Black holes ruled out as universe's missing dark matter

October 2, 2018, University of California - Berkeley
A supernova (bright spot at lower left) and its host galaxy (upper center), as they would appear if gravitationally lensed by an intervening black hole (center). The gravitational field of the black hole distorts and magnifies the image and makes both the galaxy and the supernova shine brighter. Gravitationally magnified supernovas would occur rather frequently if black holes were the dominant form of matter in the universe. The lack of such findings can be used to set limits on the mass and abundance of black holes. Credit: Miguel Zumalacárregui image, UC Berkeley

For one brief shining moment after the 2015 detection of gravitational waves from colliding black holes, astronomers held out hope that the universe's mysterious dark matter might consist of a plenitude of black holes sprinkled throughout the universe.

University of California, Berkeley, physicists have dashed those hopes.

Based on a statistical of 740 of the brightest supernovas discovered as of 2014, and the fact that none of them appear to be magnified or brightened by hidden black hole "gravitational lenses," the researchers concluded that primordial can make up no more than about 40 percent of the in the universe. Primordial black holes could only have been created within the first milliseconds of the Big Bang as regions of the universe with a concentrated mass tens or hundreds of times that of the sun collapsed into objects a hundred kilometers across.

The results suggest that none of the universe's dark consists of heavy black holes, or any similar object, including massive compact halo objects, so-called MACHOs.

Dark matter is one of astronomy's most embarrassing conundrums: despite comprising 84.5 percent of the matter in the universe, no one can find it. Proposed dark matter candidates span nearly 90 orders of magnitude in mass, from ultralight particles like axions to MACHOs.

Several theorists have proposed scenarios in which there are multiple types of dark matter. But if dark matter consists of several unrelated components, each would require a different explanation for its origin, which makes the models very complex.

"I can imagine it being two types of black holes, very heavy and very light ones, or black holes and new particles. But in that case one of the components is orders of magnitude heavier than the other, and they need to be produced in comparable abundance. We would be going from something astrophysical to something that is truly microscopic, perhaps even the lightest thing in the universe, and that would be very difficult to explain," said lead author Miguel Zumalacárregui, a Marie Curie Global Fellow at the Berkeley Center for Cosmological Physics.

An as-yet unpublished reanalysis by the same team using an updated list of 1,048 supernovas cuts the limit in half, to a maximum of about 23 percent, further slamming the door on the dark matter-black hole proposal.

"We are back to the standard discussions. What is dark matter? Indeed, we are running out of good options," said Uroš Seljak, a UC Berkeley professor of physics and astronomy and BCCP co-director. "This is a challenge for future generations."

The analysis is detailed in a paper published this week in the journal Physical Review Letters.

Dark matter lensing

Their conclusions are based on the fact that an unseen population of , or any massive compact object, would gravitationally bend and magnify light from distant objects on its way to Earth. Therefore, gravitational lensing should affect the light from distant Type Ia supernovas. These are the exploding stars that scientists have used as standard brightness sources to measure cosmic distances and document the expansion of the universe.

Zumalacárregui conducted a complex statistical analysis of data on the brightness and distance supernovas catalogued in two compilations—580 in the Union and 740 in the joint light-curve analysis (JLA) catalogs—and concluded that eight should be brighter by a few tenths of a percent than predicted based on observations of how these supernovas brighten and fade over time. No such brightening has been detected.

Other researchers have performed similar but simpler analyses that yielded inconclusive results. But Zumalacárregui incorporated the precise probability of seeing all magnifications, from small to huge, as well as uncertainties in brightness and distance of each . Even for low-mass black holes—those 1 percent the mass of the sun—there should be some highly magnified distant supernovas, he said, but there are none.

"You cannot see this effect on one supernova, but when you put them all together and do a full Bayesian analysis you start putting very strong constraints on the dark matter, because each supernova counts and you have so many of them," Zumalacárregui said. The more supernovas included in the analysis, and the farther away they are, the tighter the constraints. Data on 1,048 bright supernovas from the Pantheon catalog provided an even lower upper limit—23 percent—than the newly published analysis.

Seljak published a paper proposing this type of analysis in the late 1990s, but when interest shifted from looking for big objects, MACHOs, to looking for fundamental particles, in particular weakly interacting massive particles, or WIMPs, follow-up plans fell by the wayside. By then, many experiments had excluded most masses and types of MACHOs, leaving little hope of discovering such objects.

At the time, too, only a small number of distant Type Ia supernovas had been discovered and their distances measured.

Only after the LIGO observations brought up the issue again did Seljak and Zumalacárregui embark on the complicated analysis to determine the limits on dark matter.

"What was intriguing is that the masses of the black holes in the LIGO event were right where black holes had not yet been excluded as dark matter," Seljak said. "That was an interesting coincidence that got everyone excited. But it was a coincidence."

