
University of Miami astrophysicist Nico Cappelluti studies the sky. An assistant professor in the Physics Department, Cappelluti is intrigued by the cosmic phenomena of super massive black holes, the nature of dark matter, and active galactic nuclei, which is the very bright light source found at the center of many galaxies.
Recently, Cappelluti published findings that could give insight on a subject scientists and astrophysicists have been investigating for decades: What is dark matter and where does it come from?
According to Esra Bulbul, an astrophysicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and co-author in Cappelluti's study, about 95 percent of the mass in the universe is made up of material that is unknown and invisible to scientists, that is dark matter.
Cappelluti's study, published in The Astrophysical Journal and entitled, "Searching for the 3.5 keV line in the deep fields with Chandra: the 10 MS observations," examines an interesting light source that was captured by four different telescopes each pointing in a different direction in the sky. The source of light is unfamiliar and unrecognizable to scientists and has caused quite a stir in the world of astrophysics. Bulbul also found the emission line while studying clusters of galaxies in 2014.
"We use special telescopes to catch X-ray light in the sky, and while looking at these X-rays, the telescopes noticed an unexpected feature and captured a spectrum of light, which is not produced by any known atomic emission," said Cappelluti. "This emission line is now called the 3.5 kiloelectron volt (keV). One interpretation of this emission line is that it's produced by the decay of dark matter."
The four telescopes that captured the 3.5 keV emission were NASA's NuSTAR telescope, the European Space Agency's (ESA) XMM-Newton telescope, the Chandra telescope, and the Suzaku telescope from Japan.
"This 3.5 keV emission line is unidentified. We truly don't know what it is," said Bulbul. "But one theory is that it could be a sterile neutrino, which is also known as decaying dark matter. What is truly interesting about Dr. Cappelluti's study is that he found this 3.5 keV line within our own galaxy."
"If confirmed, this will tell us what dark matter is and could be one of the major discoveries in physics," said Cappelluti. "We know that the Milky Way is surrounded by dark matter. Think of it as if we are living in a bubble of dark matter. But we also want to have the statistical certainty of our detection, so now we are putting together a Sterile Neutrino Task Force."
This fall, several scientists from around the world, including Harvard's Bulbul, plan to gather at the University of Miami to organize a massive data-mining project to investigate and research this 3.5 keV emission line.
"The goal now is to continue to look at the sky until we obtain more powerful operating telescopes with better resolution, which won't be ready until 2021, and share and analyze data from other scientists who are trying to uncover the secrets of dark matter," said Bulbul.
Explore further:
A new twist in the dark matter tale
More information: Searching for the 3.5 keV Line in the Deep Fields with Chandra: the 10 Ms observations, arxiv.org/abs/1701.07932
Nico Cappelluti et al. Searching for the 3.5 keV Line in the Deep Fields with Chandra: The 10 Ms Observations, The Astrophysical Journal (2018). DOI: 10.3847/1538-4357/aaaa68
fthompson495
A galaxy's halo is not a clumpof dark matter traveling with the visible matter. A galaxy's halo is displaced dark matter.
cantdrive85
ThereIsNoDarkMatter
it is getting comical...
PTTG
These fucking anti-dark-matter idiots are as infuriating as they are self-deluding.
Da Schneib
alexander2468
We have another secret "Dark matter lensing is visible in normal photons and it was never observed in other way"
darkmatter is visible only in dark photons, as normal matter is visible in normal photons so who came up with the assumption that as gravitational lensing is only visible in normal photons it is darkmatter, when it is clearly normal matter emitting normal photons cantdrive85. This is the strange illogicality that has been allowed to creep into physics and to use a phrase coined by DJ – "the darkmatter wooist's"
ThereIsNoDarkMatter
I prefer emergent gravity theories. they seem to fit the data better but my best data point, is that all existing testable DM theories failed or still have inconclusive data. thus I have my own theory that DM does not exist based on the 100% failure rate of DM theories.
ThereIsNoDarkMatter
just google this: DOI: 10.1038/s41550-018-0414-3
xrays where from pulsars, not from dm. why DM should be the first theory for unexplained xrays? failure of imagination?
ThereIsNoDarkMatter
the part that annoys me. is that unexplained observations get DM hypothesis as explanation first. never read an article about these xrays, but lump them with DM, and voila, they get published in science magazines. pfff.
alexander2468
The statement, "unknown and invisible to scientists, that is dark matter". 1884, Lord Kelvin described dark-matter - 134 years later and what are scientist professing to claim, dark-matter is unknown and invisible to scientists and were supposed to believe it with unquestioning faith! Darkmatter wooist's is sounding more and more appropriate with each new claim requiring unquestioning faith and devotion in this unknown and invisible to scientists that is dark-matter.
