believing that off is a channel on the TV.
//Believing in dark matter is believing not collecting stamps is a hobby.
 
2013-10-31 05:13:49 PM

fluffy2097: Believing in dark matter is like believing that off is a channel on the TV.
//Believing in dark matter is believing not collecting stamps is a hobby.


Um, the basic idea is that gravity has to come from something and the sources of gravity are called mass or matter (dark it it doesn't interact with light).

I vaguely recall some theory where dark gravity arises from gravity aligned dipoles of virtual particle/anti-particle pairs. If true then "dark matter" will wind up being called "virtual matter".

Would that make you happy?
 
2013-10-31 05:54:15 PM

HairBolus: fluffy2097: Believing in dark matter is like believing that off is a channel on the TV.
//Believing in dark matter is believing not collecting stamps is a hobby.

Um, the basic idea is that gravity has to come from something and the sources of gravity are called mass or matter (dark it it doesn't interact with light).

I vaguely recall some theory where dark gravity arises from gravity aligned dipoles of virtual particle/anti-particle pairs. If true then "dark matter" will wind up being called "virtual matter".

Would that make you happy?


Do you know what a Theory is?  It's an educated guess. A leap of faith if you will.
 
2013-10-31 06:59:22 PM
dilbert.com
 
2013-10-31 11:03:40 PM

EvilEgg: The Crepes of Wrath: EvilEgg: But it's matter, so shouldn't we bump into it?

We have, indirectly.  We've mapped where dark matter exists based on its gravitational interaction with normal matter.

But no, "Ouch, wtf was that?"


Disclaimer: I'm not really all that good at theoretical, particle, or even really general physics, but I've got some basic background here and there (biologist). Take this with a grain of salt, I guess, but this is my understanding...

Bumping and touching are sort of electromagnetic interactions. Nothing ever actually "touches" in the way you think of normal scale solid objects colliding or you touching something. Actual bumping into something is just an electromagnetic interaction between the electron shells of the atoms and molecules of your body and those of whatever you bumped into.

If dark matter is non-interactive (or weakly interactive, as some kind of unaccounted for mass is affecting gravity, and we call it "dark matter" for now), then no, we cannot physically bump into it. I don't even know if there is any theoretical ideas proposing how it might be generated or revealed in particle accelerator type experiments (as it is my understanding that at least one proposal for Dark Matter is called "Weakly Interactive Massive Particles" or WIMPs) or if it could even be detected if generated.

All kinds of craziness when you are trying to think or imagine how the universe behaves at the quantum level. ;)
 
2013-11-01 02:01:10 AM

EvilEgg: You would think with it making up some 70% of the universe we would see some kicking around in this neck of the woods.


Hipparchus measurements of stellar motions in the sun's neighborhood (say 500 light years) confirmed that there is no statistically significant amount of Dark Matter in the local vicinity.  Dark matter is predominantly measured surrounding galaxies in a halo (because no friction slows it down so it keeps falling THROUGH the galaxy unlike normal matter which concentrates IN galaxies)

EvilEgg: ...But it's matter, so shouldn't we bump into it?


No, because it doesn't "bump" -- that's an interaction and the only interaction we KNOW it has is gravitational which is so weak we could never detect it on a particle basis -- and since it doesn't interact, it doesn't clump into larger chunks we could detect.

namatad: ...
These things are SO massive that they account for the majority of the gravitational effects in the universe.
But they dont interact with normal matter.

I am holding out for a different theory.


There are something like 11 separate lines of evidence for the existence of Dark Matter -- no theory I've heard of has accounted for even 3 of them.

serial arseonist:
Dude, gravity IS dark matter.

No. Dark Matter is the term for something producing gravitational influence that is IN ADDITION to the gravity produced by regular-name-brand matter.  It occurs in specific places and moves in specific ways which are best described by a large amount of matter that does not interact electromagnetically -- something like a bunch of slow heavy neutrinos.

Marcus Aurelius:
Not only that, but everyone assumes it's mass causing excess gravitation within galaxies that's keeping them together, when the expansion of space within the galaxy can explain the same phenomenon.

No it can't.  The idea that mass is causing excess gravitation "keeping galaxies together" is missing the point.  Stars in the outer sections of galaxies don't move in the right ways -- Dark Matter is not evenly distributed... it has specific configurations that cause matter that we CAN observe to move in specific ways.  Gravitational lensing from galaxies doesn't bend light in the right way -- Dark Matter distribution causes specific and mappable DIFFERENCES in how the light is bent enabling us to SEE the dark matter through it's gravity.
 
2013-11-01 01:39:03 PM

fluffy2097: Do you know what a Theory is?  It's an educated guess. A leap of faith if you will.


You apparently don't know either, because an "educated guess" is what those in the science biz call a hypothesis.  If experimentation yields data that confirms the hypothesis, then it's called a theory.  At which time, more experiments are run (for years, even decades) which either further refine the theory, or eventually refute the theory.

/have to love scientific illiteracy
 
Displayed 38 of 38 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report