Explore further: Cosmologists propose new way to form primordial black holes

More information: Miguel Zumalacárregui et al, Limits on Stellar-Mass Compact Objects as Dark Matter from Gravitational Lensing of Type Ia Supernovae, Physical Review Letters (2018). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.141101

Related Stories

Cosmologists propose new way to form primordial black holes

August 30, 2018

What is dark matter? How do supermassive black holes form? Primordial black holes might hold the answer to this longstanding question. Leiden and Chinese cosmologists have identified a new way in which these hypothetical ...

Is dark matter made of primordial black holes?

April 20, 2018

Astronomers studying the motions of galaxies and the character of the cosmic microwave background radiation came to realize in the last century that most of the matter in the universe was not visible. About 84 percent of ...

How a star cluster ruled out MACHOs

August 10, 2016

Are massive black holes hiding in the halos of galaxies, making up the majority of the universe's mysterious dark matter? This possibility may have been ruled out by a star cluster in a small galaxy recently discovered orbiting ...

Recommended for you

Researchers study interactions in molecules using AI

October 19, 2018

Researchers from the University of Luxembourg, Technische Universität Berlin, and the Fritz Haber Institute of the Max Planck Society have combined machine learning and quantum mechanics to predict the dynamics and atomic ...

Pushing the extra cold frontiers of superconducting science

October 18, 2018

Measuring the properties of superconducting materials in magnetic fields at close to absolute zero temperatures is difficult, but necessary to understand their quantum properties. How cold? Lower than 0.05 Kelvin (-272°C).

The big problem of small data: A new approach

October 18, 2018

Big Data is all the rage today, but Small Data matters too! Drawing reliable conclusions from small datasets, like those from clinical trials for rare diseases or in studies of endangered species, remains one of the trickiest ...

64 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

nelsondussault
1.2 / 5 (9) Oct 02, 2018
This implies that dark matter does not gravitationally affect light ?
fthompson495
1.3 / 5 (16) Oct 02, 2018
Dark matter is a supersolid that fills 'empty' space, strongly interacts with ordinary matter and is displaced by ordinary matter. What is referred to geometrically as curved spacetime physically exists in nature as the state of displacement of the supersolid dark matter. The state of displacement of the supersolid dark matter is gravity.

The supersolid dark matter displaced by a galaxy pushes back, causing the stars in the outer arms of the galaxy to orbit the galactic center at the rate in which they do.

Displaced supersolid dark matter is curved spacetime.
jonesdave
3.6 / 5 (20) Oct 02, 2018
This implies that dark matter does not gravitationally affect light ?


No; it does affect light gravitationally. Therefore the lack of detections of such lensing puts a tight constraint on the amount of DM that can be ascribed to BHs.
rrwillsj
1.8 / 5 (5) Oct 02, 2018
This article is an excellent example of the "Left-Hand" / "Right-Hand" organizational failure to communicate.

https://phys.org/...ube.html
tallenglish
1 / 5 (10) Oct 02, 2018
Surely this just proves the universe isn't full of holes - i.e. the universe is not swiss cheese.

I thought it was always assumed DM comes in two areas, black holes (like at the center of galaxies) and the stellar ones as well as halos around galaxies - which woul dbe more like a DM cloud and far more diffuse, so wouldn't lense like a BH but gently curve spacetime around it to the point we may not see any lensing, but the light would be deflected like it is in glass prism which would also account for some extra red shift as well.

I beleive DM is just mass (quarks/electrons) - just in imaginary spacetime (ict, ix), i.e. have undergone a 90deg hyperbolic rotation. To us "normal" matter objects it may look like E/M is on the inside and hidden and strong/weak force on the outside - i.e. matter turned inside out, thats not only how it clumps but is next to impossible to find.

It neither emits light or exists in the same time as mass it just shares spacial co-ords.
tallenglish
1 / 5 (10) Oct 02, 2018
Time is a 4 dimensional object, i.e. a + bi + cj + dk, where b,c,d represent red/gree/blue imaginary part of spin [i.e. the sin(t) bits]. a is the real part or white spin that is red+green+blue and what defines E/M on the outside.

Space is 2 dimensional - i.e. only has mass (i) or momentum (r). So for every spacial dimension there is also real and imaginary part of time associated with it. I..e red real/imaginary time for x space.

Momentum is when velocity is real, so special relativity beta sqaured is always positive, lorentz always > 1. Mass is when velocity is imaginary (either imaginary time/real space as in DM, or real time/imaginary space for mass). beta^2 is always negative and lorentz is always < 1. This is why nucleus must always look smaller than the electron cloud. It also how mass compresses spacetime, electrons/light stretch it.

Kust special relativity with the missing imaginary bits added in as they should be.
tallenglish
1 / 5 (9) Oct 02, 2018
Why is time 4 dimensional but looks like 1, space is 3 x 2 dimensional?

