Why Is Dark Matter Essential for Understanding Gravity in the Universe?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Dark matter is essential for understanding gravity in the universe because the total mass of ordinary matter and photons is insufficient to account for the gravitational forces needed to hold galaxies together, as established by general relativity. Despite the mass-energy equivalence principle (E=mc²), the energy from electromagnetic radiation contributes minimally to gravitational effects. Current theories indicate that dark matter must not possess electric charge, interact weakly with itself and normal matter, and be produced in the right quantities during the early universe. Observations suggest the existence of dark galaxies, such as VIRGOHI 21, which further support the need for dark matter in cosmological models.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of general relativity and its implications for gravity
  • Familiarity with mass-energy equivalence (E=mc²)
  • Knowledge of dark matter properties and its role in cosmology
  • Basic concepts of galaxy formation and structure
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the properties and characteristics of dark matter and its candidates
  • Explore the implications of dark matter on galaxy formation and dynamics
  • Investigate the methods used to detect dark galaxies and their significance
  • Learn about the role of interstellar hydrogen in understanding dark matter interactions
USEFUL FOR

Astronomers, astrophysicists, cosmologists, and anyone interested in the fundamental forces governing the universe and the nature of dark matter.

  • #31
Skolon said:
Very interesting discussion.

But it is something from my previous post that you don't discuss yet: "can we say that it (DM) is different by Dark Energy"?
After my post I found some strange theories based on this idea: "Dark fluid" models.

Are these models accepted by "official science"?
They're considered to be extremely speculative. Nearly all such speculative models turn out to be wrong. But I don't think they're considered ruled out just yet.
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #32
Yes, in the LCDM model, DM and DE behave very differently. DM clusters gravitationally, and indeed this clustering is responsible for the structure we see in the Universe, but DM is also pressure-less.

DE on the other hand does not cluster (it is very close to, or exactly homogeneously distributed) and has significantly negative pressure. This negative pressure is what cause the late time acceleration of the expansion of the Universe.

Now, thinking of alternatives to LCDM there are some attempts to construct single field models in which a single energy term has strange properties that allow it to both cluster on small scales but drive acceleration on large scales. These theories are not yet fully developed (at least as I understand it) in terms of having worked out all the details and implications that such a theory would have on the things we can observe.

There is no such thing as 'official science' but these aren't crackpot theories if that's what you mean. More that they are as yet under-developed possibilities that are being investigated. I don't know a lot about this to be honest, most of what I know comes from a conversation I had for several hours with one of the proponents of this idea. It seemed there were still a lot of details to be worked out before definite model predictions could be made in order to test this against data.

Probably a case of watch this space, though my personal view is that there doesn't seem to be a great motivator for this kind of approach, apart from a desire to simplify the theory by only needing one, rather than two, new unseen forms of energy. To me it seems that the single fluid would need to in fact act in a way that's much more complex and fine tuned that the two fluids we currently put in the model. In any case it's difficult to judge this yet in the absence of more details.
 

Similar threads

  • Featured
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K