Verification of Dark Matter Finding
Many scientists are looking for dark matter and upon its discovery cosmologists will have difficulty verifying the finding is the 'real thing by testing it to verify it.
excerpt from Nobel Prize site ===
Using theoretical tools and calculations, [James] Peebles was able to interpret trace radiation from the infancy of the universe and discover new physical processes, the Nobel academy said.
He showed that matter readily seen around us, be it pebbles, mountains or stars, actually make up only 5%, with the rest made up of dark energy and dark matter.
He was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics 2019 for claiming 95% of the universe is dark or undetectable.
He did not define any of this 95% or how to investigate and develop an understanding of any of it.
excerpt from CERN ===
Many theories say the dark matter particles would be light enough to be produced at the LHC. If they were created at the LHC, they would escape through the detectors unnoticed. However, they would carry away energy and momentum, so physicists could infer their existence from the amount of energy and momentum “missing” after a collision. Dark matter candidates arise frequently in theories that suggest physics beyond the Standard Model, such as supersymmetry and extra dimensions. One theory suggests the existence of a “Hidden Valley”, a parallel world made of dark matter having very little in common with matter we know. If one of these theories proved to be true, it could help scientists gain a better understanding of the composition of our universe and, in particular, how galaxies hold together.
Let's suppose CERN actually detects an event with something "missing"
After CERN or anyone else does an experiment with a result assumed to be this undefined dark matter then the finding must be verified to be the 'real thing' but that test is undefined.
The first test should be confirming this finding solves the notable problem of a spiral galaxy rotation curve which is not as expected.
Dark matter is the accepted explanation for this deviation.
When the spiral galaxy model integrates this dark matter finding then the model's predicted rotation curve should now match the observed curve.
This integration will be difficult but cosmology has an alternative that I will mention shortly.
The reason why integration will be difficult is the galaxy model assumes the stars are in orbits like planets in our solar sysystem. All the planets have at their ellipse's focus the barycenter of the solar system. Even the Sun wobbles around this barycenter. Dark matter is assumed to change the matter/gravity distribution for the barycenter to still work for the system.
The barycenter wobble the basis for one of the methods used to detect exoplanets around other stars ===
Doppler spectroscopy (also known as the radial-velocity method, or colloquially, the wobble method) is an indirect method for finding extrasolar planets and brown dwarfs from radial-velocity measurements via observation of Doppler shifts in the spectrum of the planet's parent star.
Cosmologists had a choice when scientists observed the M31 rotation curve could be explained by the galactic magnetic field meaning the stars were not moving like planets driven only by gravity around the solar system barycenter.
A web search for "Magnetic Fields and the Outer Rotation Curve of 31" should find the 2010 paper from Astrophysical Journal Letters.
A youtube search for the same title gets the author's video presentation.
Upon the M31 finding cosmologists could abandon the barycenter assumption and replace it with the magnetic field.
Cosmologists chose instead to disregard that pivotal finding and stay with dark matter and the barycenter model. Updating this model requires a substantial effort.
The barycenter model must get the dark matter finding integrated with the 1 trillion stars assumed to be in M31. The galaxy model must make its predictions based on each star's rotation in M31 about the barycenter, or this simultaneous center of gravity of everything in the spiral galaxy disk (with the inclusion of dark matter). The motion of all stars could be affected also by globular clusters outside the disk. This galaxy model must be tested to verify the updated barycenter model correctly predicts the observed rotation curve.
There are two alternatives:
1) spend very much effort trying to make the barycenter model work and verify the galaxy model is correct though it should be obvious it is probably impossible given the barycenter model is simply just wrong for a galaxy, or
2) admit the spiral galaxy rotates primarily by the galactic magnetic field and discard the barycenter model for a spiral galaxy because clearly the barycenter model applies only to planetary systems.
Unfortunately this means cosmologists must admit they were just wrong about needing dark matter in spiral galaxies for so many years, almost a century.
Cosmologists have accepted an undefinable dark matter for so long I expect they will select (1) and continue without changing wrong assumptions for a long time even with such dire consequences for actual progress in understanding galaxies. I expect this to continue until the other fundamental mistake called dark energy gets addressed as well.
Eventually the barycenter model for a spiral galaxy rotation must be discarded.
Perhaps I did not need to post this to EUT but I cannot know how much everyone knows about the consequences of dark matter.
Hit back to go to previous page in history.
Here is the list of topics in this Cosmology Topic Group .
Ctrl + for zoom in; Ctrl - for zoom out ; Ctrl 0 for no zoom;
triple-tap for zoom to fit; pinch for zoom change; pinched for no zoom