Time integrates your view of energy, space differenciates it - and because we are made of up/down quarks which are 3D energy - time = 1/4.D^4 and space = 3.D^2

Time always looks like 1D, but it also connects everything, everywhere in space.

So 3D+1T should be read as [x,y,z][a + bi] + [t][w=r+g+b,ir,ig,ib]

Real time, real space is where the electrons live, imaginary space real time is where the quarks live. DM is reversed, imaginary space/time is where electrons live, real space/imaginary time is where the quarks live. So neither electrons or quarks exist in the same spacetime - thats why they don't interact.

https://drive.goo...axHhZRB6

But from their own perspectives, DM is just normal matter and light it just looks weird from our perspective.
dogbert
2.9 / 5 (18) Oct 02, 2018
What is dark matter? Indeed, we are running out of good options


When you look everywhere and never find it, perhaps it is time to decide that what you are looking for does not exist and never has existed.
Old_C_Code
2.7 / 5 (14) Oct 02, 2018
"Dark matter is one of astronomy's most embarrassing conundrums: despite comprising 84.5 percent of the matter in the universe, no one can find it."

Embarrassing? No, JonesDav has no shame.

nelson says: "This implies that dark matter does not gravitationally affect light ?"
Nelson, dark matter is not effected by galaxy mergers! The dark matter doesn't interact with normal matter or dark matter in a merger! ... i.e. it's make believe.
Benni
2.1 / 5 (16) Oct 02, 2018
"Dark matter is one of astronomy's most embarrassing conundrums: despite comprising 84.5 percent of the matter in the universe,no one can find it."

I know what happened here...........all that cosmic fairy dust is still there like they claim, it's just that all the BHs have sucked it in which is why DM can't be found, it's hidden inside all those SMBHs. Just as soon as we discover the very first BH we will have solved the mystery of Cosmic Fairy Dust disappearance......then we can go looking for her sister The Tooth Fairy.
torbjorn_b_g_larsson
4 / 5 (14) Oct 02, 2018
So another contender firmly rejected, and back to the promising WIMP scenarios and lesser ideas.

So to add to the usual repeat of the obvious since many comments repeat obviously erroneous ideas:
- Dark matter exist; it has been observed by many independent means, and is now the best explanation for those on all scales including galaxies.
- Dark matter is slow moving (cold), particulate (matter) and interact mostly gravitationally (dark). (And yes, it interacts with light, say in gravitational lensing or in baryonic acoustic oscillations [google!].)
- Dark matter cannot be ordinary matter, its observations in the cosmic background radiation spectra show this and is easily understood [ https://galileosp...niverse/ ].

And now we know it can't be primordial black holes either, this close the open BH mass hole that LIGO made interesting. Saying that we are running out of good DM options (WIMPS remains) is saying precisely that it exists.
Benni
2.2 / 5 (13) Oct 02, 2018
So to add to the usual repeat of the obvious since many comments repeat obviously erroneous ideas


..........right, if YOU be the one to say it, it must obviously be erroneous.

we are running out of good DM options (WIMPS remains)
......good choice, one more wimpy theory, let me count them...............too many.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.7 / 5 (11) Oct 02, 2018
What is generally considered to be "Dark Matter"is merely the layer of an unseen Dimension that is conjoined to our own Dimension and is spread out in our Universe. It interacts with Matter/Energy that it encounters, which is very often.
Occasionally, an entity who normally resides in that other Dimension falls into ours and loses its way - at least until it finds its way back to the Portal from which it fell.
I bear witness to such an event in which an entity had lost its way and was seen searching at length for a period of many days, for the path that would take it back to its own Dimension.
It is doubtful that humans, or anything that is made of Matter could possibly gain entrance to this other Dimension. And if there were a way to travel there, the human would probably die, not only of asphyxiation, but also from possible flattening.
This is not a possibility that scientists have even considered, unfortunately, that another Dimension could be attached/conjoined to ours.
Benni
2.6 / 5 (10) Oct 02, 2018
What is generally considered to be "Dark Matter"is merely the layer of an unseen Dimension that is conjoined to our own Dimension and is spread out in our Universe. It interacts with Matter/Energy that it encounters, which is very often.
Occasionally, an entity who normally resides in that other Dimension falls into ours and loses its way - at least until it finds its way back to the Portal from which it fell.
I bear witness to such an event in which an entity had lost its way and was seen searching at length for a period of many days, for the path that would take it back to its own Dimension.
It is doubtful that humans, or anything that is made of Matter could possibly gain entrance to this other Dimension. And if there were a way to travel there, the human would probably die, not only of asphyxiation, but also from possible flattening.


>Egg, nice try attempting to pull off a twining granDy, but no one can do it like granville. You get a 4 this time.

