Bump on a plot from Chandra X-ray observatory reveals excess of X-rays, hinting at dark matter

February 3, 2017 by Bob Yirka report
A massive cluster of yellowish galaxies, seemingly caught in a red and blue spider web of eerily distorted background galaxies, makes for a spellbinding picture from the new Advanced Camera for Surveys aboard NASA's Hubble Space Telescope. To make this unprecedented image of the cosmos, Hubble peered straight through the center of one of the most massive galaxy clusters known, called Abell 1689. The gravity of the cluster's trillion stars — plus dark matter — acts as a 2-million-light-year-wide lens in space. This gravitational lens bends and magnifies the light of the galaxies located far behind it. Some of the faintest objects in the picture are probably over 13 billion light-years away (redshift value 6). Strong gravitational lensing as observed by the Hubble Space Telescope in Abell 1689 indicates the presence of dark matter. Credit: NASA, N. Benitez (JHU), T. Broadhurst (Racah Institute of Physics/The Hebrew University), H. Ford (JHU), M. Clampin (STScI),G. Hartig (STScI), G. Illingworth (UCO/Lick Observatory), the ACS Science Team and ESA

(Phys.org)—A team of space researchers with members from Yale University, MIT and the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics has found a bump in X-ray readings from the Chandra-X-ray observatory that appears to be similar to bumps seen with X-rays from other telescopes. Such bumps have been theorized to represent the decay of dark matter, which could indirectly prove it exists. The team has written a paper describing their results and have posted it on the arXiv preprint server.

Physicists around the globe continue to be perplexed by dark matter and the dearth of evidence showing that it actually exists. In this new effort, the researchers were looking at data from a telescope orbiting the Earth—the Chandra X-ray observatory. The observatory was looking at X-ray signals from deep space when it came across an unexpected line of X-ray energy at approximately 3,500 electron volts. The team suggests that if the bump is due to dark matter, it would likely be caused by such material existing in a region surrounding the Milky Way galaxy. They note that the intensity of the bump is consistent with theories regarding dark matter in other parts of the galaxy such as at the center of the Milky Way—a source of signals that have been found to be stronger, which aligns with logic that suggests dark matter would be denser in places where there are more stars. Also, the bump was similar to readings found by researchers at several other observatories, which reduces the chances of the bump being an anomaly or system malfunction. Oddly, others looking at the same parts of sky have not observed any bump at all.

Unfortunately, the X-ray bump, despite being observed by multiple teams, is not proof of dark matter, because it is still possible that it is due to something else. The finding does, however, rule out some other theoretical sources, such as random sulfur ions seizing electrons from hydrogen atoms hanging around in otherwise empty space. It also seems very unlikely the came about due to the type of technology used to observe it. For some, that may leave as the only possible explanation—others will want something a little more concrete.

Explore further: Isolated chorionic bump tied to fetal aneuploidy

More information: Searching for the 3.5 keV Line in the Deep Fields with Chandra: the 10 Ms observations, arXiv:1701.07932 [astro-ph.CO] arxiv.org/abs/1701.07932

Abstract
In this paper we report a 3σ detection of an emission line at ∼3.5 keV in the spectrum of the Cosmic X-ray Background using a total of ∼10 Ms Chandra observations towards the COSMOS Legacy and CDFS survey fields. The line is detected with an intensity is 8.8±2.9×10−7 ph cm−2s−1. Based on our knowledge of Chandra, and the reported detection of the line by other instruments, we can rule out an instrumental origin for the line. We cannot though rule out a background fluctuation, in that case, with the current data, we place a 3σ upper limit at 10−6 ph cm−2s−1. We discuss the interpretation of this observed line in terms of the iron line background, S XVI charge exchange, as well as arising from sterile neutrino decay. We note that our detection is consistent with previous measurements of this line toward the Galactic center, and can be modeled as the result of sterile neutrino decay from the Milky Way when the dark matter distribution is modeled with an NFW profile. In this event, we estimate a mass ms∼7.02 keV and a mixing angle sin2(2θ)= 0.69-2.29 ×10−10. These derived values of the neutrino mass are in agreement with independent measurements toward galaxy clusters, the Galactic center and M31.

