In theory, the Milky Way could be a 'galactic transport system'

January 21, 2015
Wormhole simulation. Credit: Davide and Paolo Salucci

Based on the latest evidence and theories our galaxy could be a huge wormhole (or space-time tunnel, have you seen "Interstellar?") and, if that were true, it would be "stable and navigable". This is the hypothesis put forward in a study published in Annals of Physics and conducted with the participation of SISSA in Trieste. The paper, the result of a collaboration between Indian, Italian and North American researchers, prompts scientists to re-think dark matter more accurately.

"If we combine the map of the in the Milky Way with the most recent Big Bang model to explain the universe and we hypothesise the existence of space-time tunnels, what we get is that our galaxy could really contain one of these tunnels, and that the tunnel could even be the size of the galaxy itself. But there's more", explains Paolo Salucci, astrophysicist of the International School for Advanced Studies (SISSA) of Trieste and a dark matter expert. "We could even travel through this tunnel, since, based on our calculations, it could be navigable. Just like the one we've all seen in the recent film 'Interstellar'". Salucci is among the authors of the paper recently published in Annals of Physics.

Although space-time tunnels (or wormholes or Einstein–Rosen bridges) have only recently gained great popularity among the public thanks to Christopher Nolan's sci-fi film, they have been the focus of astrophysicists' attention for many years. "What we tried to do in our study was to solve the very equation that the astrophysicist 'Murph' was working on. Clearly we did it long before the film came out" jokes Salucci. "It is, in fact, an extremely interesting problem for dark matter studies".

"Obviously we're not claiming that our galaxy is definitely a wormhole, but simply that, according to theoretical models, this hypothesis is a possibility". Can it ever be tested experimentally? "In principle, we could test it by comparing two – our galaxy and another, very close one like, for example, the Magellanic Cloud, but we are still very far from any actual possibility of making such a comparison".

The video will load shortly
Wormhole simulation

To reach their conclusions the astrophysicists combined the equations of general relativity with an extremely detailed map of the distribution of dark matter in the Milky Way: "the map was one we obtained in a study we carried out in 2013", explains Salucci. "Beyond the sci-fi hypothesis, our research is interesting because it proposes a more complex reflection on dark matter".

As Salucci points out, scientists have long tried to explain dark matter by hypothesising the existence of a particular particle, the neutralino, which, however, has never been identified at CERN or observed in the universe. But alternative theories also exist that don't rely on the particle, "and perhaps it's time for scientists to take this issue 'seriously'", concludes Salucci. "Dark matter may be 'another dimension', perhaps even a major galactic transport system. In any case, we really need to start asking ourselves what it is".

In addition to Salucci, the other scientists who took part in the study included Farook Rahaman (first author), from Jadavpur University in India, and a group of Indian and North American researchers.

Explore further: Dark matter half what we thought, say scientists

More information: "Possible existence of wormholes in the central regions of halos." Ann. Phys. 350 (2014) 561. DOI: 10.1016/j.aop.2014.08.003 . On Arxiv: http://arxiv.org/abs/1501.00490

Related Stories

Researchers detect possible signal from dark matter

December 11, 2014

Could there finally be tangible evidence for the existence of dark matter in the Universe? After sifting through reams of X-ray data, scientists in EPFL's Laboratory of Particle Physics and Cosmology (LPPC) and Leiden University ...

Decoding the gravitational evolution of dark matter halos

January 13, 2015

Researchers at Kavli IPMU and their collaborators have revealed that considering environmental effects such as a gravitational tidal force spread over a scale much larger than a galaxy cluster is indispensable to explain ...

Speeding bullet galaxy observed slamming into galaxy cluster

January 16, 2015

(Phys.org)—Researchers working at Europe's XMM-Newton X-ray space telescope have observed a speeding galaxy smashing its way through a galaxy cluster called Abell 4067. They have reported their observations and findings ...

Recommended for you

Understanding nature's patterns with plasmas

August 23, 2016

Patterns abound in nature, from zebra stripes and leopard spots to honeycombs and bands of clouds. Somehow, these patterns form and organize all by themselves. To better understand how, researchers have now created a new ...

Measuring tiny forces with light

August 25, 2016

Photons are bizarre: They have no mass, but they do have momentum. And that allows researchers to do counterintuitive things with photons, such as using light to push matter around.

