Is it possible that "dark matter" is a side effect?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the nature of dark matter and whether its effects could be attributed to shortcomings in general relativity rather than actual matter. Participants question if dark matter is a placeholder for an unknown aspect of the universe and seek proof of its existence. The Bullet Cluster is highlighted as evidence supporting dark matter, suggesting it behaves like a particle rather than a modification of gravity. Current theories of modified gravity have been explored but fail to align with observational data as effectively as the dark matter hypothesis. Overall, the consensus leans toward dark matter being a real phenomenon rather than a mere theoretical construct.
SCSF
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
How do we know that the effects of "dark matter" are not merely a failure of some other aspect of general relativity? Could it be that it is not matter at all but instead some placeholder for another aspect of our universe, or is it proven that there must be some form of 'matter', so to speak? If so, what is this proof?

I understand that there is some forms of radiation which we predict results from dark matter interactions, and I admit I don't have full understanding of this topic, but I am curious as to why dark 'matter' is a popular theory, and not some other explanation for the discrepancies we observe.

Thanks.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Google 'Bullet Cluster'.

The implications should convince you that DM is most likely a real phenom of some sort of particle. While not definitive, it all but rules out 'tweaks to gravity' theories.
 
Theories with modified gravity have been considered by the scientific community for quite some time. At the moment, they simply do not fit observations as well as the dark matter hypothesis.
 
Publication: Redox-driven mineral and organic associations in Jezero Crater, Mars Article: NASA Says Mars Rover Discovered Potential Biosignature Last Year Press conference The ~100 authors don't find a good way this could have formed without life, but also can't rule it out. Now that they have shared their findings with the larger community someone else might find an explanation - or maybe it was actually made by life.
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
Back
Top