Related Stories

Isolated chorionic bump tied to fetal aneuploidy

November 9, 2016

(HealthDay)—In high-risk fetuses, sonographically isolated chorionic bumps are associated with fetal aneuploidy, according to a study published online Nov. 3 in the Journal of Clinical Ultrasound.

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 ...

Recommended for you

NASA telescope studies quirky comet 45P

November 22, 2017

When comet 45P zipped past Earth early in 2017, researchers observing from NASA's Infrared Telescope Facility, or IRTF, in Hawai'i gave the long-time trekker a thorough astronomical checkup. The results help fill in crucial ...

Uncovering the origins of galaxies' halos

November 21, 2017

Using the Subaru Telescope atop Maunakea, researchers have identified 11 dwarf galaxies and two star-containing halos in the outer region of a large spiral galaxy 25 million light-years away from Earth. The findings, published ...

Cassini image mosaic: A farewell to Saturn

November 21, 2017

In a fitting farewell to the planet that had been its home for over 13 years, the Cassini spacecraft took one last, lingering look at Saturn and its splendid rings during the final leg of its journey and snapped a series ...

25 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Benni
1.5 / 5 (13) Feb 03, 2017
"Physicists around the globe continue to be perplexed by dark matter and the dearth of evidence showing that it actually exists."

"Unfortunately, the X-ray bump, despite being observed by multiple teams, is not proof of dark matter,"

What they really mean here is that they need actual spectroscopy because there is no INFERRED GRAVITY effect here.

If 80-95% of the Universe is made up of this Cosmic Fairy Dust, then why is it so hard to come up with a SPECTROSCOPY for it? Oh, yeah, that's right, I forgot, even the spectroscopy must be INFERRED in the absence of inferred gravity effects where the "X-ray bump"comes in.

RNP, the resident Journalist, is an expert on Inferred Science, he'll explain it for us? Nah, he'll just Copy & Paste a link because even he won't understand how such an oblique asymptomatic phenomena can exist within the ranks of believers of Perpetual Motion no matter how simply it is explained to him, he'll leave the psycho-babble for us to sort through.
peter_ruhe
1 / 5 (5) Feb 03, 2017
Probably another example of H(1/17) hydrino production, which indicates creation of dark matter from hydrogen H(1), or transition of dark matter from one form to another, e.g. H(1/4) to H(1/17). Dark matter, a.k.a. hydrinos, does not interact with electromagnetic radiation, hence does not absorb light, so cannot be detected as spectral lines, except when it is created from plain ground-state atomic hydrogen or when it transitions from one size to another. Extreme UV or X-Rays with continua bands are emitted during the transitions. To learn more, websearch hydrino or GUTCP. Ignore Wikipedia which has been taken over by pathological skeptics.
Benni
1 / 5 (5) Feb 03, 2017
Dark matter, a.k.a. hydrinos, does not interact with electromagnetic radiation.
How do you know hydrinos exist if no one can come up with a detection method? Think about it, 80-95% of the Universe should be pretty easy to find, it's not like we're looking for a needle in a haystack here.
peter_ruhe
1 / 5 (5) Feb 03, 2017
"How do you know hydrinos exist...?"
Hydrinos were first predicted from a theory, then found in a lab here on Earth (in New Jersey perhaps), by the theorist/experimenter (Dr. Randall Mills, my favorite mad scientist), who knew where and how to look, after he created some from normal hydrogen. He now has a repertoire of about a dozen detection methods, none of which involve just looking with light, because hydrinos do not interact with light. Hydrinos are not normal matter that we are accustomed to, but neither are they extremely exotic. They are shrunken hydrogen atoms (and also form dihydrino molecules akin to H2 molecular hydrogen). Hydrinos form in the sun's corona from hydrogen atoms, and as they form they release extremely energetic ultraviolet light which explains the "solar corona problem" (apparent million-degree temperature of the solar corona, despite presence of molecular species such as carbon monoxide). Solar EUV does not reach the Earth's surface.
jonesdave
3.9 / 5 (7) Feb 03, 2017
Hydrinos were first predicted from a theory, then found in a lab here on Earth (in New Jersey perhaps), by the theorist/experimenter (Dr. Randall Mills, my favorite mad scientist),.....


