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."
is it 1x4x9?
Given that > 90% of the stuff out there is not even made of the same stuff like us - in the great scheme of things we are: ;) )
a) Interesting
b) Not interesting
c) Both (don't you love quantum superpositions
Take that MOND!
Soon all your adherents will have to move to studying a crazy theory that can't disproven, like String Theory!
The Virgo Supercluster is 200 million light years in diameter. And I'm sure there are large superclusters known.
So we are to understand that dark matter, acted on only by gravity, forms sheets and filaments? We know very well what shapes distributions of particles form over time with only gravity acting on them and they look a lot like galaxies and very little like sheets and filaments. Can anyone clear this up for me?
so the scientists are lol cats? Oh, hai drk mater! i pownse on u!
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...
So what's the thread count on these sheets? And no weaving multiple superstrings at a time to inflate the number please...
I typically consider myself Interesting, but I never really know for sure until mod points are assigned. Occasionally, I'm Funny, Insightful, Informative, or Overrated... Sometimes all at the same time!
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
You are throwing up your hands WAY too soon and crying occam's razor.
Atmospheric distortions are not consistent over time or different locations and those distortions do not "lense" like gravity does. Also standard astronomic technique is to have someone confirm your results with a different telescope, in a different part of the world.
It may not be dark matter, but it's not a smudge on their mirror either.
The journal article is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/0004-6361:20078522
But that's exactly how it's being treated by physicists. Here are the very equations that physicists use to described the bending of spacetime by matter, dark or not.
Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
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
No, you are not. Damn that's the dumbest thing I've read on Slashdot in a while. You aren't a physicist, okay? Don't pretend like you have any idea what you're talking about. Don't assume that you know more than Ph.D.s who've been studying this shit for decades. They've seen the effects in all directions around us, you saying there's brown dwarfs hiding out in all directions? Just shut up, you're making Slashdot a stupider place with your very presence.
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.
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.