IMP-9
The galactic center excess is not the same signal as the 3.5 keV line. They are quite different. Neither are particularly convincing as a DM signal but people are studying the possibility. Ruling out these as signals of dark matter does not debunk dark matter. Standard models of dark matter do not make claims about high energy signatures.
ThereIsNoDarkMatter
my point is that I learned about these xrays, actually seen a docu about the galactic center xrays, as a possible proof of DM. and in the end, they weren't. but hey, I am a mere consumer of physics news, and there are fantastic models, like the neutron star mergers, that gets confirmed with observations and data. but this DM, it is just failure after failure. I am very very
skeptical.
ThereIsNoDarkMatter
Nico Cappelluti affirms:" with 5 sigma confidence, it is confirmed that dark matter increased by an order of magnitude the viewership of my paper. this unexpected result is clear proof for DM existance"
alexander2468
"Lord Kelvin estimated the number of dark bodies in the Milky Way from the observed velocity dispersion of the stars orbiting around the centre of the galaxy. By using these measurements, he estimated the mass of the galaxy, which he determined is different from the mass of visible stars"
The number of stars observed today and black holes were not possible in 1884, you do not create invisible matter based simply on observed matter because how was Lord Kelvin supposed to add these to the observed stars, mathematically defining his theory is still not possible today as it is still unknown and invisible to scientists and we have yet to complete the tally on normal-matter.
ThereIsNoDarkMatter
why you think this happens? herd mentality? scientists just spicing up their research areas with DM hot sauce?
alexander2468
It is the illogical way theories are being presented for your theory to be accepted, if you don't question it that is, belief has crept into science where its losing its distinction, becoming a faith based religion instead.
ThereIsNoDarkMatter
seems so. could also be the convulsions of a dying paradigm. without dm there is too much intelectual pain as scientists need to evaluate a central piece of their model and replace it with something else.
alexander2468
If this continues The Grand Unified Theory will include faith based theories, if it does not already do so!
ThereIsNoDarkMatter
what about other models like verlinde emergent gravity? does not fit all data but fits quite much data with but no free parameters to make the model fit observations like in DM.
I am not sure he is right, but eventually a theory with a more simple mathematical model to explain observations will win out over a bloated model.
alexander2468
The next step is Dirac/Weyl/Majorana fermions, the implication is The Grand Unified Theory will include faith based theories and now have the dense Aether model Aether discredited.
ThereIsNoDarkMatter
reminds me of the list of DM candidates i once seen compiled in a docu. axions, wimps, and many many more. I once read that DM is organised in strands around the solar system. just recently the DM galactic disk theory got crushed. honestly, I have seen so many crazy science news when it comes to DM, that it is comical.
can't there be other explanations? mond? emergent gravity?
DM seems a convenient model that provides nearly no data on the nature of its elements and enough free parameters to fit any data.
the sure way you say DM exists makes you look like a zealot.
alexander2468
cantdrive85
Please, all you DM acolytes get together and get this right once and for all. I am a "denier", that's what were called when we don't believe all the same BS you dumbasses believe. Don't believe in the holocaust? Denier! And anti-semite. Don't believe AGW? Denier! Don't slavishly believe in vaccination? Denier!
You see? If I am not as moronic as you then the correct terminology to refer to me is "denier". Same page now? Great!
alexander2468
Anything that goes in The Grand Unified Theory cauldron is tried and tested going back 330 years old and that instantly discounts MOND, is sound, down to earth, realistic and believable! Then we have a rock to lean on.
ThereIsNoDarkMatter
some entanglement density thing, and some physicists have been already exploring the idea that gravity is an emergent phenomena like a thermodynamic effect of some quantum phenomena and verlinde falls into that area.
whatever, seems elegant fits a lot of data.
the counter paper was not a debunk. I read the conclusions, and it assumed a larger scatter disk that is not observed yet for his equations to fit observation. there is not even a probability majoration.
alexander2468
We cannot deform an entity that does not exist, mass is not an extension of the vacuum of space and gravity is also is not an extension of the vacuum of space, there's real physical explanations on how gravity travel through space, it is not the warping of the vacuum, The reason why the theory of deform of space-time has been put forward because it side step the question how it deforms as that awkward question is deferred to the vacuum of space.
ThereIsNoDarkMatter
I will not pretend I can debate physics at that level. what I can debate, is the huge amount of failed DM theories. and again, the really anoying propensity to have unexpected observations be explained as the missing DM in science articles only to fail later.
ThereIsNoDarkMatter
meh, maybe is my data scientist knowledge talking, but what really matters is the predictability of a theory to fit observational data with the least number of free parameters.the rest is aesthetics.
alexander2468
A vacuum is not an elastic band, unfortunately there is a whole mindset to unravel here, not being enamoured by some theories I'm immune to most mindsets, but ground hog day gets a bit wearisome all the time, not that it is wearisome but it's the repetition of constantly unravelling the mind set, its hanging your clothes on line when it raining and its explained to you so you take them in and take them out again when it stops raining, next day the clothes are taken out and put on the line when it's raining and you have to go through the same explanation again or Ground hog day!
