Why Does Dark Matter Appear Scale Variant in Galactic Rotation?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter StationZero
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the apparent scale variance of dark matter's effects in galactic rotation compared to its influence within the solar system. Participants explore the implications of dark matter density and distribution at different cosmological scales, questioning why dark matter does not seem to affect the solar system's rotation similarly to how it influences galaxies and larger structures.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that galaxies rotate as if they are on a plate, contrasting this with the differential rotation observed in the solar system, raising questions about the scale variance of dark matter's effects.
  • Another participant suggests that the solar system's density is much greater than that of the surrounding galaxy, implying that the thin distribution of dark matter results in negligible gravitational effects within the solar system.
  • A different viewpoint emphasizes that while dark matter's influence may be weak in the solar system, it plays a significant role in the dynamics of galaxies, local groups, and superclusters, questioning the completeness of the explanation regarding scale variance.
  • One participant highlights the vast difference in scale between the solar system and galaxies, arguing that this scale difference is crucial to understanding the varying effects of dark matter.
  • Another participant provides a reference to a paper measuring local dark matter density, suggesting that the estimated total dark matter within the solar system is significantly less than the mass of Pluto, which may explain its minimal observable effects.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of dark matter's scale variance, with no consensus reached on the reasons behind its apparent effects in different contexts. Some agree on the importance of scale, while others question the sufficiency of current explanations.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on current estimates of dark matter density and the unresolved nature of how these densities translate into gravitational effects at various scales.

StationZero
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
One of the principal arguments for the existence of dark mater is, of course, that galaxies rotate as if they were on a plate as opposed to the differential rotations of planets in our solar system.

My question is, if the entire galaxy is infused with this dark matter, why does it seem to be scale variant. That is, why doesn't the dark matter in our solar system cause it to rotate as if on a plate just as the larger galaxy does as a whole?
 
Space news on Phys.org
StationZero said:
One of the principal arguments for the existence of dark mater is, of course, that galaxies rotate as if they were on a plate as opposed to the differential rotations of planets in our solar system.

My question is, if the entire galaxy is infused with this dark matter, why does it seem to be scale variant. That is, why doesn't the dark matter in our solar system cause it to rotate as if on a plate just as the larger galaxy does as a whole?
The solar system is far, far more dense than most of the galaxy, and the dark matter is spread thinly throughout. So there just isn't enough dark matter in the solar system for its gravitational effect to be measurable.
 
Hmm, I'm surprised nobody else has commented on this thread. Thank you Chalnoth for that explanation but hopefully someone can offer an extended analysis. First of all, not only does this thinly spaced dark matter motivate a star at the edge of our galaxy to rotate at an absurdly high velocity, it also holds together our local group and also our local supercluster. This doesn't seem to be a trival effect. So, to eschew the effect of dark matter in our solar system for its lack of huzpah is well noted but it doesn't explain the apparent scale invariance of its effects at several other cosmological scales. Perhaps a reference would help me.

In any case, one would think that, however weak it may comparably be relative to larger scales, we might be able to detect some contribution of dark matter in the orbit of planets in our solar system?
 
StationZero said:
Hmm, I'm surprised nobody else has commented on this thread. Thank you Chalnoth for that explanation but hopefully someone can offer an extended analysis. First of all, not only does this thinly spaced dark matter motivate a star at the edge of our galaxy to rotate at an absurdly high velocity, it also holds together our local group and also our local supercluster. This doesn't seem to be a trival effect.
It's just a matter of scale. The galaxy is big, and clusters and superclusters are far, far larger.

The milky way, for instance, is tens of thousands of light years across, and you have to go a few hundred to a few thousand light years before the dark matter density becomes really apparent.

By contrast, our own solar system is less than 0.001 light years across (this is about the limit of the Kuiper belt, the large collection of icy objects out beyond the planets that supplies the inner solar system with the occasional comet). This is a massive difference in scale, and that makes a huge difference in the effect of dark matter.

This recent paper measures the local density of dark matter:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.4033

To put the density in more understandable terms, this means that we currently estimate the total density of dark matter within the solar system (out to 50AU, the extent of the Kuiper belt) to be about 10^{17}kg. That may sound like a lot, but Pluto's mass is 10^{22}kg. So the total dark matter in the Solar System is estimated to be about one ten thousandth the mass of Pluto, spread over the whole 50AU out to the edge of the Kuiper belt.
 
Thanks again, Chalnoth, I'll check that out.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K