Invisible Dark Matter: Scientists have come up empty-handed.

Scientists looking for invisible dark matter can't find any
July 21, 2016 by Seth Borenstein

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

In this Oct. 29, 2013, photo Richard Gaitskell, study co-investigator from Brown University, explains an experiment being conducted deep in an abandoned gold mine in Lead, S.D., to search for elusive and mysterious dark matter. Scientists have come up empty-handed in their latest effort to find elusive dark matter, the plentiful stuff that helps galaxies like ours form. For three years scientists have been looking for dark matter nearly a mile underground. But they announced Thursday, July 21, 2016, that despite sensitive equipment working better than expected they couldn't find the invisible particles that make up four fifths of the universe's matter.(AP Photo/Chet Brokaw, File)
Scientists have come up empty-handed in their latest effort to find elusive dark matter, the plentiful stuff that helps galaxies like ours form.



Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2016-07-scientists-invisible-dark.html#jCp

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Remember programming an orbital simulator in BASIC, or FORTRAN or Java? And the first hundred times time you compiled and ran the thing, you hoped to see some nice coloured dots moving in stately circles arond the big central dot, but instead the dots immediately shot off the edge of the screen like a bat out of hell, never to be seen again, and you eventually bowed to inevitability, and opened up the code and added a constant that tweaked the simulated gravity until the little dots would at least stay on the screen for longer than a tenth of a second, and you didn't like having such an abitrary fudge factor in a program that should run gracefully but you left it in anyway because what-the-heck-it-worked?

Yeah.

I think Dark Matter is God's fudge factor.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

So what else is new ? Here is your big theory going down the drain, The best in science don't think you know, but keep working and thank God for revealing us your wisdom.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Seems a bit of an ascerbic response to the mere posting of an article.
Pretty sure Pad isn't actually the guy in the pic there...

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Perhaps you are unaware that DM comes in two types, WIMPS and MACHO's.
And of course it does not mean that anything has gone down the drain, nor is it my theory. It means we keep looking.
It's though comforting that any time you reply to any scientific post, you actually support exactly what most here already know about yourself.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

So what, that means your religion does not allow any other other view .
Speaking on scientific posts , Most of the scientific posts discussed hear are unreachable, in other words not verifiable if you don't have the billion dollars equipment . So you are building giants mirror , there come Hubele , so what are you getting out of it, beside Papers that do not mean much for a common man

 

You're a bit confused about what religion is.
And you're a bit confused about what scientific research is.
And, frankly, you're a bit confused about the topic of this thread.

There is plenty of science that can be done in one's own backyard, if one is of a mind - albeit it is not going to be a lot of astrophysics. I think you'll agree that, to do astrophysics science, it's going to have to be well, astro-y and physics-y. Since you or I don't have a billion dollars, it won't be us. But others can.

Would you prefer to have never explored atomic structure because electron-microscope are beyond your personal budget?

What I find strange as that, why this is even being discussed. If you are as anti-science as this post indicates, why are you frequenting a science forum to read articles about all this unreachable no-good-for-the-common-man science?

Do you go to the Dolphin-sex forum and tell them that Dolphin-sex is bad?

 

Dupe

 

...so..."Dark Matter"... "remains"..."elusive"...?

...article from University College London : https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/0716/210716-dark-matter-particle

...official website of the Large Underground Xenon dark matter experiment.: http://luxdarkmatter.org/

...the new research results from the detector's final 20-month run from October 2014 to May 2016 : http://lux.brown.edu/LUX_dark_matte...erSearchResult_332LiveDays_IDM2016_160721.pdf

from : http://www.sciforums.com/threads/wo...r-detector-completes-search-and-finds.157222/ ...yesterday at 10:16 PM...

 

Yes.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

Why don't you tell us in your own words what is of interest to you in those articles?

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

What needs to be said, has been said and quite admirably.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

The heliocentric solar system remained elusive for 1500 years or thereabouts.

 

What's your point ?

1. That this state of art DM detector is not suitable for DM detection ?

2. That our resources to find the truth are of the order of that period when heliocentric system could not have been verified ?

