Unexpected interaction between dark matter and ordinary matter in mini-spiral galaxies

December 15, 2016
Credit: ESO’s OmegaCAM on the VLT Survey Telescope

Statistical analysis of mini-spiral galaxies shows an unexpected interaction between dark matter and ordinary matter. According to the SISSA study recently published in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, where the relationship is obvious and cannot be explained in a trivial way within the context of the Standard Model, these objects may serve as "portals" to a completely new form of Physics which can explain phenomena like matter and dark energy.

They resemble a spiral galaxy like ours, only ten thousand times smaller: the mini-spiral galaxies studied by Professor Paolo Salucci of the International School for Advanced Studies (SISSA) in Trieste, and Ekaterina Karukes, who recently earned her PhD at SISSA, may prove to be "the portal that leads us to a whole new Physics, going beyond the of particles to explain matter and ," says Salucci. It is the first time these elements have been studied statistically, a method that can erase the "individual" variability of each object, thus revealing the general characteristics of the class. "We studied 36 galaxies, which was a sufficient number for statistical study. By doing this, we found a link between the structure of ordinary, or luminous matter like stars, dust and gas, with ."

Dark matter is one of the great mysteries of Physics: since it does not emit electromagnetic radiation we cannot see it, even with the most sophisticated instruments. It was only discovered through its gravitational effects. Many believe it makes up 90% of our Universe. "Most dark matter, according to the most credible hypotheses, would be non-baryonic or WIMP. It would not interact with except through gravitational force," continues Karukes. "Our observations, however, disagree with this notion."

Salucci and Karukes showed that, in the objects they observed, the structure of dark matter mimics in its own way. "If, for a given mass, the luminous matter in a galaxy is closely compacted, so it is the dark matter. Similarly, if the former is more widespread than in other galaxies, so is the latter."

The "tip of the iceberg"

"It is a very strong effect that cannot be explained trivially using the Standard Model of particles." The Standard Model is the most widely-accepted theory of Physics in the scientific community. It explains fundamental forces (and particles of matter), however it contains some doubtful points, most notably the fact that it does not include . Phenomena such as the existence of dark matter and dark energy make it clear to scientists that there is another sort of yet to be discovered and explored.

"From our observations, the phenomenon, and thus the necessity, is incredibly obvious. At the same time, this can be a starting point for exploring this new kind of physics," continues Salucci. "Even in the largest spiral galaxies we find effects similar to the ones we observed, but they are signals that we can try to explain using the framework of the Standard Model through astrophysical processes within galaxies. With mini-spirals, however, there is no simple explanation. These 36 items are the tip of the iceberg of a phenomenon that we will probably find everywhere and that will help us discover what we cannot yet see. "

Explore further: NA64 hunts the mysterious dark photon

More information: E.V. Karukes et al. The universal rotation curve of dwarf disk galaxies, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (2016). DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stw3055

Related Stories

NA64 hunts the mysterious dark photon

November 25, 2016

One of the biggest puzzles in physics is that eighty-five percent of the matter in our universe is "dark": it does not interact with the photons of the conventional electromagnetic force and is therefore invisible to our ...

The case for co-decaying dark matter

December 5, 2016

(Phys.org)—There isn't as much dark matter around today as there used to be. According to one of the most popular models of dark matter, the universe contained much more dark matter early on when the temperature was hotter. ...

Reconciling dwarf galaxies with dark matter

September 7, 2016

Dwarf galaxies are enigmas wrapped in riddles. Although they are the smallest galaxies, they represent some of the biggest mysteries about our universe. While many dwarf galaxies surround our own Milky Way, there seem to ...

Image: Hubble sees spiral in Serpens

September 8, 2014

(Phys.org) —This new NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope image shows a beautiful spiral galaxy known as PGC 54493, located in the constellation of Serpens (The Serpent). This galaxy is part of a galaxy cluster that has been ...