So here we are at day two, we have unravel the mind set we unravelled yesterday!
baudrunner
alexander2468
alexander2468
Benni
.......notice how cosmologists are trying to be ever more clever with how they label their ANIMATIONS? Now they call them IMAGES.
alexander2468
One of the many faces of dark-matter physicists suspect that it has something to do with dimensionality of space-time and projection geometry in 3D space. After going over the definition of space it is a vacuum (nothing comes from nothing) the mindset still exists of dark-matter as space-time 3d space time projection.
Lord Kelvin in his original postulation of dark--matter was simply demonstrating the velocity of stars indicated gravitation inertial mass that was not visible to his Newtonian Telescope just as today blackholes are not visible to our Newtonian Telescopes
We are no closer to Lord Kelvin's Darkmatter; it is still "Unknown and Invisible to scientists" after 134years!
alexander2468
"Harvard-Smithsonian Centre for Astrophysics and co-author in Cappelluti's study, about 95 percent of the mass in the universe is made up of material that is unknown and invisible to scientists"
The remaining 5% is normal matter which makes up 100% of all the galaxies, stars, planets and our selves the universe contains.
Now this is a mathematical derivation to come out of the Harvard-Smithsonian Centre for Astrophysics, who runs their mathematical department because they have achieved what darkmatter has failed to achieve in 134 years because it is still unknown and invisible to scientists at the Harvard-Smithsonian Centre for Astrophysics, but they have achieved 100% of the universe out of only 5% of the universe
Gigel
milnik
If the night is dark, because there is no light, and this is your dark matter, which is dark? THERE IS NO EXISTENCE !!!
Mackita constantly mentions some model of dense ether. Whether it was his model, or he saw it somewhere in some magazines. He needs to explain what ETHER is doing for him.
From all the previous discussions and all possible scientific journals, it is evident that nobody knows what gravity is and how it arises. Also, nobody knows what matter and magnetism are and how they arise. Is there any logical conclusion that the conclusions of any kind are true, if the above elements are not known?
Why are you persistent and believe in the completely unnatural Einstein's price that space and time in the universe make some net curvature, and that these are the causes of the emergence of gravity and many other fabricated phenomena. The same is the case with dark matter, which has entangled most of those who do not know the structure of the universe, because t
milnik
I intend to try to restore science to the path of realizing natural and logical phenomena and to understand them in a simple way, using our consciousness and intuition that leads us to the true causes of the phenomenon. To date, several billion pages of explanations for these phenomena have been written, but without success. I can do it on a few dozen pages.
Do not be puzzled by this exposure, because I have reason to be curious about all of these fatamorgas, which are disgraceful to natural laws and SEU.
alexander2468
alexander2468
The son of a yeoman farmer in Lincolnshire, England, Isaac Newton was educated in science and mathematics at Cambridge University, earning his BA in 1665. He then returned home on account of the plague until 1666, and while there made several brilliant discoveries that would lay the groundwork for his monumental opus. For example, he thought out the fundamental principles of his theory of gravitation-namely, that every particle of matter attracts every other particle-and worked out the elements of fluxional calculus. He applied fluxions to find the tangent and radius of curvature at any point on a curve in November 1665, and used them to solve several problems in the theory of equations in October 1666. He also devised instruments for grinding lenses into particular forms other than spherical, which would later serve him in his study of optics https://www.aps.o...tory.cfm
Benni
1. Dark Matter Fairy
2. Dark Energy Fairy
3. Black Hole Fairy
All the above have one thing in common with the Tooth Fairy.......no one's ever seen one.
milnik
how do you imagine that your aether? What does it represent, where it is located, stops mucus, does something get from it? You were even more complicated this question than Einstein. Einstein invented and gave his fatamorgana: space time and their entanglement, and you put it in and dense aether, dark matter and fabric space time. First explain what time is, and what is the space behind this evidence and explain how they met, fell in love, and "marry." Who was their godfather? Was it Einstein? And this one dies aether, as it can be thick, when you know what it is. ?
milnik
To live on Matsu, our time would correspond to the rotation of Mars, as it is for Earth. This Einstein's invention is a strong intensity because it has destroyed the basis of consciousness that you have received from the one who formed both the space and the matter and the substance from which matter is formed.
milnik
Gigel
That may be an interesting article, but it doesn't say much.
I could not find something definitive about Stary, Soldatenko or the Kiev Institute of quantum physics. Also, I found a similar article in Pravda. My hunch is the article is bogus and it is weird it has appeared on phys.org (and it has no author or source).