Slashdot Mirror


Giant Sheets Of Dark Matter Detected

Wandering Wombat writes "The largest structures in the universe have been, if not directly found, then at least detected and pounced upon by scientists. 'The most colossal structures in the universe have been detected by astronomers who tuned into how the structures subtly bend galactic light. The newfound filaments and sheets of dark matter form gigantic features stretching across more than 270 million light-years of space — three times larger than any other known structure and 2,000 times the size of our own galaxy. Because the dark matter, by definition, is invisible to telescopes, the only way to detect it on such grand scales is by surveying huge numbers of distant galaxies and working out how their images, as seen from telescopes, are being weakly tweaked and distorted by any dark matter structures in intervening space.' By figuring how to spot the gigantic masses of dark matter, hopefully we can get a better understanding of it and find smaller and smaller structures."

12 of 231 comments (clear)

  1. What if.... by EntropyXP · · Score: 1, Interesting

    What if it isn't dark matter at all? But the Universe actually bending? I read a description of the universe expanding like a snail building its shell... it doesn't expand in all directions infinitely but instead curls on itself like a snail shell.

    --
    "No one will really be free until nerd persecution ends."
  2. Three times larger? by amstrad · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Virgo Supercluster is 200 million light years in diameter. And I'm sure there are large superclusters known.

    1. Re:Three times larger? by Wandering+Wombat · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's not really "One structure", though... it's a lot of small structures close together. A big pile of sand isn't the same as a big sheet of glass.

      --
      I like to place meaningful quotes in my sig, so people will know that I know what meaningful quotes are.
    2. Re:Three times larger? by Wandering+Wombat · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, atoms interact strongly with eachother, to the point that homogenous iron can withstand forces in excess of a thousand times it's own weight. A school of fish, which is more accurately comparable to that cluster, is not one BIG fish... it's a bunch of small fish all hanging out in the same area, and although they are close together, it would be quite easy, compared to the size and mass and force of the group, for them to be pulled apart.

      --
      I like to place meaningful quotes in my sig, so people will know that I know what meaningful quotes are.
  3. The Rubber sheet analogy is WRONG!!! by jameskojiro · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The whole rubber sheet of space time analogy is wrong, it is missing something.

    Current analogy of space time:

    Take a rubber sheet and stretch it out over a frame and drop a bowling ball and marble and drop them on it, they push down and those dents are gravitation fields in space-time.

    New more correct analogy:

    Take a swimming pool and fill it all the way to the top with water. THEN, stretch a rubber sheet over it and seal it so that no water leaks out. Then put your bolwing ball and marble on it. Draw a line running between the bowling ball and marble, and take that cross section, note that the bowling ball and marble behave the same way at close distance like they do above, but when they are a opposite sides of the pool there is a slight "repulsive" effect. We call that Dark Energy! This repulsive effect also can help stick objects together applying a "pressure" against all the other objects, hence "Dark Matter". This effect will also affect light waves moving past it, hence gravitational lensing.

    I'll take my Nobel prize now!

    --
    Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
    1. Re:The Rubber sheet analogy is WRONG!!! by jameskojiro · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Oh almost forgot the water pressing back upwards is like the way space time relieves the stress of having massive objects concentrated in one area. You press down on one area of space time and space time bulges out in another more distant area. It is like the packing dilema try putting 1000 ping pong balls in a box that can only hold 999, when you put int he last one and force it in, it will push another one out.

      If you took all the matter in the universe and spread it out evenly, it would put the same "pressure" against space time, like a uniform sheet or membrane, make a large enough disturbance and all that matter will start flowing to one area and the sheet will stretch till it hit the bottom of the pool and rebounds, hence the Big Bang.

      --
      Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
  4. Re:Sheets and Filaments by KublaiKhan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Kind of an odd thing to do, isn't it?

    However, galaxies also form 'sheets and filaments' at extremely large scales, as well; presumably, should these folks figure out how to find smaller structures, they should look somewhat more familiar.

    --
    In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
    A stately pleasure dome decree
  5. Re:Sheets and Filaments by KublaiKhan · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It may be possible that dark matter interacts normally with itself, but its weak interaction with what we can see makes the problem of resolution difficult.

    If I were feeling particularly sci-fi, I'd probably call it something like 'gravitational bleed-over from close neighboring dimensions'.

    --
    In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
    A stately pleasure dome decree
  6. Gravity, it is wrong by sweetser · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Or at least our current mathematical description of it is wrong. We cannot explain how disk galaxies spin. We cannot explain how the big bang happens without the magic fairy dust for inflation. Now we have a large wall of dark matter. Oh, and there is dark energy for galaxy acceleration. One more thing, we cannot quantize our approach to gravity.

    These are the reasons I work on a rank 1 field theory for gravity. For the details, read as much of this thread as you like: http://physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=87097 This is a LONG thread, more than 36k views, I make learn things along the way. Right now I am trying to find derive the Maxwell equations, and then the unified field theory, instead of using tensors. Quite a bit of fun. I have never had to write so many partial differential equations in my life.

    Doug

    --
    Working on new views of old physics at http://VisualPhysics.org
  7. Simulation error by 0xABADC0DA · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You joke, but consider if the universe were a simulation -- quantum mechanics makes a lot more sense in term of a simulation. Things like spooky action at a distance become lazy evaluation. Quanta become memory locations, variables. And so on. Quantum mechanics is easy to simulate.

    But how does one simulate gravity? It has to propagate in every direction at the something like speed of light or else -- god forbid -- information could travel faster than light. The whole concept of gravity, that every individual particle affects however slightly every other particle, is not possible to compute directly.

    Now suppose the universe were simulated as a sparse matrix. Each cell could contain a gravity component that stored the aggregate gravity force from each of a certain number of directions (perhaps expressed as several point masses). Depending on the number of directions this would give highly accurate simulation at a small scale, where error is absorbed as noise, while being computable for the overall universe as a whole. However the error would magnify over great distances due to 'floating point' type errors accumulating.

    What if what these people are seeing as dark matter is not matter at all, but simulation error. Perhaps even dark matter is related to a sparse simulation of the universe where intervening space is approximated by invisible masses that gravity affects but nothing else does. These mass would act to consolidate cells in the matrix to reduce the overall memory requirements.

    1. Re:Simulation error by jgarra23 · · Score: 2, Interesting


      But how does one simulate gravity? It has to propagate in every direction at the something like speed of light or else -- god forbid -- information could travel faster than light. The whole concept of gravity, that every individual particle affects however slightly every other particle, is not possible to compute directly.


      If your hypothesis is correct then we wouldn't know the answer to this because we are not the ones running the simulation & whoever is obviously has technology & knowledge greater than our own hence, it would be possible to compute gravity directly in every known situation. This would also fit the rules of quantum physics in that you can either know the state or position of things but not both since the simulator would be using this OR clause to save memory and/or processing capability.

  8. So they didn't really detect dark matter then by Crazy+Taco · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So from what I gather, this is still more pie in the sky from dark matter proponents then? It has been argued that we don't need dark matter to explain the universe, and that a minor tweaking of Newton's law of universal gravitation would explain everything. As of yet, no one has truly detected/demonstrated dark matter particles.

    If our fundamental laws are a bit off, then this bending/distorting of the light would be explained by that, and these dark matter constructions would be nothing but an illusion created by a mathematical error in our first principles. Therefore, until someone can actually demonstrate a dark matter particle, I am not jumping on this bandwagon. There are experiments underway to actually find dark matter, and for now I await their results.

    --
    Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it.