Benni
2.6 / 5 (10) Oct 02, 2018
>granDy.........would you kindly get over here & leave jonesy alone for awhile with his density problems? Egg is trying to imitate you & doesn't realize he doesn't have those kinds of writing skills.
valeriy_polulyakh
3 / 5 (6) Oct 02, 2018
In search of black holes and dark matter astrophysicists are relying on indirect observations. It would seem that the measurement of the event horizon of a black hole directly would be a direct evidence. However, by the nature of a horizon, any real measurement of the event horizon will be indirect. The Event Horizon Telescope will get picture of the silhouette of the Sgr A* which is due to optical effects of spacetime outside of the event horizon. The result will be determined by the simple quality of the resulting image that does not depend on the properties of the spacetime within the image. So, it will be also indirect and an existence of BH is a hypothesis.
https://www.acade...ilky_Way
https://www.acade...k_Energy
kamikrazee
2.5 / 5 (4) Oct 02, 2018
I am well known for not knowing jack, but if matter is energy and vice versa, is it not possible that some of the radiation in its various flavors, as well as gravity, cannot somehow be the missing matter, (at least in a complex mathematical analysis)?
Benni
2.8 / 5 (11) Oct 02, 2018
I am well known for not knowing jack, but if matter is energy and vice versa, is it not possible that some of the radiation in its various flavors, as well as gravity, cannot somehow be the missing matter, (at least in a complex mathematical analysis)?


Gravity is a consequence of the presence of Mass/Energy, which are EQUIVALENT transformed products of one another.

There is no such thing as flavors of radiation. There are FREQUENCIES of radiation which of course is what ENERGY/ELECTRO-MAGNETIC WAVE is. Energy therefore does not exist as particles of MASS such as we understand atoms to be, but exist as transformed products of one another.
Benni
1.9 / 5 (9) Oct 02, 2018
In search of black holes and dark matter astrophysicists are relying on indirect observations. It would seem that the measurement of the event horizon of a black hole directly would be a direct evidence. However, by the nature of a horizon, any real measurement of the event horizon will be indirect. The Event Horizon Telescope will get picture of the silhouette of the Sgr A* which is due to optical effects of spacetime outside of the event horizon. The result will be determined by the simple quality of the resulting image that does not depend on the properties of the spacetime within the image. So, it will be also indirect and an existence of BH is a hypothesis.
https://www.acade...ilky_Way


OK Val, I read through most of it.......what are elastons? I'm a Nuclear/Electrical Engineer unfamiliar with Astro-physics jargon.

Paper looks correct, As soon as you mentioned the gas cloud you had me hooked.

Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.6 / 5 (10) Oct 02, 2018
>granDy.........would you kindly get over here & leave jonesy alone for awhile with his density problems? Egg is trying to imitate you & doesn't realize he doesn't have those kinds of writing skills.
says Benni

Drat!!
But I was being serious. That other Dimension is firmly affixed onto the one on which we live.
And, quite frankly, my hypothesis is far more probable than jones' Dark Barzoomas and just as visible.
ameliawizard
1 / 5 (3) Oct 03, 2018
where the hell did you guys put the antimatter?
Anonym54
1.4 / 5 (7) Oct 03, 2018
I'm curious about the missing dark matter thing.

Physicists often write about time travel and the amount of energy needed to achieve it, so considering the amount of energy that's around a black hole. Is it possible that missing dark matter might have been blown into another future or leaked in a past event? I mean you can't detect what's behind you or what's been violently moved forward can you?

Some of the Dark matter in the future could get recycled again and again through some cosmic event, Where some of it will always get pushed into the past, and stay there.

Thanks, curious

granville583762
3.2 / 5 (9) Oct 03, 2018
Blackholes of infinite density of matter without the power of darkmatter
nelsondussault> This implies that dark matter does not gravitationally affect light ?

jonesdave> No; it does affect light gravitationally. Therefore the lack of detections of such lensing puts a tight constraint on the amount of DM that can be ascribed to BHs.

As your confirming JD, like matter gravity lens's light, darkmatter gravity lens's light, blackholes being the singularities that they are, as you explained singularities are infinite density without infinite gravity, what in your opinion is holding this blackhole together JD?
AllStBob
1 / 5 (3) Oct 03, 2018
What this means is that the data is statistically unlikely to have been produced by HIS prior distribution of black holes. Of interest would be the MLE implied distribution of black holes and whether it is a feasible if not within current theories.
poksnee
2 / 5 (8) Oct 03, 2018
Dark energy and dark matter has the same logic and validity as the multiverse and string theory....none.
granville583762
3.1 / 5 (9) Oct 03, 2018
And the complements keep coming
>granDy.........would you kindly get over here & leave jonesy alone for awhile with his density problems? Egg is trying to imitate you & doesn't realize he doesn't have those kinds of writing skills.
says Benni
Drat!!
But I was being serious. That other Dimension is firmly affixed onto the one on which we live.
And, quite frankly, my hypothesis is far more probable than jones' Dark Barzoomas and just as visible.