Image: Hubble explores the hidden dark side of NGC 24

October 3, 2016

This shining disk of a spiral galaxy sits approximately 25 million light-years away from Earth in the constellation of Sculptor. Named NGC 24, the galaxy was discovered by British astronomer William Herschel in 1785, and ...

Recommended for you

Camera on NASA's Lunar Orbiter survived 2014 meteoroid hit

May 26, 2017

On Oct. 13, 2014 something very strange happened to the camera aboard NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO). The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Camera (LROC), which normally produces beautifully clear images of the lunar ...

SDO sees partial eclipse in space

May 26, 2017

On May 25, 2017, NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory, or SDO, saw a partial solar eclipse in space when it caught the moon passing in front of the sun. The lunar transit lasted almost an hour, between 2:24 and 3:17 p.m. EDT, ...

Collapsing star gives birth to a black hole

May 25, 2017

Astronomers have watched as a massive, dying star was likely reborn as a black hole. It took the combined power of the Large Binocular Telescope (LBT), and NASA's Hubble and Spitzer space telescopes to go looking for remnants ...

30 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Benni
2.2 / 5 (10) Dec 15, 2016
we found a link between the structure of ordinary, or luminous matter like stars, dust and gas, with dark matter.


Most dark matter....... would not interact with ordinary matter except through gravitational force, Our observations, however, disagree with this notion.


So now the DM Enthusiasts have concocted a New Physics rule aside from "gravitational force" by which they imagine the presence of DM making up 90% of the mass of the Uninverse.

Some member of their research team figured out that there couldn't possibly be one of Zwicky's Envelopes of DM around this tiny Spiral because it is way too small for application of the Old Physics, now they need a new "physics" to bolster their dismal Cosmic Fairy Dust narratives of the past.

This is the same bunch of so-called cosmologists being paid by government funding grants to crank out worthless periodic proclamations as they work tirelessly to keep their paychecks from being cut.

cantdrive85
2.7 / 5 (7) Dec 15, 2016
"Our observations, however, disagree with this notion."

Say it ain't so. You mean astrophysicists fanciful imaginings may not be correct?
tblakely1357
not rated yet Dec 15, 2016
While dark matter and dark energy is all that we have to go with nowadays they do bear a resemblance to the epicycles of the Ptolemaic system
Tuxford
1.2 / 5 (10) Dec 15, 2016
Say it ain't so.

Hey, that's my line!
"From our observations, the phenomenon, and thus the necessity, is incredibly obvious. At the same time, this can be a starting point for exploring this new kind of physics,"

I have saying this for years. The problem is that the new physics leads to electro-granitic weaponry, which could be incredibly dangerous. Thus, there is widespread disinfo spread in this forum and throughout the academic world, spread by government intelligence agencies.
shows an unexpected interaction between dark matter and ordinary matter.

Like I have been saying for years, dark matter effects are caused by the presence of matter. It is the interpretation that is wrong. Greater matter density causes more refraction of light, leading to dark matter halo effects surrounding galaxies.

The new physics will be centered around LaViolette's SQK. It is just a matter of time and further conformational observations. Relativists belong in Disneyland.
Benni
1.6 / 5 (7) Dec 15, 2016
Greater matter density causes more refraction of light


There is probably some "refraction" occurring that appears as lensing effects, but differentiating between the two effects from distances of billions of light years is absurdly impossible.

When Elastic & Inelastic Photon Scattering effects are added into the mix you really end up with cosmic soup which is all but impossible to sort through, which is why this bunch of DM Enthusiasts in the UK need "new physics".

The "new physics" they need is a narrative so open ended that they won't even attempt a cogent discussion about it. Because the "new physics" so contradicts Zwicky's old physics, any discussion about the "new physics" becomes unintelligible to rational thinking Physicists, but they'll prattle on because there is a large enough tinfoil hat crowd out there that will jump aboard almost any make believe Trekkie bandwagon leading them to the next Trekkie convention gathering site.
dogbert
2.6 / 5 (9) Dec 15, 2016
If, for a given mass, the luminous matter in a galaxy is closely compacted, so it is the dark matter. Similarly, if the former is more widespread than in other galaxies, so is the latter."


