Re: "After several years of observations, and careful data analysis, the results speak for themselves."

No offense intended to the researchers, who I trust are extremely talented, but one wonders if dark matter researchers will eventually regret not widening the scope of their investigation to also include questioning accepted hypotheses. A person can be forgiven for suspecting that we are at an impasse here, and that the situation will simply not change for the better.

Re: "few scientists seriously doubt that it exists ..."

Perhaps that's actually the problem. If the discipline basically weeds out approaches which question foundational hypotheses, then wouldn't this be an extremely risky strategy in the event that a wrong turn was taken? Many lines of investigation have been tossed out along the way. As each decade passes, the probability that somebody will possess the courage to suggest that all of this investment was a mistake will predictably approach zero.

As each decade passes, the probability that somebody will possess the courage to suggest that all of this investment was a mistake will predictably approach zero.


Where have ya been living? Ya need to get out more, people suggest this all the time. Somebody? Well I can attest that there are more than a few somebodies who possess the courage,, hundreds, nay thousands of them. The one's who have some science in their proposals get heard. The cranks, crackpots, and pseudo guys? They get heard more than is necessary.

Maybe ya should do as I suggested to Zephyr, try to get a "Mainstream Fairness to Bunk Science Act" passed. Compel them to listen, compel them to believe under penalty of law.

Where have ya been living? Ya need to get out more, people suggest this all the time.

Halton Arp, that worked well for him.

I'd like to point out here, that this article is very good in my opinion. People often think that Dark Matter is a mere fudge factor to make OUR theories of Galactic rotation work according to OUR theories of Gravity. However in this case Dark Matter is implied due to Gravitational Lensing. So in either case Dark Matter is implied through experimental observation, and to the horror of scientists it isn't understood via current models. Now THAT is SCIENCE!!!!
Look back at Particle Physics and you will see discoveries such as the Neutron and Neutrino were once fudge factors as well!!!
So while it may be annoying that we don't know what this Dark Matter/Energy/Flow stuff is, you should be excited that there is still an enormous amount of physics yet to be deciphered. The outcomes of this research will be mind blowing once the mystery is unveiled. Though I suspect we'll just be unwrapping another layer of the onion.

Ober wrote, "...Dark Matter is implied due to Gravitational Lensing."

Actually, no. What's implied is the presence of an unseen, distributed source of gravity.

CDM theory produces a match when 50 galaxy clusters are averaged. Individual galaxy clusters generally do not. Studies of individual galaxies thus far generally have not matched CDM theory. This gravitational lensing result is certainly interesting, but CDM theory has a long way to go before we'll conclude that it's correct.

Thus far the only sources of gravity that we can pin down are associated with matter. It's only natural that we should assume that a source of gravity we can *not* pin down is also associated with matter; hence the CDM and other dark matter theories.

But until we pin down the nature of that matter, it's an *assumption* that any form of matter is responsible for these observed gravitational phenomena.

Perhaps it's a likely assumption. But it's still an assumption.

Actually, no. What's implied is the presence of an unseen, distributed source of gravity.


Gravity is produced by stress and energy. Matter is only one form of energy.

This gravitational lensing result is certainly interesting, but CDM theory has a long way to go before we'll conclude that it's correct.


Hot versus cold refers to the mean speed of the particles. If they were hot then their speed would mean that they would have smoothed out the early variations in density and the structure of the universe would be very different from what we see.

But until we pin down the nature of that matter, it's an *assumption* that any form of matter is responsible for these observed gravitational phenomena. ... it's still an assumption.


If it is a "gravitational phenomena" within GR then it is produced by some form of energy, and that energy forms clumps so cannot be moving at the speed of light. That means it must have mass. It is matter but of an unknown type.

... and to the horror of scientists it isn't understood via current models. Now THAT is SCIENCE!!!! ...


I think you meant " to the delight of scientists". There's nothing they like more than a mystery and the opportunity to discover something new.

When DM causes gravity, then one can assume, that DM is also attracted by gravity. Or not?


Yes, that is what caused the large scale structure to form in the universe. See this amazing video which shows dark matter flow marked by galaxies:

http://phys.org/n...rse.html

If yes, the DM should also form bodies and fall on bodies made from ordinary matter.


No, since it doesn't interact with EM, it falls straight through normal matter, just like neutrinos.

There's nothing they like more than a mystery and the opportunity to discover something new

Exactly. That's why people become scientists in the first place.
(Apart from the tons of money, the short working hours, the immense prestige, the droves of women and the adulation of millions of fans, of course)

They say that a quark-gluon plasma can only exist in extremely high T. But what mechanisms could lead to a cooling.


The usual thermal radiation will cool it easily, but below a threshold temperature, the quarks bind together into hadrons and you no longer have the "soup".

Sub: Interactions in time- Concepts
1.Philosophy of Science : Plasmas, Electro-magnetic fields and Cosmology
2.. Resource : Reflectors,3-Tier Consciousness, Source, Fields and Flows -Add protection
15.SPACE VISION-OM-COSMOLOGICAL INDEX-By Vidyardhi Nanduri-TXU 1-731-970 - SPACE SCIENCE-Reports Cover [ESA]-2010- PROPOSALS-Environment-Sensex-Earth-Glow-Sun Life-Significance - Human Being in-depth-Milky-way Sensex-Aditya links
1.ENVIRONMENT SENSEX-EARTH'S GLOW-SUN-LIFE SIGNIFICANCE -VIDYARDHI NANDURI.PPT-27
2.SUN TO ADITYA-COSMOLOGY VEDAS INTERLINKS –VIDYARDHI NANDURI..PPT-27
3.COSMOLOGICAL INDEX-MILKYWAY SENSEX-VISIBLE -INVISIBLE MATRIX 2010..PPT-33
See new addition-May 2013: Jnanam udbhavam-Dattam-Knowledge base Creation-75 PPT

"Team member Professor Masahiro is also excited about the future..."

I think the author of this article failed to note that "Masahiro" is actually a given name in Japanese, not a family name!