GALAXIES - what was 'extra' so visible matter was presumed missing?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter stephenn
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Galaxies Matter
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of dark matter and its role in explaining the discrepancies observed in the rotational speeds of galaxies, particularly spiral galaxies. Participants explore the calculations that suggest visible matter is insufficient to account for these speeds, leading to the inference of additional unseen mass. The conversation includes references to alternative theories such as Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND) and seeks to identify established research on the topic.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that the rotational speeds of stars in the outer regions of galaxies exceed what would be expected based solely on visible matter, suggesting the presence of dark matter.
  • Others reference gravitational lensing as a verification method for the existence of dark matter.
  • There is a request for established papers that detail the calculations leading to the conclusion of missing visible matter.
  • Some participants mention MOND as an alternative to dark matter, proposing that it modifies Newtonian dynamics to explain rotation curves, though it is acknowledged that MOND has limitations in certain contexts.
  • One participant points out that MOND cannot fully explain phenomena such as gravitational lensing or large-scale structure formation, indicating its applicability may be restricted.
  • There is a discussion about the compatibility of MOND with dark matter, with some asserting that any MOND theory requiring dark matter contradicts its foundational premise.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views regarding the necessity and implications of dark matter versus MOND. While some support the dark matter hypothesis, others advocate for MOND, leading to an unresolved debate over which model better explains the observations.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference various articles and papers, indicating a diversity of sources and perspectives. The discussion highlights the ongoing challenges and uncertainties in understanding the dynamics of galaxies and the nature of dark matter.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those studying astrophysics, particularly in the areas of galaxy dynamics, dark matter research, and alternative gravitational theories.

stephenn
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Hello
Dark matter is presumed... to balance the sums... as visible matter doesn't work out (apparently) to a high enough value...

... What part of the calculations was evaluated as being too high... to warrant the need for more matter to be 'somewhere'.

Thanks for thoughts
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
The rotational speed of the stars in the outer reaches of the galaxy is WAY off based on just the normal matter in the galaxy ... There has to be a huge amount of mass in addition to normal matter and that's how dark matter was inferred. It has been further verified by gravitational lensing.
 
OK thanks, 'phinds'...

so... the rotational speed of stars in the outer reaches = faster than the quantity of mass, seen to be around... (providing gravitational force) to balance the sums... to hold them in their place, as observed.

* ... anyone know established papers with these sums?... (who concluded missing visible matter)


I've found another topic on these boards which is most interesting and have placed the link... should anyone else just reading this thread, wish to also consider:
Rotational Speed:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=497992

* ... is it established, what gives a galaxy (spiral one)... it's rotational speed
* ... is there a top paper on rotational speeds (spiral galaxies)

cheers
 
Here is a decent article though its more a review paper on LCDM measurements.

http://www.intechopen.com/download/pdf/18737

What your interested will be better answered here.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_rotation_curve

It will cover the effect dark matter has on rotation curves better
along with this page
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter
 
Last edited:
Thanks for links, 'Mordred'...

Your links are helpfull... the first article one especially... rotational velocity in relation to radius distance etc

I've found another topic on these boards which is most interesting and have placed the link... should anyone else just reading this thread, wish to also consider:
simple explanation for rotation of spiral galaxy:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=690481&highlight=galaxy+rotation

* ... am increasingly interested in honing in on the specific most established (agreed so far) actual cause of the velocity itself... in the rotation (for a spiral galxy)

cheers
 
Mond

You probably know MOND. The author Moti Milgrom invented the possibility to explain the rotation curves with a modification of Newtonian dynamics as an alternative to DM. As the author says himself, it is a phenomenological observation only. But it is still in use! This year a team from germany/Bonn explained the bahaviour of satelite galaxies with MOND where the DM theory failed. I believe there is invisible mass. But who knows, maybe there is "something" to MOND.

Original Publication: Milgrom, 1983, The Astrophysical Journal, free from arxiv or google
 
Philosopha said:
You probably know MOND. The author Moti Milgrom invented the possibility to explain the rotation curves with a modification of Newtonian dynamics as an alternative to DM. As the author says himself, it is a phenomenological observation only. But it is still in use! This year a team from germany/Bonn explained the bahaviour of satelite galaxies with MOND where the DM theory failed. I believe there is invisible mass. But who knows, maybe there is "something" to MOND.

Original Publication: Milgrom, 1983, The Astrophysical Journal, free from arxiv or google

MOND does provide a good fit to a certain class of gas-rich galaxies. The problem is MOND by *itself* does not seem to work in all situation: fitting CMB data for example. For more, see http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2011/02/26/dark-matter-just-fine-thanks/.
But of course that is not saying modified gravity is ruled out!
 
Philosopha said:
You probably know MOND. The author Moti Milgrom invented the possibility to explain the rotation curves with a modification of Newtonian dynamics as an alternative to DM. As the author says himself, it is a phenomenological observation only. But it is still in use! This year a team from germany/Bonn explained the bahaviour of satelite galaxies with MOND where the DM theory failed. I believe there is invisible mass. But who knows, maybe there is "something" to MOND.

Original Publication: Milgrom, 1983, The Astrophysical Journal, free from arxiv or google

while MOND does have good results at the smaller dwarf galaxy scale. It seriously lacks on average galaxy rotation curves.
Also MOND cannot explain gravitational lenses or early large scale structure formation.
In some specific examples MOND does work better than LCDM dark matter however that's more due to our lack in our knowledge of dark matter distributions.
Several MOND articles I have read include dark matter though
I would have to remember the
articles and locations of them
 
Any MOND theory that requires dark matter defeats the entire premise.
 
  • #10
stephenn said:
Thanks for links, 'Mordred'...

Your links are helpfull... the first article one especially... rotational velocity in relation to radius distance etc

I've found another topic on these boards which is most interesting and have placed the link... should anyone else just reading this thread, wish to also consider:
simple explanation for rotation of spiral galaxy:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=690481&highlight=galaxy+rotation

* ... am increasingly interested in honing in on the specific most established (agreed so far) actual cause of the velocity itself... in the rotation (for a spiral galxy)

cheers

I fully agree Chronos it does contradict the MOND premise.

That aspect is discussed in this recent LCDM and MOND review of challenges and difficulties faced in both models.

Coincidentally it will also provide a direction of current researches and challenges in our understanding of the dark sector.
Further reading can be found via the articles reference papers.
Some of the reference papers are worth reading.

The article is also handy in that it covers rotation curves of spiral galaxies. However I will not state which is the most agreed upon
lol. My opinion is biased towards the LCDM paradigm.

http://arxiv.org/abs/1301.0623
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 82 ·
3
Replies
82
Views
12K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 72 ·
3
Replies
72
Views
11K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K