I missed that Benni, this is catching, time for a autumn sabbatical in the shires
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.5 / 5 (8) Oct 03, 2018
The Black Hole - Is It Comparable To A Vacuum Cleaner

Now that certain Physicists have deemed Black Holes to exist in the Cosmos without having given all the relevant particulars for its existence, other than the maths and its probabilities - it now behoves the rest of us of the lower echelons to disprove that existence with as much evidence as may be admissible. This ambitious undertaking will not be rewarded due to the amplified voices coming from the high places of Astrophysics who will only accept corroborating evidences that are agreeable to their simulations, artists' impressions, and most of all - because they say so.

Therefore, it appears that the onus is on us - the accusers - to remediate the science of Black Hole Theory to that which is more agreeable to the Natural Universal Order Against Chaos.

-continued-

jonesdave
2.8 / 5 (11) Oct 03, 2018
I'm a Nuclear/Electrical Engineer unfamiliar with Astro-physics jargon.


Liar. You have never studied anything beyond high school. And astrophysics doesn't have a frigging hyphen in it.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.5 / 5 (8) Oct 03, 2018
-continued-

To that end, I propose the probability that a Dyson Ball vacuum cleaner exists in place of a Black Hole, and that the Dyson Ball draws electrical power from electric current filaments which have been seen to connect all Galaxies to each other.

As most housekeepers know (mine does), the Dyson Ball vacuum cleaner is quite proficient at picking up all detritus and stray animal hairs and then storing it all inside its ball. It is also well known that the Dyson Ball allows some of the vacuum to escape, thereby the flow of clean air is continually replenishing air in the room.
So it is in the vacuum of Space, where the Dyson Ball continues to draw detritus and used Star material into itself as it cleans the Cosmos, as well as removing clean particles from with itself.
However, a Dyson Ball can only do so much within its field of limitations
Benni
2.3 / 5 (9) Oct 03, 2018
I missed that Benni, this is catching, time for a autumn sabbatical in the shires


You got a 4 for that post, this talk about sabbaticals.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 03, 2018
@ jones
You say tomayto; He says tomahto; What is your problem in dealing with semantics?
jonesdave
2.8 / 5 (9) Oct 03, 2018
it now behoves the rest of us scientifically illiterate loons to disprove that existence with as much evidence as may be admissible.


FTFY.

Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.5 / 5 (8) Oct 03, 2018
So you are now including yourself?
good show, old man
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.3 / 5 (9) Oct 03, 2018
@Benni
@granville
You must have realised after all this time that jonesdave has always wanted to join us in our merry quest to denounce the Black Hole Theory. And now, it seems that jones wishes to join us in that quest, while deriding himself as an scientifically illiterate loon.
HIS words, not mine.
jonesdave
3.2 / 5 (11) Oct 03, 2018
@Benni
@granville
You must have realised after all this time that jonesdave has always wanted to join us in our merry quest to denounce the Black Hole Theory. And now, it seems that jones wishes to join us in that quest, while deriding himself as an scientifically illiterate loon.
HIS words, not mine.


Sod off you illiterate loon. Nothing you, Granny, the idiot Benni, or the tosspot cantthink write on here is of any scientific relevance. Do I need to explain why? Scientific hypotheses are not born on comments sections by unqualified dullards such as the aforementioned. Write it up, or shut up. Yes?
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.5 / 5 (8) Oct 03, 2018
I'm curious about the missing dark matter thing.

Physicists often write about time travel and the amount of energy needed to achieve it, so considering the amount of energy that's around a black hole. Is it possible that missing dark matter might have been blown into another future or leaked in a past event? I mean you can't detect what's behind you or what's been violently moved forward can you?

Some of the Dark matter in the future could get recycled again and again through some cosmic event, Where some of it will always get pushed into the past, and stay there.

Thanks, curious

says Anonym54

The "missing" dark matter is strictly the figment of Fritz Zwicky's imagination, all due to the fact that a large percentage of normal Matter has not been seen/detected. There is no Law that the Universe MUST be 100% filled with Matter, as well as the fact that, with present telescopic technology, only a small part of the Universe has been tracked. The rest is unseen.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.3 / 5 (9) Oct 03, 2018
-contd-
@Anonym54\
All of this hullabaloo with regard to Dark Matter and Dark Energy existing in the Cosmos as clouds around galaxies - is just plain nonsense. Evidently, there are photos that show clouds of what is referred to as 'dark matter' surrounding galaxies, but those are mainly artists' impressions or are possibly photoshopped to appear as though such DM clouds exist. Many appear more like smudges.
Other photos of galaxies show no such clouds - especially in the infrared.
It is still early and there is still much evidence for or against to find.
granville583762
3.4 / 5 (10) Oct 03, 2018
Rotten Tomatoes
@Benni
@granville You must have realised after all this time that jonesdave has always wanted to join us in our merry quest to denounce the Black Hole Theory. And now, it seems that jones wishes to join us in that quest, while deriding himself as an scientifically illiterate loon. HIS words, not mine.

jonesdave> Sod off you illiterate loon. Nothing you, Granny, the idiot Benni, or the tosspot cantthink write on here is of any scientific relevance. Do I need to explain why? Scientific hypotheses are not born on comments sections by unqualified dullards such as the aforementioned. Write it up, or shut up. Yes?