We just keep jumping through hoops to hold on to dark matter. Now it is not in a halo around ether galaxy, it is mixed in with the visible matter.

When will we conclude that what we are seeing is what is happening? Imaginary matter is not only magical, it is magical in different ways in different places.

Isn't it time to dispense with magic mass and simply acknowledge that gravity behaves differently from what our models predict?
Benni
1 / 5 (6) Dec 15, 2016
simply acknowledge that gravity behaves differently from what our models predict
......which is the key consideration for why zany cosmologists concoct "new physics" for things their inept models can neither account for or predict.

Scroofinator
3 / 5 (1) Dec 15, 2016
Do these "mini-spiral" galaxies have SMBHs?
liquidspacetime
Dec 15, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
howhot3
3 / 5 (2) Dec 15, 2016
Reading this article seems like more proof to Erik Verlinde's new theories on 'Emergent Gravity'. It doesn't require a change to the standard model, nor does it require special properties or particles to explain odd observations like what the article describes. Basically the outline of the idea of emergent gravity is that an area of space occupied by a particle of mass is bent by the entropy of the particle. So the more the entropy, the weaker the curve of space time and the lower the force of attraction. Verlinde's models fit perfectly with dark matter, in that these are just particle of lower entropy and so have a sharper effect on space-time curvature. So as his Emergent Gravity theory can explain what gravity is and how it comes about, it also can explain dark matter and why concentrations of mass also have this dark matter halo. No odd-ball dark matter particles are needed.

See: https://arxiv.org...2269.pdf

Kron
not rated yet Dec 15, 2016
If, for a given mass, the luminous matter in a galaxy is closely compacted, so it is the dark matter. Similarly, if the former is more widespread than in other galaxies, so is the latter.

This to me screams unknown gravitational properties of ordinary visible matter. As many, it is my belief that the effects and phenomena observed and attributed to dark matter are in fact misunderstood properties of ordinary baryonic matter (maybe even just a gross underestimate of regular matter dispersed throughout seemingly empty space.) If not either of those two options (1.misinterpretation of gravitational effects or variance of gravitational strength over distance, or 2.underestimated amount of baryonic matter), then perhaps the effects can be attributable to quantum interactions between ordinary matter (such as virtual particles pervading the quantum field). The virtual particles produced between interacting "real" particles could in essence add to the mass total of the quantum field.
howhot3
4.3 / 5 (3) Dec 15, 2016
Recently the Emergent Gravity (EG) theory of Verlinde was tested against gravitational lensing and dark matter's effects on the lensing by galaxies. In a study of 33,613 galaxies if found a very good fit between the the physical lensing and the predicted lensing.

https://arxiv.org...12.03034

That seems to fit perfectly with the article's observation as well conceptually.

cantdrive85
2.1 / 5 (7) Dec 15, 2016
these objects may serve as "portals" to a completely new form of Physics which can explain phenomena like matter and dark energy.

Isn't it time to dispense with magic mass and simply acknowledge that gravity behaves differently from what our models predict?

The new physics will be centered around LaViolette's SQK.

Superfluid dark matter fills 'empty' space, strongly interacts with and is displaced by baryonic matter.

Reading this article seems like more proof to Erik Verlinde's new theories on 'Emergent Gravity'.

This to me screams unknown gravitational properties of ordinary visible matter.

Contrary to all these wild calls for "new physics", magical undetected matter, and location dependent properties of gravity, there is a simple explanation which yields all these claims moot. The Universe is pervaded by plasma, EM fields, and it's electrodynamic properties. EM drives processes large and small, no magical process or matter needed.
howhot3
4 / 5 (4) Dec 15, 2016
@cantdrive says "... EM drives processes large and small, no magical process or matter needed." but unfortunately it just doesn't work at this scale. EM can only repell on like charges on attract on opposite charges. EM forces just wash out to 0 in the average of space that you measure. So good post @cantdrive but EM won't do it.