Light and matter merge in quantum coupling

August 22, 2016

Where light and matter intersect, the world illuminates. Where light and matter interact so strongly that they become one, they illuminate a world of new physics, according to Rice University scientists.

A new study looks for the cortical conscious network

August 26, 2016

New research published in the New Journal of Physics tries to decompose the structural layers of the cortical network to different hierarchies enabling to identify the network's nucleus, from which our consciousness could ...

67 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Doug_Huffman
1.8 / 5 (17) Jan 21, 2015
So this is to what the science of cosmology is reduced, to un-falsifiable could. The divide of cosmology from theology is reduced to Planck's Angels dancing on the mustard seed of faith.
vlaaing peerd
4.1 / 5 (13) Jan 21, 2015
the trouble of a science enthusiast. You know there is something utter bollocks about such spectacular articles but when you read the official papers, it´s too complicated to make out the BS from the non-BS.
KBK
3 / 5 (20) Jan 21, 2015
So I come here,to read this entry... and it has a 1 out of five vote...

Somewhere out there, there are negative thinking, pouty, small minded douchebags who are down-voting the forwarding of science.

downvoting posts, downvoting the dreamers, downvoting the ones who move us into the future..

Little ticky-tocks they commit to ---like little blundering blind dogmatic rubber repeat soldiers.

Black holes of negativity who stab the creative minded in the back.

There is little that is more pitiful, nor more dangerous to humanity in this world --than that sort of sick animal dogmatism.

movementiseternal
Jan 21, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
cantdrive85
Jan 21, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
movementiseternal
Jan 21, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
zangetsu
1 / 5 (5) Jan 21, 2015
the idea of "navigating" a wormhole is silly.

you would enter at one end and travel to the other end.

you would not get to choose where you exited or make a pit stop half way there.

a person would probably not survive the trip alive anyway, but in any case the word navigating needs to be removed as there is no navigation involved.
marinespill
4.3 / 5 (6) Jan 21, 2015
If we "hypothesise" wormholes exist? This whole article pretty much says that if we assume something can exist, in theory it could exist. There is and has never been any scientific reason to suspect any such thing as wormholes exist or can exist. The whole concept is based on the idea that physics doesn't rule it out, which is absurd, because physics doesn't rule any grass smoking, science fiction, 2AM idea out. That's not how the process works.
RWT
4.3 / 5 (6) Jan 21, 2015
Highly theoretical research based on highly theoretical matter that might not even exist, particles that may not exist, and a model of another theory that is probably wrong. My money is on NOPE.
luvinspoon2001
4.3 / 5 (7) Jan 21, 2015
"Based on the latest evidence and theories"

Does the author understand what a theory is? Wormholes as star gates are theory? No No No, the concept, even if its been around for a while, is at best a hypothesis and more likely a fairy tale myth motivated by the space travel enthusiasts that so badly want space travel to be like driving an RV to a national park.
mbee1
5 / 5 (4) Jan 21, 2015
Our galaxy could be made of green cheese is just as likely as this SF claiming to be science. They have zero evidence of any of their assumptions that they play around with in the math.
valeriy_polulyakh
3 / 5 (2) Jan 21, 2015
For the purposes of enlivening or animation there is in a great numbers a diverting literature about parallel universes, time travel, wormhole time-machines, Einstein-Rosen bridges and Schwarzschild and traversable wormholes which would allow travel from one part of the universe to another. It is unclear, what is the role of this tinsel. Is this a part of cosmological theory? Or, are these undesirable waste products of its theoretical machinery? The highbrows are not inclined to discuss this "derogatory" issue.
TulsaMikel
4.3 / 5 (6) Jan 21, 2015
@kbk

Quit projecting your preconceived notions on everyone else. There are countless reasons for not agreeing 100% with this article.
mitekillem
2.1 / 5 (7) Jan 21, 2015
Dark Matter = a theory postulated to fill the gap of missing information & bad math. Rather than retooling "tried and true" methods, or find that formulas don't always work-out, they create a crazy form of matter. --The same thing happened with Black Holes. Originally, a black hole was the thing they used to describe a point where things broke down in Einstein's theory of Relativity and Newtonian "Law". Rather than say that maybe the Law isn't accurate for everything, or that maybe Einstein was off slightly, they just accept it as impunitive truth, and try to find something to fill the gap. When it comes to Science, nothing should be above reproach.
boothby171
3 / 5 (4) Jan 21, 2015
Thank you, TulsaMikel

It's a pretty good bet that the moment someone tries to defend their position by yelling at those who oppose it that they're all (and I quote @KBK here) "a bunch of poopy heads," that there's really not all that much positive to be said about it.

