| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Sam Wormley" |
| Date: |
08 Nov 2007 09:07:07 PM |
| Object: |
Cosmic collision explained without dark matter |
Cosmic collision explained without dark matter
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/31728
The Bullet Cluster -- a spectacular collision between two clusters of
galaxies -- is often cited as the best evidence to date for the
existence of dark matter. But according to John Moffat at the
University of Waterloo and Joel Brownstein at the Perimeter Institute
for Theoretical Physics in Ontario, Canada, the nature of the
collision can be explained using normal matter only -- that is, if
you\u2019re willing to accept their theory of modified gravity, or
"MOG" (Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. online early article).
Lying over three billion light years away, the Bullet Cluster
consists of a small subcluster ploughing through the centre of a
larger one at speeds of six million miles per hour. During such a
collision the stars pass each other by with little effect while the
intervening hot gas is slowed down.
To see how mass is distributed in the Bullet Cluster, scientists
examine how it behaves as a "gravitational lens" by bending the path
of passing light. In 2006, astrophysicists noted that X-ray light
emitted from very distant galaxies travelling through the Bullet
Cluster to Earth was bent more by the small galaxies at the sides
rather than the hot gas dominating the centre, which represents most
of the normal matter. This implied that there is an extra mass
component that is not associated with normal matter, leading many
physicists to hail it as strong evidence for dark matter. Assuming
conventional theories of gravity are true, dark matter is predicted
to comprise about 95% of all gravitating mass in the universe.
Moffat and Brownstein, however, argue MOG can provide a more natural
explanation by removing the need to invoke mysterious dark matter.
Essentially MOG adds extra terms to Einstein\u2019s theory of
gravitation -- general relativity -- that allow the gravitational
constant G to vary across space and time. The researchers modelled
the hot gas distribution using their MOG theory, and found the
gravitational force would be stronger as you move away from the
centre of the Bullet Cluster, explaining the stronger lensing seen at
the edges.
"Whenever dark matter is said to dominate a system, in MOG, the extra
gravity exerts a strong and measurable influence based only on the
observable [normal] matter," explained Brownstein. The researchers
have used MOG before to explain the dynamics of hundreds of galaxies
and clusters. They also argue MOG could account for the apparent
anomalous deceleration of the Pioneer space probes launched in the
early 1970s, and even for dark energy -- the strange energy
responsible for the accelerated expansion of the universe.
Others are more sceptical. "I most definitely do not agree with their
conclusions," Doug Clowe at Ohio University, one of the researchers
who took the original gravitational-lensing data from the Bullet
Cluster, told physicsworld.com. "Their lensing reconstruction of the
gas mass does not fit the lensing reconstruction of the cluster.
Their claim is that the difference can be explained by the lensing
from the cluster galaxies, but nowhere in the paper do they
demonstrate this."
.
|
|
| User: "Eric Gisse" |
|
| Title: Re: Cosmic collision explained without dark matter |
08 Nov 2007 09:17:01 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 03:07:07 GMT, Sam Wormley <swormley1@mchsi.com>
wrote:
Cosmic collision explained without dark matter
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/31728
The Bullet Cluster -- a spectacular collision between two clusters of
galaxies -- is often cited as the best evidence to date for the
existence of dark matter. But according to John Moffat at the
University of Waterloo and Joel Brownstein at the Perimeter Institute
for Theoretical Physics in Ontario, Canada, the nature of the
collision can be explained using normal matter only -- that is, if
you\u2019re willing to accept their theory of modified gravity, or
"MOG" (Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. online early article).
Lying over three billion light years away, the Bullet Cluster
consists of a small subcluster ploughing through the centre of a
larger one at speeds of six million miles per hour. During such a
collision the stars pass each other by with little effect while the
intervening hot gas is slowed down.
