World Science Scholars

1.4 The Case for Dark Matter

discussion Discussion
NoteNote

Discussions are a place where registered users can click on Reply to share their ideas and questions that follow from the material we’re covering. All users can view the conversation and indicate their like or dislike for a specific comment.

Viewing 4 reply threads
    • Dark matter is known to exist primarily because of its large-scale gravitational effects. Nothing is definitively known about the particle or particles that compose the dark matter. How likely do you think it is that an understanding of the particle nature of dark matter can be reached on Earth? Why?

    • I consider it unlikely that dark matter could be a particle, given the contents of the Standard Model and the decades of intensive research (theory und experiments) since the assumption of unseen matter, added by the discovery via the HST that there are about ten times more galaxies in our universe than previously estimated. So, there IS matter that had not been seen so far. (First line of argument.)
      Then, it has been an assumption that Kepler’s laws would apply to large objects (a reasonable one, but an assumption nonetheless). There are different theories around that don’t share that assumption, and one of the most convincing one is MOND (by Milgrom). Very strong evidence, added by explanations for observations that cannot be done otherwise. (Second line of qrgument.)
      As a “jury member”, my vote would be against dark matter.

You must be logged in to reply to this discussion.

Send this to a friend