A Does WHIM solve the dark matter problem?

AI Thread Summary
Recent observations of the warm-hot intergalactic medium (WHIM) have advanced, but it is insufficient to account for the total amount of dark matter needed in the universe. WHIM is observable in galaxy clusters via X-rays, yet it constitutes only a small fraction of the mass required to maintain the stability of these clusters. The consensus is that WHIM cannot solve the dark matter problem due to its limited quantity. Further evidence, such as the bullet cluster, directly contradicts the idea that WHIM could fulfill the role of dark matter. Thus, WHIM does not provide a viable solution to the dark matter issue.
fabinuk
Messages
1
Reaction score
1
TL;DR Summary
Does the Observation of whim can solved the problem of dark matter
Direct Observation of Whim (The warm–hot intergalactic medium) has known a lot progress recently. Does whim could be enough to amount to the quantity of dark matters in the universe, therefore solving the dark matter problem? If not, why?
 
Space news on Phys.org
Short answer: no, for many reasons. First, there isn't enough of it. We can see this matter quite clearly in galaxy clusters through x-rays, and it only amounts to a small fraction of what is required to hold the galaxy clusters together.

There's lots of other reasons why this can't work, but that's the start of it. I recommend looking up the bullet cluster for a pretty direct observational example that rules this out directly.
 
  • Like
Likes ohwilleke, vanhees71, jim mcnamara and 2 others
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