That said, this new emergent gravity stuff is by far some of the coolest physics I've read. EVER! If your curious about "What is gravity?" "Why does everything attract?" and "Why is there no anti-gravity?" I really encourage you to look up Erik Verlinde's papers on Emergent Gravity. Or look up a dated wikipedia entry on Entropic gravity (Verlinde's early work).
Heliospheric
3 / 5 (4) Dec 16, 2016
The articles says that dark matter "was only discovered through its gravitational effects".

This is nonsense. Dark matter was INVENTED to explain anomalous gravitational effects, and is no more than a theory. There is little other supporting evidence for it.
Gigel
5 / 5 (7) Dec 16, 2016
Greater matter density causes more refraction of light


There is probably some "refraction" occurring that appears as lensing effects, but differentiating between the two effects from distances of billions of light years is absurdly impossible.

When Elastic & Inelastic Photon Scattering effects are added into the mix you really end up with cosmic soup which is all but impossible to sort through, which is why this bunch of DM Enthusiasts in the UK need "new physics".

Usually refraction and photon scattering are frequency dependent, while gravitational lensing is not. That allows separating the effects.

https://en.wikipe...nal_lens
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Dec 16, 2016
Hi Gigel, everyone. :)

I've been reading-only when I can; but not posting....until this.

@ Gigel, I am prompted to respond to that 'early' assumption re gravitational lensing/refraction phenomena:
Usually refraction and photon scattering are frequency dependent, while gravitational lensing is not. That allows separating the effects.

https://en.wikipe...nal_lens
I pointed out long ago, and remind everyone now and then, that a broad 'front' of radiation (image cross-section size) from a galaxy contains a mix of photons/frequencies that can be 'bent' along 'different paths'; such that the photons arriving at the 'focus' (here) from many paths may also contain a mix of photons/frequencies 'bent' at different radial distances from the lensing object/region and traveled different paths that converged 'here' at focus. We've yet to exclude that real possibility before assuming what you stated/referenced is so.

Just a cautionary reminder. Cheers all. :)
cantdrive85
2 / 5 (4) Dec 16, 2016
@cantdrive says "... EM drives processes large and small, no magical process or matter needed." but unfortunately it just doesn't work at this scale. EM can only repell on like charges on attract on opposite charges. EM forces just wash out to 0 in the average of space that you measure. So good post @cantdrive but EM won't do it.

That may be the case if space were a vacuum, but it is pervaded by electrodynamic plasma.
https://www.resea...ructures
Gigel
5 / 5 (2) Dec 17, 2016
I pointed out long ago, and remind everyone now and then, that a broad 'front' of radiation (image cross-section size) from a galaxy contains a mix of photons/frequencies that can be 'bent' along 'different paths'; such that the photons arriving at the 'focus' (here) from many paths may also contain a mix of photons/frequencies 'bent' at different radial distances from the lensing object/region and traveled different paths that converged 'here' at focus. We've yet to exclude that real possibility before assuming what you stated/referenced is so.

Grav lensing forms images and optical lenses form them too. The difference between refraction and gravitational lensing is that in the former case images are affected by chromatic aberration, while in the latter one they are not (although they are affected by other aberrations).

https://en.wikipe...erration
Merrit
not rated yet Dec 17, 2016
It appears to me that gravitational time dilation is at work here. The further stars are from the center the faster time is passing which translates to faster apparent velocity. Maybe not enough to account for 100% of dark matter, but more likely than not we are missing more than one thing that in combination account for it.
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (2) Dec 17, 2016
Hi Gigel.:)

Yes, I already knew all that, mate. The fact remains that the images in astro/cosmic distances lensing situations are much wider and messier than the simple images which the various optic rules and priciples were first formulated/described. In the real astro/cosmic world situations the images are as I said earlier, and the many photons/frequencies which pass at various radial distances from the grav-lensing source object/region will be 'bent' at many places and involve many mixed photons/frequencies traveling along many paths past the lensing object/region to MANY foci/here(s). And the received photon mix from which the image is constructed will be 'self-selecting' in that only those photons teaveling the paths which go through 'here' wuill be detected as the focused image component photons/frequencies. It's a lot messier than the simple situation rules/principles you referenced would have you/others have assumed to date. Just think about what I said earlier. :)
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (3) Dec 17, 2016
Hey @howhot, good to see you still around.

