Revisiting Dark Matter Estimates in Axially Symmetric Galaxies

AI Thread Summary
The study examines exact stationary axially symmetric solutions of the 4D Einstein equations, focusing on co-rotating pressureless perfect fluid sources relevant to galaxy dynamics and dark matter. It highlights a specific solution that yields an approximately flat rotation curve, revealing that traditional Newtonian methods overestimate the required matter by over 30%. The authors argue that general relativity (GR) effects can account for a significant portion of dark matter, approximately 30%, without resorting to exotic matter or singular disk issues. This approach is considered more plausible than previous analyses, although its effectiveness in large-scale structures remains uncertain. The findings contribute to ongoing discussions about the nature of dark matter in galaxies.
wolram
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Messages
4,410
Reaction score
555
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0602519

Authors: H. Balasin, D. Grumiller
Comments: 11 pages revtex4, 4 eps figures
Report-no: LU-ITP 2006/002

Exact stationary axially symmetric solutions of the 4D Einstein equations with co-rotating pressureless perfect fluid sources are studied. This is of physical relevance for the dynamics of galaxies and questions concerning dark matter. A particular solution with approximately flat rotation curve is discussed in some detail. We find that simple Newtonian arguments over-estimate the amount of matter needed to explain these curves by more than 30%.
 
Space news on Phys.org
That's very interesting. Basically, they've done an analysis similar to that of Cooperstock and Tieu (the "GR accounting for dark matter" folks), but avoiding all of the "exotic matter" and "singular disk" problems. They find that GR effects can account for a small (~30 percent), but non-negligible, fraction of the dark matter. I must admit, it's still surprising to me that GR would be necessary at all in this limit, but I find this result to be much more plausible than the Cooperstock one.
 
Agreed, ST. It is a plausible approach. However, I question how well it would work with large scale structures.
 
Abstract The Event Horizon Telescope (EHT) has significantly advanced our ability to study black holes, achieving unprecedented spatial resolution and revealing horizon-scale structures. Notably, these observations feature a distinctive dark shadow—primarily arising from faint jet emissions—surrounded by a bright photon ring. Anticipated upgrades of the EHT promise substantial improvements in dynamic range, enabling deeper exploration of low-background regions, particularly the inner shadow...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
Title: Can something exist without a cause? If the universe has a cause, what caused that cause? Post Content: Many theories suggest that everything must have a cause, but if that's true, then what caused the first cause? Does something need a cause to exist, or is it possible for existence to be uncaused? I’m exploring this from both a scientific and philosophical perspective and would love to hear insights from physics, cosmology, and philosophy. Are there any theories that explain this?
Back
Top