To be honest, I'm not even convinced that "Dark Matter" and "Dark Energy" are anything more than universal fudge factors with a pinch of attempted realism thrown into the mix. But to take that and stretch it to navigable "Worm Holes"....like someone else said earlier, "Angels dancing on the heads of pins."
Rustybolts
3 / 5 (6) Jan 21, 2015
"down-voting the forwarding of science".... lmfao
First this is not science! Bad theories need shot down or someone will pick up the ball and make a new theory which includes the previous bad theory. The perfect example would be the big bang theory. It's included in many theories and now all those theories have to be shot down.
Top Taciturn
3.8 / 5 (5) Jan 21, 2015
Science is divided in thwo sections. One is the section that looks, asks questions and finds answers. The other section just 'once upon a times', thinks, conjurs, imagines, makes up, pretends and the like.
Bill C_
3.7 / 5 (3) Jan 21, 2015
It would be real interesting is for these guys who I think have access to super computers to try the following :

1) use the computer to hunt for stable combinations of the primary constants
2) postulate possible means of interconnections between some stable combinations
3) consider that the gravitational forces from the stable combinations may be felt across all
stable combinations !

Bill C.
Florentino P
5 / 5 (3) Jan 21, 2015
What an article! Wormholes, black holes, intergalactic travel, dark matter, dark energy... sounds exciting. When do we get started?
TheGhostofOtto1923
4 / 5 (12) Jan 21, 2015
So this is to what the science of cosmology is reduced, to un-falsifiable could. The divide of cosmology from theology is reduced to Planck's Angels dancing on the mustard seed of faith.
I challenge you to say something even less coherent.
Z99
4.5 / 5 (2) Jan 21, 2015
So, be honest: who has actually read Farook, et al's article? From what little I know, wormholes are NOT possible. Grade schoolers know that assuming a single false premise allows ANY conclusion (ie. assume 1+1=3 and I can prove 1+2 = 4 and 1+1 = 1+2 = -17.3) That said, we also know our physics is wrong near singularities, so why not assume all black holes (and any other event horizon, what the heck) are in fact the same (not meaning copies, but a single thing)? identities, not equivalencies. OTOH, I've also read that if they exist (wormholes, that is) they must have always existed. BTW, I presume that the authors mean that if the wormholes are large enough, then tidal effects will not cause matter to disintegrate ("navigable")
cantdrive85
2.1 / 5 (7) Jan 21, 2015
What an article! Wormholes, black holes, intergalactic travel, dark matter, dark energy... sounds exciting. When do we get started?

When you make pigs fly.
gatorchomp
5 / 5 (9) Jan 21, 2015
There should be a Star Trek symbol on articles like these. The purpose of this article is to generate excitement, not inform. Appreciate it for what it is. Criticizing it is fun too :)
Skycrime
4.1 / 5 (9) Jan 21, 2015
I don't understand why things like this get so much hostility. Maybe there are just a lot of readers here who aren't involved in physics.

What people who develop these theories do is important for two reasons. The first is that it gives us possibilities that we can test, look into further, and maybe discard later on. The second is that, if something is allowable given the current laws of physics, but is actually impossible, we've made an error.

If this is not possible, as the (I assume doctorate holding) commenters here have said, then the model of physics is missing something. If this isn't possible, then we need to prove why. And if it is possible, the question as to if it is true or not really doesn't matter, as that wasn't the point in the first place. The article does make it sound a lot more practical than the scientists involved would actually have reason to think.
sandler
1 / 5 (4) Jan 21, 2015
So this is to what the science of cosmology is reduced, to un-falsifiable could. The divide of cosmology from theology is reduced to Planck's Angels dancing on the mustard seed of faith.
I challenge you to say something even less coherent.

