Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

The Distribution of Dark Matter in Spirals

  1. Oct 6, 2005 #1

    Garth

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    The Distribution of Dark Matter in Spirals
    Perhaps another 'epicycle' is required?

    Or is the Halo baryonic after all?

    Just a thought.

    Garth
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 6, 2005 #2

    turbo

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Perhaps no Halo is required, baryonic or otherwise. Why should we believe that matter or "no-matter" (non-baryonic DM) follows the complex distribution rules required to keep GR gravity somewhat predictive on galactic scales? Besides, once you have massaged the distribution of invisible matter to fix galactic rotation curves, you still have to explain how "no-matter" manages to distribute itself "just so" to produce the too-strong lensing and excess binding energy exhibited by clusters. Occam's Razor is getting awfully rusty.
     
  4. Oct 6, 2005 #3

    SpaceTiger

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    This problem has been known for a long time, but there is no consensus on the solution as of yet. There have been some pretty crazy (but not crackpotty) things proposed, like in the paper discussed here. Another solution that's a bit simpler is just self-interaction of the dark matter, but this is still being debated.
     
  5. Oct 6, 2005 #4

    turbo

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    If you will consider substituting "quantum vacuum" for "dark matter", I think we can reach common ground very quickly.

    If your library has a copy of "The Philosophy of Vacuum", edited by Saunders and Brown, grab it and read pages 13-20. The article is "On the Ether" by Einstein. It was written in 1924, only 4 years after his Leyden address. In this article, Einstein explains that a dynamic polarizable ether is required for GR and that the ether must have physical properties that are "conditioned" by the matter embedded in it and that the ether in turn confers gravitation and inertia upon the embedded matter. He also says that logically, the gravitational ether and the EM ether are the same. He explains that the apparent separation of these ethers in GR is attributable more to an "imperfection in our theoretical edifice than to a complex structure of reality itself."

    Einstein was uncomfortable with the strangeness of quantum theory, and by 1952 when Dirac proposed a quantum-compatible ether, he may have been past the point of flexibility and openness on the subject. The fact of the matter is that the quantum vacuum has the required properties to perform as Einstein's GR ether (gravitational, inertial, with EM properties) not the least of which is that it is invisible (dark). All we need is a polarizing mechanism. My vote goes for a failure of the Weak Equivalence Principle, scheduled to be tested in CERN's Athena project. Other people studying the vacuum think the polarizing mechanism will turn out to have an EM basis, analogous to the phase-synchronization action of the Van der Waals dispersive force.
     
    Last edited: Oct 6, 2005
  6. Oct 7, 2005 #5

    Chronos

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2015 Award

    I think not. Modern observational evidence appears to trump 50 year old observations and the weird science theories they spawned.
     
  7. Oct 7, 2005 #6

    Hans de Vries

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    I was reading this in the latest CERN Courier:

    http://www.cerncourier.com/main/article/45/8/8

    (About a claim that proper application of GR instead of Newtonian gravity
    produces the right speed distributions without dark matter)



    Pre-print: http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0507619


    Regards, Hans
     
  8. Oct 7, 2005 #7

    Garth

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Thank you Hans for that important link. If their analysis stands up then this would radically change ideas of DM galactic halos.

    However DM is still required in IGM to virialise galactic clusters and produce the observed lensing events.

    Garth
     
  9. Oct 8, 2005 #8

    Chronos

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member
    2015 Award

    Thanks for the link, Hans. But, I see serious problems with that model. Specifically, what happens to cluster dynamics? That appears to pretty much blow all the fairly decent N-body simulations right out of the water.
     
  10. Oct 30, 2005 #9

    Nereid

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    So, what do the observers have to say? How well do the high quality rotation curve results match various models?

    Stacy McGragh's recent paper is, IMHO, worth a read; the abstract gives a hint of what's inside:
    Enjoy! :approve:
     
  11. Oct 30, 2005 #10

    SpaceTiger

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Do you mean Stacy McGaugh? :smile:

    Although I respect her opinion, I think this observer will only give you one part of the story, given that she's at one of the homes of MOND (UMD) and has been pushing it for quite some time.

    Personally, I'm not all that surprised that MOND fits rotation curves well -- the theory was created to solve that problem, even inventing new physics to do so. Dark matter theorists face the tougher challenge of both fitting the curves and explaining how dark matter came to be distributed in the way that it is.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?