3. You dismiss this finding as premature or conspiracy laden ?

4. You are of the opinion that DM is there because it was postulated by mainstream guys while this experiment has few cranks as team members ?

 

DM was a fudge stuff from day one..
It required fudging on quantum as well as on distribution.

Unverifiable physics lead to such monsters. So the galaxy speed distribution anomaly requires new thought or MOND will be accepted ?

 

Yes, DaveC426913, from reading the articles that I Posted, at least for the Scientist conducting the Large Underground Xenon dark matter experiment...it seems that..."Dark Matter"... "remains"..."elusive"...?

I am not "trying to say" anything at all...
I simply Posted the Links to what the actual University College London and Scientists that conducted the Large Underground Xenon dark matter experiment were actually "saying" - not merely "trying to say".

1.) - The University College London described the results of an experiment that so far had failed to produce the results that they had hoped for...
2.) - I simply provided a Link to the official website of the Large Underground Xenon dark matter experiment for any Members that were Truly interested in the LUX "search" for "Dark Matter".
3.) - In addition I also provided a Link to the .pdf of the new research results from the Large Underground Xenon dark matter detector's final 20-month run from October 2014 to May 2016...again for the benefit of any Members that might be Truly interested.

So, perhaps, DaveC426913, you could tell us, in your own words, why you did not make the same query about the OP?

 

Just havn't found it as yet. simple, easy peasy.

Of course the heliocentric system could have been verified in those days if they would have thought long enough and hard enough about it.
You see it was another example of religion rearing its f%$#&^% ugly head and dismissing the science

Why would I do that? I leave the conspiracies to our illiterate trolls and cranks.

I certainly do not believe our Sun is anything else then part of a unitary system, and obviously the evidence for DM
http://chandra.harvard.edu/press/06_releases/press_082106.html

NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter
For Release: August 21, 2006

NASA RELEASE 06-297

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

X-ray/Optical Composite of 1E 0657-56
Press Image and Caption
Dark matter and normal matter have been wrenched apart by the tremendous collision of two large clusters of galaxies. The discovery, using NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory and other telescopes, gives direct evidence for the existence of dark matter.

"This is the most energetic cosmic event, besides the Big Bang, which we know about," said team member Maxim Markevitch of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Mass.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Gravitational Lensing Explanation
These observations provide the strongest evidence yet that most of the matter in the universe is dark. Despite considerable evidence for dark matter, some scientists have proposed alternative theories for gravity where it is stronger on intergalactic scales than predicted by Newton and Einstein, removing the need for dark matter. However, such theories cannot explain the observed effects of this collision.

"A universe that's dominated by dark stuff seems preposterous, so we wanted to test whether there were any basic flaws in our thinking," said Doug Clowe of the University of Arizona at Tucson, and leader of the study. "These results are direct proof that dark matter exists."

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Animation of Cluster Collision
In galaxy clusters, the normal matter, like the atoms that make up the stars, planets, and everything on Earth, is primarily in the form of hot gas and stars. The mass of the hot gas between the galaxies is far greater than the mass of the stars in all of the galaxies. This normal matter is bound in the cluster by the gravity of an even greater mass of dark matter. Without dark matter, which is invisible and can only be detected through its gravity, the fast-moving galaxies and the hot gas would quickly fly apart.

The team was granted more than 100 hours on the Chandra telescope to observe the galaxy cluster 1E0657-56. The cluster is also known as the bullet cluster, because it contains a spectacular bullet-shaped cloud of hundred-million-degree gas. The X-ray image shows the bullet shape is due to a wind produced by the high-speed collision of a smaller cluster with a larger one.

 

Yep, originally a fudge factor, but we now know better according to the evidence.

 

Desire to troll far exceeds the desire to learn...

 

OK. I wasn't sure.

He posted a science news article. That is self-explanatory.
It was not clear what exactly your response was intended to convey in the context of the OP. It is generally problematic to reply in a thread with just links and no contextual explanation.

But it's cleared up. No harm, no foul.

 

Unfortunately, our observations require some sort of explanation. They can't be swept away.
DM is by no means a sure thing; it's just the best working model we currently have.