Here goes. Lets say you get on board of you Starship and speed it up all the way to speed of light, maximum velocity. You then experience certain things, such as time for you would run slower than the rest of the universe, lets say 1000 times slower. Also the space would contract for you presumably at the same rate. So if you traveling this fast and have to cover 1000 times less distance, you kind of in the worm hole, no? If any of this is possible it would also possible for some dark matter to be travelling this fast that light wouldn't reflect of it, yet gravity would still be there because of time dilation.
tomallen498
1 / 5 (7) Jan 21, 2015
Yep, galactic transport. A sperm trying to find an egg to transport a clean soul into a material life, now is space an illusion? or is it a reflection of sun(son) seen differently by every living existence(son's-life)
Steve 200mph Cruiz
5 / 5 (10) Jan 21, 2015
Why would the galaxy be a worm hole? this article didn't say anything other than "Woah! Trippy"

When you say in theory, tell me the damn theory.
This is stupid and when you do things like this it is at the expense of the public and their faith in the scientific process.
Seriously, update this article and at least mention how a galactic size worm hole is possible or delete it.
markj_armstrong
5 / 5 (8) Jan 21, 2015
Without even mentioning the pseudoscience present here, I'd have expected an article on a science website to at least be devoid of factual mistakes. Like a wormhole being an Einstein-Rosen bridge, not an Einstein-Penrose bridge. (I believe the author may be confusing Penrose's and Hawking's work on singularities: Penrose-Hawking singularity theorems.) And then saying something as foolish as "...[wormholes] recently gained great popularity among the public thanks to Christopher Nolan's sci-fi film." Okay...sure...since Star Trek, Stargate, and any other multitude of science-fiction stories, movies, and tv-shows never had "great public popularity" or made wormholes a common element... Good thing the author wasn't being graded on this, since it's a solid D at best.
arpotu
4.5 / 5 (2) Jan 21, 2015
This would be a lot less like bollocks if we didn't know about the Beckenstein Bound.
JIMBO
not rated yet Jan 21, 2015
Only one practical problem: First we have to pilot a spacecraft to one of these wormholes to utilize its properties. The center of the Milky Way is about 25K light-yrs distant from earth, so this is thinking outside the box of practicality, but still very interesting.
Solon
1 / 5 (1) Jan 21, 2015
I was going to say that the movie was typical Hollywood tripe, all imagination, very little fact, but I did notice that they showed that space in our galaxy to be pure black, and not filled with stars and nebulae and a glowing milky way, which really is tripe, but accepted by most scientists.
alfie_null
not rated yet Jan 22, 2015
Regarding multiple refs to "Interstellar" in the article; I wonder if they cited it in their paper? Nice to know one need delve no deeper than some pop entertainment to gain an understanding of science topics. Think I'll be off to irradiate me some spiders.
Losik
Jan 22, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Gimp
5 / 5 (2) Jan 22, 2015
So many righteously superior responses, so much presumed knowledge, so many educated conjectures and so few real answers. Humans are entertaining.
Losik
Jan 22, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Losik
Jan 22, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
4.1 / 5 (9) Jan 22, 2015
well, Zeph is back
In AWT the whole idea is not nonsensical, but you shouldn't imagine some metaphysical funnels there.
@ZEPHIR/losik
metaphysical funnels?
really?
as if it isn't bad enough that you are proposing that a falsified conjecture is legitimate science and posting about aw/daw, but now you want to add metaphysics to it?

WORDNIK says metaphysics is
Philosophy The branch of philosophy that examines the nature of reality, including the relationship between mind and matter, substance and attribute, fact and value
and Wiki says
Metaphysics is a traditional branch of philosophy concerned with explaining the fundamental nature of being and the world that encompasses it, although the term is not easily defined
https://en.wikipe...aphysics
IOW - NO SCIENCE

as for aw/daw
it is DEBUNKED PSEUDOSCIENCE
http://arxiv.org/...1284.pdf

Losik
Jan 22, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Losik
Jan 22, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Losik
Jan 22, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Losik
Jan 22, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
OZGuy
5 / 5 (5) Jan 22, 2015
So back eh Zephir, lets see how long before you get this Mr Hand banned...
KBK
1 / 5 (3) Jan 23, 2015
Our galaxy could be made of green cheese is just as likely as this SF claiming to be science. They have zero evidence of any of their assumptions that they play around with in the math.


The biggest find of all, the one that the more dogmatic aspects and minds in science find, much to their horror....is that there is no place for determinism at the table of functional, forward moving, open science.

That determinism is shit-canned ...and has no place in science, at all.

