Dark matter
Monday, August 28th, 2006I admit it: I’ve long been a skeptic of the idea of dark matter. It has been my belief (not based on much data) that dark matter is used explain away inaccuracies in cosmological theories which might otherwise be flawed. I have viewed it like Einstein’s famous fudge factor: namely, a concept that is created to lend support to an inaccurate idea.
Nevertheless, in spite of my historical leanings, I’m willing to believe what the data suggests. It seems that the latest data gives the strongest support yet for the existence of dark matter. I’ve read the technical paper, and while much of the content is not within my comprehension, it does appear that the authors are intellectually honest and that they have given reasonable thought to the question “In what cases could our results be inaccurate?”
Why do we need to throw in the concept of dark matter? It seems that our models require additional mass in the universe to fit our astronomical measurements.
What is dark matter? I really like wikipedia’s explanation: “…dark matter refers to matter that does not emit or reflect enough electromagnetic radiation (such as light, x-rays and so on) to be detected directly, but whose presence may be inferred from its gravitational effects on visible matter.” This takes out the lowest level debates of what dark matter is comprised of. Is it similar to the matter that we experience everyday here on earth? Is it instead comprised primarily of neutrinos? I’ll leave this to the astronomers to decide.
It’s strangely comforting to know that dark matter can include things such as asteroids and planets. For some reason that gives me confidence that it is not just an idea that exists solely in the minds of theoretical physicists and astronomers.
Here are some non-contiguous quotes from the NASA press article:
“Dark matter and normal matter have been wrenched apart by the tremendous collision of two large clusters of galaxies. The discovery, using NASA’s Chandra X-ray Observatory and other telescopes, gives direct evidence for the existence of dark matter.”
“”A universe that’s dominated by dark stuff seems preposterous, so we wanted to test whether there were any basic flaws in our thinking,” said Doug Clowe of the University of Arizona at Tucson, and leader of the study. “These results are direct proof that dark matter exists.”"
“The hot gas in this collision was slowed by a drag force, similar to air resistance. In contrast, the dark matter was not slowed by the impact, because it does not interact directly with itself or the gas except through gravity. This produced the separation of the dark and normal matter seen in the data. If hot gas was the most massive component in the clusters, as proposed by alternative gravity theories, such a separation would not have been seen. Instead, dark matter is required.”
Finally, Science Friday discussed the latest research with a more accessible (though quite short) discussion and introduction.