Cosmology Intelligent Design

Dark matter still elusive?

Spread the love
Click to see an enlarged picture
Dark matter ring, Wikimedia commons

In “Dark matter no-show at sensitive underground lab” (New Scientist, 14 April 2011), Celeste Biever reports that the WIMPs (yes, yes,) wimped out:

It’s just like a wimp to be a no-show when summoned for interrogation. That seems to be the result of an experiment to detect the weakly interacting massive particles, or WIMPs, thought to make up elusive dark matter that is thought to make up much of the mass of the universe.

After 100 days of monitoring, a tub of cryogenically chilled liquid xenon deep in an Italian mountain has shown no trace of the particles it is designed to catch. The result doesn’t rule out the existence of WIMPs, but it does seem these particles are slipperier than previously hoped.

[ … ]

If no such signals appear in the coming decade, physicists are going to have to throw out much of what they think they know about dark matter and dream up new possibilities.

From UXL Encyclopedia of Science (2002):

The principal way dark matter can be detected is by observing its gravitational effect on nearby objects. Although dark matter does not shine, it still exerts a gravitational force on the matter around it. Astronomers believe that dark matter is a “cosmic glue” holding together rapidly spinning galaxies and controlling the rate at which the universe expands. 

7 Replies to “Dark matter still elusive?

  1. 1
    tragic mishap says:

    Maybe try a new theory of physics that doesn’t require the largest fudge factor in the history of science?

  2. 2
    Noesis says:

    Fudge factor? The cosmological constant, Lambda, is related to dark energy, not dark matter. What did you have in mind?

  3. 3
    bornagain77 says:

    notes;

    The Mathematical Anomaly Of Dark Matter – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4133609

    Hubble Finds Ring of Dark Matter – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4133618

    ,,,I think that ‘dark matter’ is not really ‘matter’ at all but is in fact a fairly solid clue that space-time itself preceded gravity in the formation of this universe.,,, Perhaps they could verify this hypothesis by developing a corresponding entropic measure from what we now know so as to see if it matches expectations of the posit???

    Evolution is a Fact, Just Like Gravity is a Fact! UhOh!
    Excerpt: The results of this paper suggest gravity arises as an entropic force, once space and time themselves have emerged.
    http://www.uncommondescent.com.....fact-uhoh/

    Entropy of the Universe – Hugh Ross – May 2010
    Excerpt: Egan and Lineweaver found that supermassive black holes are the largest contributor to the observable universe’s entropy. They showed that these supermassive black holes contribute about 30 times more entropy than what the previous research teams estimated.
    http://www.reasons.org/entropy-universe

  4. 4
    Graham says:

    I find these articles (popular at UD) disquieting because behind it there seems to be an unpleasant thrill that Science has ‘failed again’.

    Sure, somebody did an experiment, and it failed to detect anything, and sure, if such failures persist, some theory may have to be modified, but if we dont try, we will never make progress. At least Science is having a go.

  5. 5
    tragic mishap says:

    Dark energy and dark matter are both fudge factors.

    Here’s some more predictions for you:

    1. The existence of the Higgs boson will be disconfirmed.

    2. Despite this, string theorists will abandon string theory over their dead bodies.

  6. 6
    Frost122585 says:

    Dark matter is just an idea that seems like it can maybe explain a lot of things, and to its benefit it also has the feature of not being empirically verifiable, hence “dark” (invisable) matter.

    It is interesting how much of evolution and physics is this way. For example the Big Bang is not empirically verifiable but we rely on things like back ground radiation, the red shift and doppler effect etc. to support the theory’s legitimacy.

    Dark matter is about 30 levels less verified than the big bang- and to whatever extent the theory of dark matter is likely- it seems materialists are always far too eager to try and extend its existence ten times more than it is warranted by the evidence so as to explain every metaphysical mystery in the universe.

    So what we have with these theories is a lot of inferring and extrapolation. Why then is ID excluded from science when so much of science is strictly inferential? We cannot find empirical verification of the designer itself, just like we cant see the dark matter, or the big bang, yet the evidence is clearly there to support the theory of ID as well as the others to SOME extent…

  7. 7
    bornagain77 says:

    semi OT:

    When I heard the learn’d astronomer;
    When the proofs, the figures, were ranged in columns before me;
    When I was shown the charts and the diagrams, to add, divide, and
    measure them;
    When I, sitting, heard the astronomer, where he lectured with much
    applause in the lecture-room,
    How soon, unaccountable, I became tired and sick;
    Till rising and gliding out, I wander’d off by myself,
    In the mystical moist night-air, and from time to time,
    Look’d up in perfect silence at the stars.
    Walt Whitman

    All of Creation – MercyMe (with Lyrics)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7bD02ZmTqk

Leave a Reply