- #1

- 34

- 5

- TL;DR Summary
- Any signs of a factor of two difference between Dark Matter mass calculated using gravitational lensing vs calculated from the virial theorem?

This thought surprisingly came from thinking about the definition of temperature and the symmetry breaking that separated time from temperature. Which led to thoughts about symmetry breaking that separated QM from GR. Which led to to the symmetry breaking that separated dark energy from baryonic matter from dark matter. ie. the fine tuning there may be a result of symmetry breaking rather than just a statistical freak.

Although gravity between baryonic matter and baryonic matter has been confirmed using Parameterized post-Newtonian formalism to agree to high accuracy with General Relativity, I haven't seen evidence confirming that gravity between Dark Matter and baryonic matter acts using General Relativity.

Gravity between DM and baryonic matter could, for instance, act through gravitons in QM rather than through GR. If so, then the DM mass calculated from the virial theorem would differ by a factor of two from that calculated by gravitational lensing. Has this been tested? Any signs of a factor of two difference between Dark Matter mass calculated using different methods?

Although gravity between baryonic matter and baryonic matter has been confirmed using Parameterized post-Newtonian formalism to agree to high accuracy with General Relativity, I haven't seen evidence confirming that gravity between Dark Matter and baryonic matter acts using General Relativity.

Gravity between DM and baryonic matter could, for instance, act through gravitons in QM rather than through GR. If so, then the DM mass calculated from the virial theorem would differ by a factor of two from that calculated by gravitational lensing. Has this been tested? Any signs of a factor of two difference between Dark Matter mass calculated using different methods?