Verlinde's work is interesting, but it's missing one thing: a prediction that is different from what we already know. Someone needs to get it to the point where it can make such a prediction. Then we can test it.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (1) Dec 17, 2016

That may be the case if space were a vacuum, but it is pervaded by electrodynamic plasma.

... that is only there when an area of space is "pervaded" by enough baryonic matter to conduct the electro...
cantdrive85
2.3 / 5 (3) Dec 17, 2016

That may be the case if space were a vacuum, but it is pervaded by electrodynamic plasma.

... that is only there when an area of space is "pervaded" by enough baryonic matter to conduct the electro...

Ever notice how the Universe is filamentary/cellular? That filamentary/cellular structure is known to be a result of the EM properties of the plasma, as Alfvén predicted back in the 30's. That filamentary structure is the skeletal backbone of the Universe. The edges of the cells are connected to the filaments, these physical connections eliminate the need for any missing matter. In addition, the matter concentrations and plasma phenomena explain numerous other cosmological mysteries.
MRBlizzard
5 / 5 (4) Dec 17, 2016
optiongeek
1 / 5 (1) Dec 18, 2016
How about fractional hydrogen? At the beach we don't wonder what's underneath all the sand. More sand, of course, even though we don't see it. Why shouldn't it be the same with hydrogen and dark matter? Due to the non-radiation condition, fractional hydrogen would not radiate photons hence would be invisible, yet as baryonic matter it would behave gravitationally exactly this paper describes.
Whydening Gyre
not rated yet Dec 18, 2016
Ever notice how the Universe is filamentary/cellular? That filamentary/cellular structure is known to be a result of the EM properties of the plasma, as Alfvén predicted back in the 30's. That filamentary structure is the skeletal backbone of the Universe.

The "Filaments" are where baryonic material has achieved sufficient density to interact electromagnetically. "Plasma" is a result of that interaction.
cantdrive85
1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 18, 2016
The "Filaments" are where baryonic material has achieved sufficient density to interact electromagnetically. "Plasma" is a result of that interaction.

You obviously are not aware of the 100+ years of laboratory experiments with plasma, what you're suggesting contradicts what is known and observed. Cart in front of the horse as usual.
BTW, the voids are plasma as well at a much lower density.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (3) Dec 18, 2016
The "Filaments" are where ... material has achieved sufficient density to interact electromagnetically. "Plasma" is a result of that interaction.

You ... not aware of the 100+ years of laboratory experiments with plasma,

A definition BASED on that 100+ years of experiments...
"Plasma - an ionized gas consisting of positive ions and free electrons in proportions resulting in more or less no overall electric charge,"
what you're suggesting contradicts what is ... observed.

Only contradicts what you choose to believe.
Cart in front of the horse as usual.

You mean electron in front of the particle?
Here's another for you -
"ion - an atom or molecule with a net electric charge due to the loss or gain of one or more electrons."
Together they mean; if there is insufficient proximity (density) of ions WITH (or without) electrons to exchange with another ion there is NO electron exchange. Just a free floating charged particle.
Ergo, no plasma.
cantdrive85
not rated yet Dec 19, 2016
Whyde,
Why are you changing the subject to dedate definitions? Irregardless of the quasi-neutral presumptions of astrophysicists, it is a known and observed fact that these conditions are regularly violated in cosmic plasmas.
Together they mean; if there is insufficient proximity (density) of ions WITH (or without) electrons to exchange with another ion there is NO electron exchange. Just a free floating charged particle. Ergo, no plasma.

Meaningless word salad based on ignorance or attempted obfuscation.
Only contradicts what you choose to believe.

You apparently rely on beliefs, I prefer to rely on actual facts. You have much work to educate yourself to the basic properties and phenomena of plasmas.

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.