Sorry to say, it is just another free energy scam that this bloke has been dragging out for ~20 years. Either that, or he is a cert for this years Nobel Prize for Physics. My bet is the former.

http://www.intern...t=315572

Benni
1 / 5 (4) Feb 04, 2017
Hydrinos were first predicted from a theory, then found in a lab here on Earth (in New Jersey perhaps), by the theorist/experimenter (Dr. Randall Mills, my favorite mad scientist)


This is the just another one of those cockamamie Fake Science "predictions", just as fake as the whole DM hypothesis itself.

You people who promote this zany Zwicky fake science have zero concept about the whole concept of the REAL science of SPECTROSCOPY.

Part of my job description is the oversight of a gamma-ray spectroscopy lab. In our lab we have yet to perform spectroscopy at any wavelength but what we cannot identify the source. Just because someone looks at a spectroscopy from 10 Glyrs distance & is unable to isolate it to a single identifiable source, this does not mean the source must have something to do with DM.

Gamma rays are very energetic & very capable of penetrating the thickest nebulae (intergalactic dust) everywhere in the Universe.

Benni
1 / 5 (4) Feb 04, 2017
Sorry to say, it is just another free energy scam that this bloke has been dragging out for ~20 years. Either that, or he is a cert for this years Nobel Prize for Physics. My bet is the former.


No blokey guy, it's a "free energy scam" that was started by one of your the Perpetual Motion godfathers, name of Fritz Zwicky who concocted the fake science that has come to be known as INFERRED GRAVITY.

The fake science of INFERRED GRAVITY is what led Mills, et al, to try another Perpetual Motion scam, that DM does not interact with electromagnetic radiation, hence does not absorb light. It's so entertaining to watch people like you & peter dogmatically fall for so much INFERRED SCIENCE for which no evidence has ever been produced.

Come on petey & jonesy, look in a mirror & tell us how much of what you see is DM? Or maybe you wished it were so? If 80-95% of the Universe is DM then you can be sure our solar system is an integral part of that 80-95%, thus so are you.

Chris_Reeve
1.5 / 5 (8) Feb 04, 2017
Gravity is a local force. It's weak. They seem to think they can fix this problem without actually backing up to the mistaken hypothesis.
RNP
4.4 / 5 (7) Feb 05, 2017
@Benni
Your obsession with "INFERRED GRAVITY" is comical. So, just a few points.

It is impossible to observe a gravitational field directly. The ONLY way to detect it is by observing its effects on the motions of bodies moving within it. These motions can be used to calculate the gravitating mass. In fact, this is the only way to estimate the mass of celestial bodies. So, for example, the mass of the Sun can be calculated using only the length of the year and our distance from the center of the Sun. E.g. https://imagine.g...ass.html . This shows that, by simply measuring the position and velocity of a bound, orbiting body, the mass within its orbital radius can be measured. The equation is so general that it can be applied to moons orbiting planets, planets orbiting stars AND stars orbiting galaxies AND galaxies orbiting clusters. So, please explain, where do you get the idea that using dynamics to measure mass is a "fake" science?
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (6) Feb 05, 2017
Bump on a plot from Chandra X-ray observatory reveals excess of X-rays, hinting at dark matter

All that is revealed is the astrophysicist's complete willful ignorance of real plasma physics.
Benni
1 / 5 (4) Feb 05, 2017
@Benni
Your obsession with "INFERRED GRAVITY" is comical


It is impossible to observe a gravitational field directly.The ONLY way to detect it is by observing its effects on the motions of bodies moving within it.
....hence the commonly used term: INFERRED GRAVITY.

