Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Articles on dark matter, dark energy etc.


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Christopher

Christopher
  • Demigod
  • 32,914 posts

Posted 17 April 2003 - 01:57 AM

Here are some cool items I found while wandering around Space.com:

http://www.space.com...d_030415-1.html

http://www.space.com...ion_030410.html

http://www.space.com...d_010322-1.html

http://www.space.com...ter_030212.html

http://www.space.com...ter_000718.html
"You don't use science to show that you're right, you use science to become right." -- xkcd

"The first man to raise a fist is the man who's run out of ideas." -- "H. G. Wells," Time After Time


Written Worlds -- My homepage and blog
Facebook Author Page

#2 Kosh

Kosh

    Criag Ferguson For President!

  • Islander
  • 11,149 posts

Posted 17 April 2003 - 04:26 AM

Thanks! I had a question after the first one, but the last one went into it in detail.











:nervousninja:  :Oo:  < "I think we need to keep a look out for Dark Matter.
Can't Touch This!!

#3 Kevin Street

Kevin Street
  • Islander
  • 6,256 posts

Posted 17 April 2003 - 06:49 AM

Thanks for the links, Christopher. :)

I'm gonna look at 'em later, after finals. Don't want to do too much thinking all at once. ;)
Per aspera ad astra

#4 the Pill

the Pill

    I really need to come here more often.

  • Islander
  • 1,046 posts

Posted 17 April 2003 - 01:36 PM

Being fairly ignorant of dark matter and dark energy, I will be looking forward to reading these.  Thanks to Christopher to posting these.

However, I'm leary about the inherent flaw of the argument regarding it's possible existence.  That being, "Well, we have calculated the total possible amount of matter and energy and our number falls quite a bit short.  Ergo, there must be matter and energy that we can't detect by current methods, we'll call this stuff dark matter and dark energy respectively."

I keep wondering if there isn't some scientist out there somewhere doing the calculation on the amount of matter and energy saying to himself,  "This should work out, why doesn't this work out...  Oh, I forgot to carry the two."

-the Pill

#5 Christopher

Christopher
  • Demigod
  • 32,914 posts

Posted 17 April 2003 - 03:18 PM

the Pill, on Apr 17 2003, 05:20 AM, said:

However, I'm leary about the inherent flaw of the argument regarding it's possible existence.  That being, "Well, we have calculated the total possible amount of matter and energy and our number falls quite a bit short.  Ergo, there must be matter and energy that we can't detect by current methods, we'll call this stuff dark matter and dark energy respectively."

I keep wondering if there isn't some scientist out there somewhere doing the calculation on the amount of matter and energy saying to himself,  "This should work out, why doesn't this work out...  Oh, I forgot to carry the two."

-the Pill
Well, certainly there have been alternative hypotheses advanced to explain the discrepancy.  A theory called Modified Newtonian Dynamics, or MOND, proposed that our equations of gravity were incorrect, and that if you adjusted them the right way it would explain the observed movements of matter on galactic fringes without the need for dark matter.  However, recent observations have provided hard data which are consistent with the dark-matter model and inconsistent with MOND.
"You don't use science to show that you're right, you use science to become right." -- xkcd

"The first man to raise a fist is the man who's run out of ideas." -- "H. G. Wells," Time After Time


Written Worlds -- My homepage and blog
Facebook Author Page

#6 the Pill

the Pill

    I really need to come here more often.

  • Islander
  • 1,046 posts

Posted 17 April 2003 - 03:59 PM

Ah, my physics/astonomy kung fu is weaker than yours.

I think I remember reading something about MOND six months back and wondered why there weren't more people jumping to their feet and pointing at the equation.  It seems to me that this was being over-looked.  I thought that there was some acceleration of the universe equation that physicists thought was bunk, because it didn't fit into the current cosmology, or am I still thinking about MOND too?

I also read the articles, and if the gas surrounding our galaxy is 150 times hotter than the sun, we ain't going anywhere soon are we?  Figuratively speaking of course.

#7 Christopher

Christopher
  • Demigod
  • 32,914 posts

Posted 17 April 2003 - 04:41 PM

the Pill, on Apr 17 2003, 07:43 AM, said:

I also read the articles, and if the gas surrounding our galaxy is 150 times hotter than the sun, we ain't going anywhere soon are we?  Figuratively speaking of course.
Hotter, yes, but much less dense, so it imparts much less actual heat to any given object.  The solar wind which fills interplanetary space is hot enough to be ionized, but so diffuse that it imparts virtually no heat to any planet or spacecraft immersed in it.  And this intergalactic gas they're talking about is probably much less dense than that.
"You don't use science to show that you're right, you use science to become right." -- xkcd

"The first man to raise a fist is the man who's run out of ideas." -- "H. G. Wells," Time After Time


Written Worlds -- My homepage and blog
Facebook Author Page


0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users