The fundamental that the physicists ~~KNOW~~, which the literal minded fear to the point that it makes them wild eyed, arms flailing and puking on their shoes......is that there are no facts in this reality.

The only fact we know is a paradox, which is that there are no facts and determinism is a thing that has no capacity to exist, at all.

You look around, and the math and the science supports this --wholly, unequivocally, remorselessly, at every step.
elliander
1 / 5 (2) Jan 23, 2015
Problem: The map is of matter. Not dark matter. There is no proof of the existence of dark matter and any attempt to measure it's influence has yielded no results. Dark matter isnt even a real theory yet. To be a theory it must be substantiated by evidence. Until then it is at best a hypothesis, but considering that there is evidence against it's existence it would be a stretch to even call it that.

Evidence: Attempts to measure the influence of dark matter within and around our solar system by measuring it's impact on our sun was found to be within the margin of error. Stars flying out of the galaxy are not being influenced by invisible gravity either.

Dark Matter as an idea only came about because simulations showed that the matter in the galaxy wasn't heavy enough to hold it all together so they made up matter out of nothing and then the simulation worked, but higher dimensional models also work.

That being said, the layout of the universe does suggest interconnection.
thefurlong
5 / 5 (4) Jan 23, 2015
@KBK
That determinism is shit-canned ...and has no place in science, at all.

Actually, the jury's still out on that. There is at least one interpretation of QM that is deterministic--DeBroglie Bohm. There could be others...
there are no facts in this reality.

you write on your keyboard, which has failed, for the millionth time, to spontaneously turn into a donkey, and explode.
The only fact we know is a paradox

Not quite.
which is that there are no facts

Are you...Mr. Mxyzptlk?
determinism is a thing that has no capacity to exist, at all.

And yet, every time an article concerning General Relativity appears, the crackpots always dependably start commenting in droves. It's almost...deterministic.
the math and the science supports this

But they rely on there being facts in the first place, so they can't suppor--
whoa
http://www.troll....whoa.jpg
dan42day
1 / 5 (1) Jan 23, 2015
Only one practical problem: First we have to pilot a spacecraft to one of these wormholes to utilize its properties. The center of the Milky Way is about 25K light-yrs distant from earth, so this is thinking outside the box of practicality, but still very interesting.


No problem! All we need is an antimatter powered ion propulsion system to accelerate our vehicle to 99.999% of light speed and the perceived trip time to the center of the galaxy would only be about 11 months! The only difficulty lies in getting precise measurements of the magnetic field flux in the center of the tunnel so we can design our flux capacitor to send us 50,000 years into the past and return us to earth within a couple years of our departure (in earth time). I saw an old Delorean for sale on a recent episode of American Pickers but it's going to be pretty cramped for a two year trip!

Just kidding, my theory is that our galaxy is really just a mural on a Scooby Doo type custom van.

Whydening Gyre
3.7 / 5 (3) Jan 23, 2015
Dark Matter as an idea only came about because simulations showed that the matter in the galaxy wasn't heavy enough to hold it all together so they made up matter out of nothing and then the simulation worked, but higher dimensional models also work.

Just a wild postulation, but... I believe they might be overlooking a little something I like to call "gravity density"... Gravity in the densest portion of matter in a galaxy is stronger. On the outer edges, less so...

That being said, the layout of the universe does suggest interconnection.

Indeed, indeed...
elliander
5 / 5 (1) Jan 23, 2015

Just a wild postulation, but... I believe they might be overlooking a little something I like to call "gravity density"... Gravity in the densest portion of matter in a galaxy is stronger. On the outer edges, less so...


That is a good point. I would be curious to actually look at the data used in these simulations. I would also be curious to hear explanations as to why stars can fly out of the galaxy unrestricted if the gravity really is great enough to hold it all together. There might even be multiple different phenomena working together rather than just one explanation.
elliander
1 / 5 (2) Jan 23, 2015
Another issue I have is that the "belief" in dark matter comes off as some kind of religion now. People are taking maps of matter and calling it a dark matter map because It's like they skipped over the steps required to become a theory and just started believing in some imaginary invisible something. They argue it must be real because "we can't see 80% of it" , but just because we can't see it isn't proof of what it is. I mean, when someone believes in something that can't be seen, touched, interacted with, or measured that's not science. That's religion. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist, only that it hasn't been proven to exist.
Vietvet
3 / 5 (10) Jan 23, 2015
Another issue I have is that the "belief" in dark matter comes off as some kind of religion now. People are taking maps of matter and calling it a dark matter map because It's like they skipped over the steps required to become a theory and just started believing in some imaginary invisible something. They argue it must be real because "we can't see 80% of it" , but just because we can't see it isn't proof of what it is. I mean, when someone believes in something that can't be seen, touched, interacted with, or measured that's not science. That's religion. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist, only that it hasn't been proven to exist.