The equation is so general that it can be applied to moons orbiting planets, planets orbiting stars AND stars orbiting galaxies AND galaxies orbiting clusters


Mr admitted Journalist, you missed the 2nd biggest concentrations of MASS in the entire universe, intergalactic VM Halos which extend more than halfway of the intergalactic space between Andromeda & the Milky Way. Of course you being the self-admitted journalist that you are, how could you keep up with this recent news in Cosmology?

So, please explain, where do you get the idea that using dynamics to measure mass is a "fake" science?
....simply because your side of the argument won't drop the INFERRED GRAVITY narratives.
RNP
4.4 / 5 (7) Feb 05, 2017
@Benni
....hence the commonly used term: INFERRED GRAVITY

INFERRED GRAVITY is NOT a commonly used term, it is an invention of your own. A simple Google search proves that.

Mr admitted Journalist,....

I have never admitted to being a journalist because it would be a lie.

..you missed the 2nd biggest concentrations of MASS in the entire universe, intergalactic VM Halos which extend more than halfway of the intergalactic space between Andromeda & the Milky Way.


..."intergalactic VM Halos"? What on earth are you talking about?!!! Even if I assume you meant DM halos, it makes no sense in relation to our discussion.

Also, your post still just CLAIMS that the ideas I explained in my previous post are wrong, and do not explain why you think that to be the case.

How can you, in all conscience, consistently post such dishonest nonsense?
Benni
1 / 5 (5) Feb 05, 2017
I have never admitted to being a journalist because it would be a lie.
.......Yes you did, I guess it was an unintentional slip of the tongue on your part, it also explains why you've never heard of some lesser used terms Cosmologists commonly use when talking about "intergalactic VM Halos" and Inferred Gravity.

Someone like you, who has never heard of Intergalactic Visible Matter halos that extends half the distances between galaxies, is someone who is indeed a novice, in fact not even one who could be labeled as one being an amateur astronomer like I am. At least my 6 years of Engineering school education in Nuclear/Electrical Engineering has provided me with the background for exposing your kind of fake science claims of fraudulent Perpetual Motion claims that populate this chatroom.

Journalists like you shouldn't be trying to play this Fake Science hand, it's just so much fun catching you off guard & calling you on your foibles.
RNP
4.3 / 5 (6) Feb 05, 2017
@Benni
I have never admitted to being a journalist because it would be a lie.
.......Yes you did, ...


YOU ARE A LIAR!! I will GUARANTEE that you can not produce a link to the post that would prove this claim.

Your "Intergalactic Visible Matter halos" and other "lesser used terms Cosmologists commonly use" are pure inventions, and laughable ones at that. If you want to insist otherwise, provide some evidence.

..one who could be labeled as one being an amateur astronomer like I am.

No kidding?!!!

Yes, well, there's the point.There really is no point in continuing this conversation that is clearly beyond a self-admitted amateur.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (6) Feb 05, 2017
Someone like you, who has never heard of Intergalactic Visible Matter halos that extends half the distances between galaxies, is someone who is indeed a novice, in fact not even one who could be labeled as one being an amateur astronomer like I am. At least my 6 years of Engineering school education in Nuclear/Electrical Engineering has provided me with the background for exposing your kind of fake science claims of fraudulent Perpetual Motion claims that populate this chatroom.

So, you're 6 years gives you the expertise to show us how the Milky Way is losing energy and will eventually dissipate, right?
Benni
1 / 5 (5) Feb 05, 2017
YOU ARE A LIAR!! I will GUARANTEE that you can not produce a link to the post that would prove this claim.
........OK, then prove I'm a LIAR.

You Journalists are all alike.........you get on a narrative & you never let go.

humy
5 / 5 (7) Feb 05, 2017
Gravity is a local force. .