The Invisible Cat is out his hat and is not going back JD, those whacker mole days of Benni and CD are over and are not coming back JD.
You have to get it out your system JD, you can curse and swear till the cows come home JD, It will not make one jot of difference, if you want to end your days on an internet forum cursing and swearing
Benni
1.9 / 5 (9) Oct 03, 2018
......only a small part of the Universe has been tracked. The rest is unseen.


> Anon, Egg........yep, look at that other article running with this one: https://phys.org/...gen.html

As we become more advanced in our instrumentation methods, the more stuff we're finding that we had no idea was out there. Of course this creates tremendous consternation with DM Enthusiasts who for some oddball reason demand we believe 80% of the Universe is MISSING, and if we don't knuckle under to their Pop-Cosmology belief system the Zwicky acolytes here are gonna make sure you get every eyeful of their foul mouthed filth they can muster, think stumpy, jonesy, etc.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.3 / 5 (9) Oct 03, 2018
ahaaa Hydrogen - that phantasmagorical gas of which Stars are born. Great link, Benni.

"Deep observations made with the MUSE spectrograph on ESO's Very Large Telescope have uncovered vast cosmic reservoirs of atomic hydrogen surrounding distant galaxies. The exquisite sensitivity of MUSE allowed for direct observations of dim clouds of hydrogen glowing with Lyman-alpha emission in the early Universe"

There was no reason for Zwicky to imply that a Universe full of physical Matter was required where every bit of Space was needed to be filled, otherwise an alternative would have to be the filler if there happened to be some emptiness in many or most locations. Perhaps he had it in mind that the Universe was like a foam rubber pillow, where all air spaces must be filled with foam and no spaces left empty.

He may not have understood that bodies in motion need to have empty space to MOVE and maneuver with enough room for smaller objects like planets in their orbits.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.3 / 5 (9) Oct 03, 2018

And, by the way, Hydrogen gas IS MATTER, in a gaseous form. It may be that it is Hydrogen gas where that 80% Matter has been all along.

:)
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.8 / 5 (9) Oct 03, 2018
@granville

I believe that it is much too late for jones. He remains here in these physorg forums as the lone sentinel for the protection of the scientists in their ivory towers, of which jones lacks any strategy to attain and engage them as one of their peers. He would fear their derision, as he holds them in the highest of regard and esteem, while they would look down their noses at his puny affectations of emulating their verbiage, while they would also hold him contemptible for daring to believe that he is of the same level of intelligence and accomplishment as they.

It is due to his feelings of doubt about his own qualifications that jones chooses to cast about for the most vicious verbiage that he can fling upon our innocence, in the hope that, one day, we might finally agree with something that he had mentioned in passing. But it is well known that we don't throw pearls before swine, so that day is very unlikely to come when there is some kind of agreement with jones.
Joe1963
1 / 5 (5) Oct 04, 2018
I posit this hypothesis that does away with both dark matter and also dark energy. I posit that at a distance of approximately 1.5 million light-years gravity becomes slightly repulsive, gradually increasing with distance to achieve a peak repulsion, and then decreasing with distance to zero.

Thus, cosmological expansion is caused by galaxies pushing against each other, and galactic rotation can be explained by the fact that each galaxy is surrounded by a "womb" of dust, gas, and other galaxies, and this "womb" pushes with repulsive gravity upon the outer stars of a galaxy to keep them in orbit at a higher speed than expected.

I give a cosmological / mathematical justification for this behavior in my Reddit article:

https://www.reddi...tter_is/

At the bottom, in the responses, I explain how General Relativity can be adjusted so as to retain time dilation while rejecting curved space and retaining flat, 3D, Euclidean space.
jonesdave
2.8 / 5 (9) Oct 04, 2018
It is due to his feelings of doubt about his own qualifications that jones chooses to cast about for the most vicious verbiage that he can fling upon our innocence, in the hope that, one day, we might finally agree with something that he had mentioned in passing. But it is well known that we don't throw pearls before swine, so that day is very unlikely to come when there is some kind of agreement with jones.


Hey, sh!t for brains, I can link to the scientific literature for any science I quote. You can't. And therein lies the difference. Idiots like you don't understand the science, and make stuff up. I am just pointing to the real science to illustrate the fact that you are talking sh!t. As usual.