To see how mass is distributed in the Bullet Cluster, scientists
examine how it behaves as a "gravitational lens" by bending the path
of passing light. In 2006, astrophysicists noted that X-ray light
emitted from very distant galaxies travelling through the Bullet
Cluster to Earth was bent more by the small galaxies at the sides
rather than the hot gas dominating the centre, which represents most
of the normal matter. This implied that there is an extra mass
component that is not associated with normal matter, leading many
physicists to hail it as strong evidence for dark matter. Assuming
conventional theories of gravity are true, dark matter is predicted
to comprise about 95% of all gravitating mass in the universe.
Moffat and Brownstein, however, argue MOG can provide a more natural
explanation by removing the need to invoke mysterious dark matter.
Essentially MOG adds extra terms to Einstein\u2019s theory of
gravitation -- general relativity -- that allow the gravitational
constant G to vary across space and time. The researchers modelled
the hot gas distribution using their MOG theory, and found the
gravitational force would be stronger as you move away from the
centre of the Bullet Cluster, explaining the stronger lensing seen at
the edges.
GR + a scalar degree of freedom mimicks a variational big G.
This is merely pushing the problem back another step. Ok - you have
gotten rid of dark matter in one special case but now you had to
impose a scalar field to do it.
Where'd the scalar field come from?
[...]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Traveler" |
|
| Title: Re: Cosmic collision explained without dark matter |
08 Nov 2007 09:55:53 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 18:17:01 -0900, Eric Gisse
<jowr.pi.nospam@gmail-nospam.com> wrote:
Where'd the scalar field come from?
Out of your *****? ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha...
Louis Savain
Why Software Is Bad and What We Can Do to Fix It:
http://www.rebelscience.org/Cosas/Reliability.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: Cosmic collision explained without dark matter |
08 Nov 2007 10:03:02 PM |
|
|
"Totally queer arse humper" <traveler@noasskissers.net>
stated his heartfelt desire and declared his homosexuality
in news:3r4ki3539l40nrg6f1b0v2kec49jpng7tl@4ax.com...
: ahahaha... Bend over, Wabi. I'll show you some coordinates. ahahaha...
: AHAHAHA... ahahaha...
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gisse" |
|
| Title: Re: Cosmic collision explained without dark matter |
08 Nov 2007 10:55:01 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 21:55:53 -0600, Traveler
<traveler@noasskissers.net> wrote:
On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 18:17:01 -0900, Eric Gisse
<jowr.pi.nospam@gmail-nospam.com> wrote:
Where'd the scalar field come from?
Out of your *****? ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha...
I wonder if he actually types this or copies and pastes it from a text
file.
Louis Savain
Why Software Is Bad and What We Can Do to Fix It:
http://www.rebelscience.org/Cosas/Reliability.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "Traveler" |
|
| Title: Re: Cosmic collision explained without dark matter |
08 Nov 2007 11:26:15 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:55:01 -0900, Eric Gisse
<jowr.pi.nospam@gmail-nospam.com> wrote:
I wonder if he actually types this or copies and pastes it from a text
file.
ahahaha... Who are you talking while referring to me in the third
person? You're kissing ***** again, Gisse? ahahaha... AHAHAHA...
ahahaha...
Louis Savain
Why Software Is Bad and What We Can Do to Fix It:
http://www.rebelscience.org/Cosas/Reliability.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: Cosmic collision explained without dark matter |
09 Nov 2007 02:50:27 AM |
|
|
"Totally queer arse humper" <traveler@noasskissers.net>
stated his heartfelt desire and declared his homosexuality
in news:3r4ki3539l40nrg6f1b0v2kec49jpng7tl@4ax.com...
: ahahaha... Bend over, Wabi. I'll show you some coordinates. ahahaha...
: AHAHAHA... ahahaha...
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Traveler" |
|
| Title: Re: Cosmic collision explained without dark matter |
08 Nov 2007 09:22:27 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 03:07:07 GMT, Samantha wrote:
Moffat and Brownstein, however, argue MOG can provide a more natural
explanation by removing the need to invoke mysterious dark matter.