You've missed the point that "dark matter" is a place holder until it's actual composition is determined.
Whydening Gyre
4 / 5 (4) Jan 23, 2015
That is a good point. I would be curious to actually look at the data used in these simulations. I would also be curious to hear explanations as to why stars can fly out of the galaxy unrestricted if the gravity really is great enough to hold it all together. There might even be multiple different phenomena working together rather than just one explanation.

More than likely - there is... It's never just ONE thing... it's a conglomeration of several...
elliander
2 / 5 (4) Jan 23, 2015

You've missed the point that "dark matter" is a place holder until it's actual composition is determined.


No it isn't. That's the problem. Dark Matter is actually defined. "Unseen matter that may make up more than ninety percent of the universe." and it's function is also defined as being responsible for holding the galaxy together.

That's a bit too detailed to be a mere placeholder, especially when there are other potential explanations.

For example, if there is no "Unseen matter", but instead their is gravitational influence from higher dimensions (like a magnet influence a paper on a 2D plane than an observer within that plane can't see) that placeholder idea wouldn't really work because it is defined.

If instead Dark Matter was simply defined as "Whatever accounts for the extra gravity" that would be fine. SOMETHING has to account for it and that approach would leave it open to science.
Losik
Jan 24, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
elliander
1 / 5 (1) Jan 24, 2015
Here's another problem with the "place holder" idea: Not all models of the universe require anything even resembling dark matter. This model says that there is no need for extra gravity and that the curve can be explained without making stuff up:

http://theconvers...er-16446

So which makes more sense scientifically? A model that relies on something that cannot be measured, or a model that can be tested for? I'm not saying which is true, but I am saying that we need to actually be looking for the answers instead of assuming we know without any evidence.
cantdrive85
2.5 / 5 (8) Jan 24, 2015
Why is it not surprising that the lap sitting jock puppet crew of Cap'n Stupid, OZ gargler, and Viet killer is here in full support of pseudoscientific metaphysical mumbo jumbo.
Losik
Jan 24, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
elliander
5 / 5 (1) Jan 24, 2015
it cannot explain all observed aspects of dark matter behavior


I have to stop you there because there are NO observed aspects of dark matter. No one has ever observed or measured dark matter either directly or indirectly. There have been attempts though. One team spent 8 years trying to measure it's influence underground unsuccessfully (thermal changes explained their results) and another team tried to study it's influence on our sun only to find that there was no trace of dark matter influence.

This right here outlines my main problem with the "Dark Matter" supporters: They use circular logic. Now, I'm not a physics major, but physics was required learning for a genetics major so I did actually study this stuff at least a little bit and so far I have not found any reference to any team with any evidence of dark matter of any kind. Every time I find someone claiming to have anything it's just evidence of what Dark Matter is supposed to explain, not Dark Matter itself.
elliander
not rated yet Jan 24, 2015
In particular it fails in explanation of cohesive behavior (Bullet cluster), also dark matter filaments (it's essentially spherically symmetric model) and/or even so-called dark galaxies, i.e. objects composed entirely of dark matter


What evidence do you have to support that any of that even exists?

To explain: We know that a Black Hole is real because we can measure it's influence. We can see matter being pulled in and we can see how light is bent. We don't need to see a Black Hole to observe it's influence.

As far as filaments go, they are called Galaxy filaments and we can observe them. The Lambda-CMD model does assert that the matter forms along filaments of dark matter, but that's just conjecture. That's taking the observed phenomena and using it as evidence for an explanation. Unlike black holes we haven't observed enough to substantiate that one explanation.

If, say, an entire Galaxy of invisible matter was real how would you propose even testing for it?
elliander
5 / 5 (1) Jan 24, 2015
so-called dark galaxies, i.e. objects composed entirely of dark matter.


