Slashdot Mirror
Vera Rubin, Pioneering Astronomer Who Confirmed Existence of Dark Matter, Dies At 88 (www.cbc.ca)
Mikkeles quotes a report from CBC.ca: Vera Rubin, a pioneering astronomer who helped find powerful evidence of dark matter, has died, her son said Monday. She was 88. Vera Rubin found that galaxies don't quite rotate the way they were predicted, and that lent support to the theory that some other force was at work, namely dark matter. Rubin's scientific achievements earned her numerous awards and honors, including a National Medal of Science presented by then-president Bill Clinton in 1993 "for her pioneering research programs in observational cosmology." She also became the second female astronomer to be elected to the National Academy of Sciences.
She was a truly amazing person and an inspiration to us all, male OR female.
and Rubin wasn't a huge fan of it either:
"If I could have my pick, I would like to learn that Newton's laws must be modified in order to correctly describe gravitational interactions at large distances. That's more appealing than a universe filled with a new kind of sub-nuclear particle."
I have high hopes for this new theory that can account for the galaxy rotation problem ( and the emDrive ): http://physicsfromtheedge.blog...
Open Source is Common Sense: http://groovix.com/
When exactly did we confirm the existence of dark matter?
Vera was interviewed by Philip Morrison for his 1980s series _The Ring of Truth_ and talked about her observations of galaxies:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhfUfxeh9Lg
....on the Science channels discussing her observation that the arms of Galaxies were going the same speed regardless of position from the center which could only be explained by concepts which eventually came to be known as dark matter. Sad to hear of her passing.
There is no experimental evidence for either dark matter or dark energy.
Someday, maybe. But not today.
We can measure the rotational velocity of galaxies by noting the red/blue shift of light from the opposite arms.
We can estimate the normal matter by looking at the brightness and estimating the number of stars.
When we do that, we find that galaxies rotate much faster than even the most optimistic estimates of their normal matter. They rotate so fast that they would literally fly apart if they only had mass from visible matter.
One hypothesis is that the extra mass comes from matter that we can't see. There's so much of it needed that it can't interact with EM radiation in any way, otherwise we'd be able to see it directly.
All other hypotheses to date have been disproved in one way or another. In particular, modifications to the law of gravity cannot account for the discrepancy.
Dark matter is the most likely explanation.
Vera, vera, what has become of you?
Does anybody else here feel the way I do?
There is a recently published new theory of gravity that doesn't need dark matter to explain the movement of stars. It does on the other hand need Einstein to be wrong: http://earthsky.org/space/erik... The article has a link to the actual paper.
You're upholding the bar on accuracy like the dark matter that has been proven to exist.
Gosh, never would have thought THAT. It's so unlike reality, where scientists snort coke off hooker asses and show off their bling to the bitches....
Yes, we get it, I even agree that science should be mode widely appreciated, and stories like this don't get the attention they deserve. BUT I DO *NOT* insist that somehow an actress is worthless because science isn't getting its deserved approval.
By your same logic, it would be fine for someone to claim that an invisible entity sits in the clouds and hurls lighting down. Having an effect does not prove the cause, and Flat Earth should be all you need to study to see how massive amounts of Scientists got stuff wrong for centuries.
Science _should_ welcome skepticism, yet when it comes to certain topics skepticism is shunned by a surprising number of people. That makes it a Religion, not Science.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.