Slashdot Mirror


Physicists Identify Possible New Particle Behind Dark Matter

sciencehabit writes: Like cops tracking the wrong person, physicists seeking to identify dark matter — the mysterious stuff whose gravity appears to bind the galaxies — may have been stalking the wrong particle. In fact, a particle with some properties opposite to those of physicists' current favorite dark matter candidate — the weakly interacting massive particle, or WIMP — would do just as good a job at explaining the stuff, a quartet of theorists says. Hypothetical strongly interacting massive particles — or SIMPs — would also better account for some astrophysical observations, they argue.

3 of 103 comments (clear)

  1. Re:My house of cards, taller than your house of ca by itzly · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you don't postulate some conjecture and start deriving all the required properties these particles are supposed to have, it's harder to find the proper experimental evidence you need to be looking for.

  2. Re:My house of cards, taller than your house of ca by painandgreed · · Score: 4, Informative

    I understand the neutrino was theorized before discovery, but I just read the article and the chain of properties either WIMPs or SIMPs need to have, and they seem overly complex for something that there is no direct evidence for. Of course I am not a physicist. Just seems like we need better data collection of anomalous particle behaviors before investing much faith in such conjectures. Granted these theories could guide future experiments, but perhaps just sometimes theory gets a little too far ahead of experimental evidence.

    Well, there is lots of evidence for something out there. This something, after coming up with other options and rejecting them through testing, must not interact with electromagnetic forces to a degree we can detect and have mass. Thus the "dark" and "matter". I am pa physicist and what you aren't seeing when you read these articles is a lot of math. It's complicated because physics at this level is really complicated and to come up with these hypothesis, they have to come up with something that fits what we already know about matter and the universe. That's going to involve a lot of graduate level mathematics and physics that describe a world that even physicists have a hard time wrapping their heads around. That's how particles get predicted, the math works out that way, and physics without the math is just philosophy. Sometimes you end up with something like string theory where the math works out (or seems to) but it can't be easily tested. At least these options can be tested.

  3. Style by Livius · · Score: 3, Informative

    This is how science works.

    It's not pretty, so you don't have to like it, but your not liking it is not a valid criticism.