How can dark matter explain the need for modifications to the CDM model?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mesogen
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dark matter Matter
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of dark matter and its implications for the Cold Dark Matter (CDM) model. Participants explore how dark matter interacts with regular matter and the gravitational forces involved, questioning its presence in celestial bodies and its role in structure formation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that dark matter should be present throughout the solar system and possibly at the centers of planets and stars, given its gravitational interactions.
  • Others argue that dark matter cannot accumulate at the center of planets because it does not interact electromagnetically and thus cannot shed kinetic energy, leading to a "slingshot" effect as it passes through.
  • A participant questions whether a large clump of dark matter could cause observable perturbations in a planet's orbit during its interaction.
  • Some participants assert that dark matter does clump together gravitationally, albeit less effectively than regular matter, and that it plays a crucial role in the formation of cosmic structures.
  • There are references to computer simulations that illustrate dark matter's clumping behavior and its significance in structure formation.
  • One participant raises the point that there is no direct observational evidence of dark matter, suggesting that its existence is inferred from simulations that require additional mass to match observed patterns.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the behavior and implications of dark matter, with no consensus reached on its properties or the validity of the CDM model. Disagreement exists regarding the observational evidence for dark matter and its role in gravitational simulations.

Contextual Notes

Some claims about dark matter's behavior depend on specific assumptions about gravitational interactions and the nature of energy dissipation. The discussion includes references to ongoing debates in cosmology regarding the interpretation of observational data and the adequacy of current models.

  • #31
George Jones said:
Because of friction, a black hole is more of en effective target for ordinary matter than it is for dark matter. See

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=2000505#post2000505.

But if there is 5x as much dark matter, it should maybe compete to some degree with regular matter. I wonder if anyone has estimated the ratio of matter to dark matter that would tend to find its way into a black hole.
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #32
From the other thread that you linked to (where I also see that, yes, someone has estimated the ratio):

oldman said:
This is why, I think, in the link you gave, Peirani and Pacheko say that "dark matter particles constitute a collisionless fluid".

So, if the particles of dark matter cannot collide at all, then can they superimpose will nilly? As in, dark matter particles can be in the same place at once, or a trillion of them can also occupy the same space all at once? There is absolutely no "collision" whatsoever? Wow.
 
  • #33
mesogen said:
As in, dark matter particles can be in the same place at once, or a trillion of them can also occupy the same space all at once? There is absolutely no "collision" whatsoever? Wow.

1 Pauli exclusion principle can be applicable to these particles if they are fermions, so 'trillions' can not gather in the same place

2 Collision is possible but the probability is extremely low
As I understand, the collision occurs at the Sypersymmetry breaking energy
Such virtual particles are very rare.
 
  • #34
Nereid said:
...

Here's what my copy of the paper says, in its last para:
"..."
May I ask how you read "major patch" into this?


quoting from the above paper
"Even though some of the puzzles discussed here may be resolved by more complete observations or astrophysical
effects, the possible requirement of more fundamental modifications of the CDM model remains valid.
...
This improved effectiveness could possibly be provided by a mild
evolution of Newton’s constant G (higher G at z > 0.5)"

in the first bold I read "major patch" and in the second bold I read "lets rewrite the more fundamental laws of physics".
An hipotetical evolution of G, of T, of alfa, of L and may others and combinations of those constants or magnitudes have been tried. I've found pappers on G and on alfa.

Triyng to mess with G without providing a mechanism for such change is data fit. But until now the pursue has been unfruitfull.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
912
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
6K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
7K