No, it isn't. There is no known upper limit or boundary to the distance gravity can influence.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (1) Feb 05, 2017
Gravity is a local force. .

No, it isn't. There is no known upper limit or boundary to the distance gravity can influence.

Both are right, in a way...
As a property of mass, it gives the APPEARANCE of locality.
However, it is a Universal field resulting from all the mass in it, that "locally" knots in proximity with matter. Weakly with small chunks, gradiently stronger with larger or denser ones.
It all depends on your frame of reference - here or (way) out there...
And THAT... is Relativity...:-)
Benni
1 / 5 (5) Feb 05, 2017
Both are right, in a way...
As a property of mass, it gives the APPEARANCE of locality.
Have you had a Journalist verify this? You might be making this up.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (5) Feb 05, 2017
Both are right, in a way...
As a property of mass, it gives the APPEARANCE of locality.
Have you had a Journalist verify this? You might be making this up.

No, and I mis-stated it. It should have said "appearance of local only"...
But I do hope the engineer/amateur astronomer that I asked for input from (regarding galactic dissipation), will be providing it shortly...
I might also ask him if Spectroscopy can produce evidence of ANY gravity that is NOT inferred...
Benni
1 / 5 (5) Feb 05, 2017
But I do hope the engineer/amateur astronomer that I asked for input from (regarding galactic dissipation)
........artist impressionism created by a blowtorch.

I might also ask him if Spectroscopy can produce evidence of ANY gravity that is NOT inferred
You don't know? How could you possibly not know this? You should ask RNP the journalist, after all we know he too is NOT an amateur astronomer, but as a Journalist knows more about Nuclear Physics/Engineering/Astronomy/Astro-physics/Cosmology than someone who engages in Nuclear Physicst everyday of his professional life.

Hey, Rguy, there's a blowtorch artist guy here who has some questions for you.
SlartiBartfast
4 / 5 (4) Feb 05, 2017
"How do you know hydrinos exist...?"
Hydrinos were first predicted from a theory, then found in a lab here on Earth (in New Jersey perhaps), ...


And how do you know New Jersey exists, hmm? Checkmate, atheists!
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (6) Feb 05, 2017
But I do hope the engineer/amateur astronomer that I asked for input from (regarding galactic dissipation)
........artist impressionism created by a blowtorch.

I might also ask him if Spectroscopy can produce evidence of ANY gravity that is NOT inferred
You don't know? How could you possibly not know this? You should ask RNP the journalist, after all we know he too is NOT an amateur astronomer, but as a Journalist knows more about Nuclear Physics/Engineering/Astronomy/Astro-physics/Cosmology than someone who engages in Nuclear Physicst everyday of his professional life.

Hey, Rguy, there's a blowtorch artist guy here who has some questions for you.

Me thinks thou dost protest too much...
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (5) Feb 05, 2017
Meanwhile, back in reality, the question here is whether we have looked for sterile neutrino decay in our dark matter searches so far. What we would be looking for is photons at around 3.5 keV. I'm going to do some research on this. I think it's possible we might see some searches like this, if there haven't been any, once these guys get some results better than 3σ. This would indicate we should be looking for a sterile neutrino of around 7 keV total energy in such a search.
Whydening Gyre
not rated yet Feb 06, 2017
Meanwhile, back in reality, the question here is whether we have looked for sterile neutrino decay in our dark matter searches so far. What we would be looking for is photons at around 3.5 keV. I'm going to do some research on this. I think it's possible we might see some searches like this, if there haven't been any, once these guys get some results better than 3ÄĹ�Ä�ď��ď��. This would indicate we should be looking for a sterile neutrino of around 7 keV total energy in such a search.

No idea how you arrived at 7KeV, but I believe ya.
The "dot connection" of sterile neutrino decay was excellent.
Reading about it also has me pondering the "Auntie Matter Inequality Situation"... (Thanks, Quentin T.) You can be Mr. Wolf...:-)
Lastly, stay away from that quote button when editing...

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.