Slashdot Mirror


Search for the Missing Universe

Chris Gondek writes "The Sydney Morning Herald has reported that one of the greatest discoveries of our time could be made under the Yorkshire moors. Deep in a Yorkshire mine, scientists are toiling to solve a cosmic puzzle that has baffled astronomers for 70 years: about 90 per cent of the universe is missing. Analyse the movements of stars and you can work out how much matter is making them swirl round in galactic islands and how much makes galaxies cluster together as they do - in other words, you can work out how much mass makes the universe look the way it does. But measurements suggest that the universe is not what it appears."

11 of 370 comments (clear)

  1. Perhaps it's not lost. by bonsai_kitty · · Score: 5, Funny

    There is allways the chance it is just compressed....with bz of course :)

    --
    Computer science is a grab bag of tenuously related areas thrown together by an accident of history, like Yugoslavia.
  2. Re:Did you look in your shoes? by Greyfox · · Score: 5, Funny
    I always look under the couch when something goes missing. I wouldn't be surprised if 90% of the mass of the universe is actually under my couch.

    Hey, go ahead and laugh, but it's at least as good a guess as anyone else has managed to make. It just has much less funding.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  3. Historical Analogues by Farley+Mullet · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Back in the 19th century, astronomers had noticed that there was a minute procession in the perihelion of Mercury (in other words, the point in Mercury's orbit that is closest to the sun kept moving forward) that they couldn't account for using the Keplerian/Newtonian model of celestial dynamics. Astronomers thought that it must have reflected the influence of some massive, distant unknown planet; predictions were made about where this planet was and what its mass was, but astronomers couldn't find it. Then all of a sudden General Relativity came along, and our understanding of mechanics in gravitational fields was improved, and the procession was easily predicted (within an incredibly small margin, as I recall). So it seems just as likely that the "missing mass" is due to a theoretical deficit as it is due to an observational deficit.

  4. Stephen Hawking's wishful thinking by kindofblue · · Score: 5, Insightful
    In his book, A Brief History of Time, I think he said something to the effect that he believes that we'll figure out most of the big questions about the nature of the universe within 10 years or so. That was about 15 years ago. Does anybody remember reading this?

    When I saw that, I remember thinking that's naive and contrary to the entire history of scientific research. Anyway, it reminds me that even some of the best minds say some of the stupidest things. Especially in physics.

    I'm not a physicist but I'm pretty damn sure that Stephen Wolfram and Roger Penrose have had some pretty wacky theories when they venture away from straight physics, like into cellular biology, free will, philosophy, ...

  5. Black Listed by OneArmedMan · · Score: 5, Funny

    Its not that 90% of the Universe is missing, but because of all the Email spam problems we have, the Earth has been Black Listed. I contened that once we solve the spam problem, we will be able to reach the rest of the Universe. With that said, dont epect to be able to reach the rest of the Universe for quite some time.

  6. Dark data.... by mseeger · · Score: 5, Funny
    Hi,

    i'm currently investigating a similar matter: dark data. It seems to occupy around 90% of my hard disk.

    Bye, Martin

  7. Re:Bush Administration cites Missing Universe Theo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Furthermore, if Al Quaeda were to buy, steal, or receive plutonium as a gift from the missing 90% of the universe, then Al Quaeda would be dangerously close to having a nuclear weapon. This is unacceptable.

    Clearly, 90% of the universe needs to be destroyed. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.

  8. Re:Thought... by efuseekay · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This argument is actually flawed.

    The answer is a bit involved.

    But basically, the weighing of the matter (as quoted in the article) does not depend on just mass, but a quantity called "mass-energy". It is true that a particle moving at very high speeds seemed to gain "mass". But depending on observers travelling at different velocities relative to this particle, each will see a different mass. However this particle, irregardless of its velocity, will have a consistent "mass-energy" to all observers. In other words, everybody in the unvierse can agree on the amount of "mass-energy" each particle have. So there is a consistent picture of weighing the amount of mass of the universe.