Benni
1.9 / 5 (9) Oct 04, 2018
I can link to the scientific literature for any science I quote.
.......actually all you do is link to Pop-Cosmology fantasy literature for ANYTHING you quote.

For example you've been here quoting fantasy literature about finite stellar bodies at the center of which exists INFINITE DENSITY, but none of your fantasy lit ever provides a definition for such a concept.

So how about if you put to good use your fake Astronomy degree from U of A in Auckland, NZ that offers no such degree & put up a scientific definition for the term INFINITE DENSITY. Can't do it can you? And you come here being the loudest & most vocal about who are the "uneducated" in this chatroom.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.5 / 5 (8) Oct 04, 2018
Yes jones - do elaborate on and entertain us with your funny farm definition for Infinite Density. The only density of note is your brain, and that IS infinite.
jonesdave
2.8 / 5 (9) Oct 04, 2018
I can link to the scientific literature for any science I quote.
.......actually all you do is link to Pop-Cosmology fantasy literature for ANYTHING you quote.

For example you've been here quoting fantasy literature about finite stellar bodies at the center of which exists INFINITE DENSITY, but none of your fantasy lit ever provides a definition for such a concept.

So how about if you put to good use your fake Astronomy degree from U of A in Auckland, NZ that offers no such degree & put up a scientific definition for the term INFINITE DENSITY. Can't do it can you? And you come here being the loudest & most vocal about who are the "uneducated" in this chatroom.


Go away you uneducated liar. Is this your tactic to cover up your scientific illiteracy? And the fact that you never gained a degree? Sad bastard.
jonesdave
2.5 / 5 (8) Oct 04, 2018
Yes jones - do elaborate on and entertain us with your funny farm definition for Infinite Density. The only density of note is your brain, and that IS infinite.


Go look at the literature, you thick piece of pig droppings. Why do you need me to explain it to you? Too stupid to understand scientific papers and articles? Oh, yeah, I forgot - you don't understand science, and are only here to learn! Liar.
Benni
1.9 / 5 (9) Oct 04, 2018
Yes jones - do elaborate on and entertain us with your funny farm definition for Infinite Density. The only density of note is your brain, and that IS infinite.


Go look at the literature, you thick piece of pig droppings. Why do you need me to explain it to you? Too stupid to understand scientific papers and articles? Oh, yeah, I forgot - you don't understand science, and are only here to learn! Liar.


How long can a definition be jonesy? I mean, if your Pop-Cosmology literature is as scientific as you lead us to believe, then surely a mere definition of just two words can't be that long, now can it?

OK, just two words, INFINITE DENSITY, on your mark, get set, go:
jonesdave
2.1 / 5 (7) Oct 04, 2018
Yes jones - do elaborate on and entertain us with your funny farm definition for Infinite Density. The only density of note is your brain, and that IS infinite.


Go look at the literature, you thick piece of pig droppings. Why do you need me to explain it to you? Too stupid to understand scientific papers and articles? Oh, yeah, I forgot - you don't understand science, and are only here to learn! Liar.


How long can a definition be jonesy? I mean, if your Pop-Cosmology literature is as scientific as you lead us to believe, then surely a mere definition of just two words can't be that long, now can it?

OK, just two words, INFINITE DENSITY, on your mark, get set, go:


Doesn't exist.
IwinUlose
3.4 / 5 (5) Oct 04, 2018
can I try?

INFINITE DENSITY - (always all caps) a colloquialism coined by a Phys.org poster to deride the mathematical singularity in functions describing compact objects known as black holes.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
3 / 5 (6) Oct 04, 2018
can I try?

INFINITE DENSITY - (always all caps) a colloquialism coined by a Phys.org poster to deride the mathematical singularity in functions describing compact objects known as black holes.
says IloseUwin

Correct. And that physorg poster is none other than jonesdave aka JD - whose favourite hobby is coining colloquialisms and flinging mud on his betters.
jones, as a youth would go to a field where there would be a herd of cattle. He collected enough bullshit to save for the day when he could fling his hoard of bullshit at innocent bystanders on physorg. He still does it to this day.
jonesdave
2.1 / 5 (7) Oct 04, 2018
can I try?

INFINITE DENSITY - (always all caps) a colloquialism coined by a Phys.org poster to deride the mathematical singularity in functions describing compact objects known as black holes.
says IloseUwin

Correct. And that physorg poster is none other than jonesdave aka JD - whose favourite hobby is coining colloquialisms and flinging mud on his betters.
jones, as a youth would go to a field where there would be a herd of cattle. He collected enough bullshit to save for the day when he could fling his hoard of bullshit at innocent bystanders on physorg. He still does it to this day.


Piss off you ignorant tit. You are a scientifically illiterate creationist tosspot. Who gives a flying **** what you think?
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.7 / 5 (7) Oct 04, 2018
I am only an interested observer and a scholar here. What is YOUR reason for commenting in physorg, jones?
Benni
2.1 / 5 (7) Oct 04, 2018
can I try?