I looked up the subject and it looks like the idea is from the observations of VIRGOHI21:

http://arxiv.org/abs/0706.1586

As best as I can tell though this study simply suggested that "Dark Matter" was a possible explanation because most other ideas were ruled out. That means it's a hypothesis. An educated guess. It's certainly an interested idea, and I certainly see no evidence to rule it out, but that's far from saying we have observed a dark matter galaxy and thus we can't say with any certainty that it is made of dark matter and thus cannot say with any certainty that galaxy formations are an observed aspect of dark matter.
Losik
Jan 24, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
yyz
5 / 5 (4) Jan 24, 2015
"If, say, an entire Galaxy of invisible matter was real how would you propose even testing for it?"

How about looking for clouds of neutral hydrogen that have the mass of a galaxy but have no discernable stars? Several examples of such systems have been found, e.g.:

http://arxiv.org/abs/1210.0073

http://arxiv.org/abs/1306.6148

http://arxiv.org/abs/1002.1714

Further study of the dark galaxy candidate you referenced, VIRGO HI21, make it likely that it is tidal debris from a galactic encounter rather than a true dark galaxy:

http://arxiv.org/abs/0707.3991

For dark galaxy candidates like HI 1225+01(1st link above), you need to explain how several billion solar masses of hydrogen, 70 kpc in diameter (and a member of the massive Virgo galaxy cluster), can remain intact over the lifetime of the universe.
tear88
not rated yet Jan 25, 2015
Ooh, ooh, maybe there's one at the center of the galaxy! It can be a travel hub, like Atlanta! And the flight from there to here is only ..... 27,000 light years. That's only 156,600,000,000,000,000 miles. (I may have misplaced the decimal point, but no biggie. I'll make it up on the instant travel to a different galaxy. Where I'll probably face another 27,000 light year leg).

We can't even make it to Mars, and someone's babbling about using wormholes? I'd be more interested in the speculation regarding the connection to dark matter, but that's all way beyond my mental abilities.
vidyunmaya
1 / 5 (2) Jan 25, 2015
The psychology of self-deception- Who can help You ?
In-complete frames - Black-hole or worm hole - mislead the spirit of Science advancement
Plasma Regulated Electro-magnetic phenomena in Magnetic Field Environment-
see formation of structures in my books
1.PLASMA VISION OF THE UNIVERSE-1993 (Reg No: TXU 729718 ) (No# Pages-95, Figures 58)
2.THE VISION OF COSMIC TO *PREM UNIVERSE-1995 (Reg No: TXU 893693 )*PREM: Plasma Regulated Electro-Magnetic Universe (No# Pages 148,Figures 56)
Space Cosmology Vedas Interlinks-Cosmology Definition-1 By Vidyardhi Nanduri
http://www.youtub...youtu.be
Introduces Cosmology Defintion, coverpages of 7 books,Purpose of interlinks -all in brief
kochevnik
5 / 5 (1) Jan 25, 2015
@KBK The only fact we know is a paradox, which is that there are no facts and determinism is a thing that has no capacity to exist, at all.
Indeed the maths support reality being intricately nested paradoxes, likely vortices as they are the simplest form made from themselves. The vortices support toroids with oscillations caused by dualism and the culmination lies in the singularity, which is where the dualities are unified and again whole
DavidW
1 / 5 (1) Jan 25, 2015
As for the article... they say that it is possible, but they could have it wrong.
If indeed it is possible, then that is one of way things are. All is interconnected with the common thread, 'part of the big picture'.

Perhaps we will use this or a similar theory that is workable as a tool for interstellar travel. It would not surprise me at all.

What is not going to happen is us getting to that point, (interstellar travel), in the understanding of our surroundings without each and every human on their knees willfully and joyfully crying tears of happiness before our master, truth and life. Translation: The needless and selfish killing of the animals "MURDER" must stop.
Urgelt
not rated yet Jan 26, 2015
This is... well, just about the ugliest possible hypothesis I've yet seen.

Why? Because it's 'easy to vary.' As David Deutsche explains, good science consists of explanations which are 'hard to vary' - which means they are falsifiable. But this wreck of an hypothesis is loose as a goose with the runs. Vary it any which way with assumptions and numbers and it's still not ruled out.

I love the Dark Matter mystery; but it's obviously driving some scientists to desperation.
Losik
Jan 27, 2015
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.