Essentially MOG adds extra terms to Einstein\u2019s theory of
gravitation -- general relativity -- that allow the gravitational
constant G to vary across space and time.
It's a big improvement over all that dark matter voodoo crap. However,
where is the physics? Twidling terms to make the equations agree with
observation is hardly physics. It's still voodoo crap and not much
better than Ptolemaic epicycles. Just like Newtonian and Einsteinian
physics before it, it explains nothing. But then again, physicists
have always had an affinity for voodoo Star-Trek physics. What with
time travel, motion in spacetime, black holes, wormholes, quantum
computers, virtual particles, trillions of parallel universes and all
that other worthless crap? ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha...
Louis Savain
Why Software Is Bad and What We Can Do to Fix It:
http://www.rebelscience.org/Cosas/Reliability.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: Cosmic collision explained without dark matter |
08 Nov 2007 09:28:35 PM |
|
|
"Totally queer arse humper" <traveler@noasskissers.net>
stated his heartfelt desire and declared his homosexuality
in news:3r4ki3539l40nrg6f1b0v2kec49jpng7tl@4ax.com...
: ahahaha... Bend over, Wabi. I'll show you some coordinates. ahahaha...
: AHAHAHA... ahahaha...
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "malibu" |
|
| Title: Re: Cosmic collision explained without dark matter |
08 Nov 2007 09:44:56 PM |
|
|
On Nov 8, 9:22 pm, Traveler <trave...@noasskissers.net> wrote:
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 03:07:07 GMT, Samantha wrote:
Moffat and Brownstein, however, argue MOG can provide a more natural
explanation by removing the need to invoke mysterious dark matter.
Essentially MOG adds extra terms to Einstein\u2019s theory of
gravitation -- general relativity -- that allow the gravitational
constant G to vary across space and time.
It's a big improvement over all that dark matter voodoo crap. However,
where is the physics? Twidling terms to make the equations agree with
observation is hardly physics. It's still voodoo crap and not much
better than Ptolemaic epicycles. Just like Newtonian and Einsteinian
physics before it, it explains nothing. But then again, physicists
have always had an affinity for voodoo Star-Trek physics. What with
time travel, motion in spacetime, black holes, wormholes, quantum
computers, virtual particles, trillions of parallel universes and all
that other worthless crap? ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha...
Louis Savain
Why Software Is Bad and What We Can Do to Fix It:http://www.rebelscience.org/Cosas/Reliability.htm
If the big G is a function
of the density of the starfields, or galaxy fields,
then it is being produced by the presence
of matter. It is something being put out by all matter,
and absorbed by all matter.
I like it.
John
.
|
|
|
| User: "Traveler" |
|
| Title: Re: Cosmic collision explained without dark matter |
08 Nov 2007 10:02:13 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 08 Nov 2007 19:44:56 -0800, malibu <vegan16@accesscomm.ca>
wrote:
If the big G is a function
of the density of the starfields, or galaxy fields,
then it is being produced by the presence
of matter. It is something being put out by all matter,
and absorbed by all matter.
So? Where is the physics? Something being put out by matter is not
physics. It's chicken *****. It's like saying that a magnetic field is
put out by a magnet. Big fucking deal. Physics is about particles,
their properties and their interactions. If you cannot explain
phenomena in terms of these things, you ain't doing physics. You're
just jerking off in public.
I like it.
I know you do. You like crap. ahahaha... AHAHAHA... ahahaha...
Louis Savain
Why Software Is Bad and What We Can Do to Fix It:
http://www.rebelscience.org/Cosas/Reliability.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: Cosmic collision explained without dark matter |
08 Nov 2007 10:07:55 PM |
|
|
"Totally queer arse humper" <traveler@noasskissers.net>
stated his heartfelt desire and declared his homosexuality
in news:3r4ki3539l40nrg6f1b0v2kec49jpng7tl@4ax.com...
: ahahaha... Bend over, Wabi. I'll show you some coordinates. ahahaha...
: AHAHAHA... ahahaha...
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|