INFINITE DENSITY - a colloquialism coined by a Phys.org poster to deride the mathematical singularity in functions describing compact objects known as black holes.


You should not have tried......UloseAgain, it's found at:https://en.wikipe...ck_hole, last two words.

You really do need to change your moniker.

"Singularity
Main article: Gravitational singularity
At the center of a black hole, as described by general relativity, lies a gravitational singularity, a region where the spacetime curvature becomes infinite. For a non-rotating black hole, this region takes the shape of a single point and for a rotating black hole, it is smeared out to form a ring singularity that lies in the plane of rotation.In both cases, the singular region has zero volume. It can also be shown that the singular region contains all the mass of the black hole solution.The singular region can thus be thought of as having infinite density."
IwinUlose
2.6 / 5 (5) Oct 04, 2018
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
3 / 5 (6) Oct 05, 2018
can I try?

INFINITE DENSITY - (always all caps) a colloquialism coined by a Phys.org poster to deride the mathematical singularity in functions describing compact objects known as black holes.
says IloseUwin

Correct. And that physorg poster is none other than jonesdave aka JD - whose favourite hobby is coining colloquialisms and flinging mud on his betters.
jones, as a youth would go to a field where there would be a herd of cattle. He collected enough bullshit to save for the day when he could fling his hoard of bullshit at innocent bystanders on physorg. He still does it to this day.


Piss off you ignorant tit. You are a scientifically illiterate creationist tosspot. Who gives a flying **** what you think?
says jones

And with that, I rest my case

:)
Da Schneib
2.6 / 5 (5) Oct 05, 2018
I retain my hypothesis that the missing mass has at least two components, and possibly three or four. But I await evidence.
jonesdave
2.1 / 5 (7) Oct 05, 2018
I am only an interested observer and a scholar here. What is YOUR reason for commenting in physorg, jones?


No you aren't you lying swine. You understand nothing of science, and are merely here to push your idiotic creationist crap. As shown. Anybody that believes that garbage has no place on a science site.
Benni
2 / 5 (8) Oct 05, 2018
I am only an interested observer and a scholar here. What is YOUR reason for commenting in physorg, jones?


No you aren't you lying swine. You understand nothing of science, and are merely here to push your idiotic creationist crap. As shown. Anybody that believes that garbage has no place on a science site.


........and "anybody" who needs to make up stories about having a degree from the University of Auckland, NZ in Astronomy & astronomy based courses that offers no such degrees is nothing less than a worthless piece of human debris who makes great friends on here with others like Schneibo, another one who makes up the same kind of slop & swill narratives rooted solely in Pop-Cosmology, right Schneibo?

I retain my hypothesis that the missing mass has at least two components, and possibly three or four. But I await evidence.


> Schneibo: What "hypothesis" ? You have one of your own? No you don't, just the standard Pop-Cosmology claptrap.

Surveillance_Egg_Unit
3.4 / 5 (5) Oct 05, 2018
I am only an interested observer and a scholar here. What is YOUR reason for commenting in physorg, jones?


No you aren't you lying swine. You understand nothing of science, and are merely here to push your idiotic creationist crap. As shown. Anybody that believes that garbage has no place on a science site.
says jones

I asked you why YOU are here, and you still have not responded reasonably without malice.
For some strange reason, you keep repeating your mantra that I don't understand science. The truth is, that anybody can understand science - even you.

And I do commend you for acknowledging that I am, indeed, a Creationist and NOT a religionist.

But you DO seem perturbed for some strange reason, jones. Anyone who would be of an unbiased Nature would not express such a violent hatred of something of which he doesn't understand - instead of asking good questions about the belief. Yet, you believe in Black Holes and Dark Matter - all invisible.
Benni
2.3 / 5 (6) Oct 05, 2018
Yet, you believe in Black Holes and Dark Matter - all invisible.


Sounds a bit like a definition of a peculiar word, spelled something like: FAITH
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
3 / 5 (6) Oct 05, 2018
@Benni
Faith in the unknown and the unseen has always been the downfall of science, when they put aside and foreswear reason and logic and, instead take up the gauntlet of the unknowable and mysterious without any real observable evidence to make their claim and make it stick. Not all, but many scientists struggle hard to find solutions to their theories, and if one suit doesn't fit, they will tarry with another suit that surely will fit - but in most instances will not.
And as with religion, scientists have their acolytes (like jones) who believe with undying fervor, and who worship at the feet of whichever theory seems to be THE ONE - the theory that will end all other theories. No others need apply.
savvys84
1 / 5 (1) Oct 12, 2018
lol what are these jokers upto.
there is no gravitational lensing and gravitational waves were not detected in 2015.
and to top it all the cooks who claimed to have detected gravitational waves even got the nobel prize.
the swedish royal academy of sciences seems to be full of kooks.

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.