    That is the beauty of Einstein's Special Relativity, which is to unify mass and energy into a (jargon warning) relativistically consistent picture of mass-energy.

    --
    Mode (3) smart-aleck mode. Press * to return to main menu.
  9. Re:Did you look in your shoes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Hey, man: $45 will NOT buy you a decent steak dinner. Here's my recipe for the best steak you've ever had.

    Go to a decent grocery store that sells USDA Prime beef. Find yourself some fillet steaks, also known as fillet mignon. You want two steaks as close to the same weight and thickness as possible. They should be between 6 and 8 ounces.

    Heat your oven to 500. If your oven won't go to 500, set it for as high as it will go. Then sit down to watch The Simpsons or something, because getting a home oven to that temperature takes a while. Be patient here.

    Dry your steaks thoroughly with paper towels. You want the surface to be completely dry, both on the top and bottom and on the sides. Why? Because liquid turns to steam, and we don't want steamed steaks. Your goal is perfect dryness here, so do a good job.

    Once your oven is hot, put a heavy, all-metal, oven-safe skillet on top of the stove. Cast iron works, but I have a stainless-steel-clad, aluminum-core skillet with a riveted metal handle that I use for this. Turn the burner or element to high, and leave it there for at least five minutes. You're looking for something really incredibly hot here. Don't be afraid to let your pan get hot. It'll be fine.

    Season your steaks liberally with salt. You want something with a coarse grain, because it makes a great texture when it cooks in. I like kosher salt for this (Morton's) but sea salt is good too. Fleur de sel is the best, but at $10 for a couple of ounces, it's a little pricey for most folks. But if you're blowing $25-$30 on raw meat, you might as well go all the way.

    DO NOT PUT PEPPER ON YOUR STEAK. I don't care if you like it that way. Pepper burns at the temperatures we're planning on using. If you want pepper, crack a little over your steak once it's on the table.

    Once your pan is hot enough to brand a steer--which is basically what we're planning to do here--plop in the steaks. No oil, no nothing. Just drop 'em into the dry, rocket-hot pan: szzzzzzz. There will be some smoke, so crack a couple of windows for ventilation.

    Do not touch the steaks for two solid minutes. Seriously. Don't touch them. Don't move them, don't poke them, don't prod them. Don't talk to them. Don't ask them questions. Just let them sit there.

    "But the meat will stick to that hot pan!" you cry. And you're absolutely right: it will. That's exactly what we want. What we're doing is called "searing." Searing is cooking in a dry pan over incredibly high heat. Searing isn't frying; frying involves lubricating the pan with fat or oil, and we don't want that. Instead, we just want dry, raw meat to hit blisteringly hot metal and to sit there for two minutes.

    What's happening is called the Malliard reaction. (That's pronounced "my-yard.") It's complicated, but the short version is that proteins in the surface of the meat are denaturing and chemically changing into a brown, crusty substance that tastes really, really good. You don't get that with any cooking method other than searing.

    After two minutes, turn the steaks over with tongs. Not with a fork, not with a spatula. Tongs. Grab the steaks gently around the middle and lift straight up. They'll lift right off of the pan, no sticking. If they do stick, just wait a few seconds. They'll let go by themselves because of the heat of the pan and that Malliard thing I talked about. Turn the steaks over and leave them for one minute.

    During that minute, look at the seared surface of the meat. It should be brown and crusty, almost like it was battered and deep-fried, but darker than that. If there are tiny black specks here and there, that's okay. If there are big black specks, you left it on too long, but it's still edible. If the whole thing is solid black... well, the dog's in for a treat tonight.

    After one minute, move the entire pan--use an oven mitt for god's sake, that pan is a branding iron by now--to the oven. We've seared the surfaces of the steak, and now we're going to cook the interior.

    There

  10. The answer to the riddle of the socks by MousePotato · · Score: 5, Funny

    If they ever find the missing 90%... I want back all my missing socks, several sets of keys, two wallets and my mind...

  11. Correction... by clambake · · Score: 5, Funny

    Clearly, 90% of the universe needs to be destroyed.

    I think you meant "liberated".