Dark matter scaffolding of universe detected for the first time

https://ns.umich.edu/new/releases/20623-dark-matter-scaffolding-of-universe-detected-for-the-first-time[/SIZE]

ANN ARBOR, Mich.—Scientists have, for the first time, directly detected part of the invisible dark matter skeleton of the universe, where more than half of all matter is believed to reside.

The discovery, led by a University of Michigan physics researcher, confirms a key prediction in the prevailing theory of how the universe’s current web-like structure evolved.

The map of the known universe shows that most galaxies are organized into clusters, but some galaxies are situated along filaments that connect the clusters. Cosmologists have theorized that dark matter undergirds those filaments, which serve as highways of sorts, guiding galaxies toward the gravitational pull of the massive clusters. Dark matter’s contribution had been predicted with computer simulations, and its shape had been roughed out based on the distribution of the galaxies. But no one had directly detected it until now.

“We found the dark matter filaments. For the first time, we can see them,” said Jörg Dietrich, a physics research fellow in the University of Michigan College of Literature, Science and the Arts. Dietrich is first author of a paper on the findings published online in Nature and to appear in the July 12 print edition.

Dark matter, whose composition is still a mystery, doesn’t emit or absorb light, so astronomers can’t see it directly with telescopes. They deduce that it exists based on how its gravity affects visible matter. Scientists estimate that dark matter makes up more than 80 percent of the universe. To “see” the dark matter component of the filament that connects the clusters Abell 222 and 223, Dietrich and his colleagues took advantage of a phenomenon called gravitational lensing.

The gravity of massive objects such as galaxy clusters acts as a lens to bend and distort the light from more distant objects as it passes. Dietrich’s team observed tens of thousands of galaxies beyond the supercluster. They were able to determine the extent to which the supercluster distorted galaxies, and with that information, they could plot the gravitational field and the mass of the Abell 222 and 223 clusters. Seeing this for the first time was “exhilarating,” Dietrich said.

“It looks like there’s a bridge that shows that there is additional mass beyond what the clusters contain,” he said. “The clusters alone cannot explain this additional mass,” he said.

Scientists before Dietrich assumed that the gravitational lensing signal would not be strong enough to give away dark matter’s configuration. But Dietrich and his colleagues focused on a peculiar cluster system whose axis is oriented toward Earth, so that the lensing effects could be magnified.

“This result is a verification that for many years was thought to be impossible,” Dietrich said.

The team also found a spike in X-ray emissions along the filament, due to an excess of hot, ionized ordinary matter being pulled by gravity toward the massive filament, but they estimate that 90 percent or more of the filament’s mass is dark matter.

The researchers used data obtained with the Subaru telescope, operated by the National Astronomical Observatory of Japan. They also used the XMM-Newton satellite for X-ray observations. This work is funded by the National Science Foundation and NASA. Other contributors are from the Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology at Stanford University; Ohio University; Max Planck Institut für extraterrestrische Physik in Germany; The University of Edinburgh and the University of Oxford.

The paper is titled “A filament of dark matter between two clusters of galaxies.” Read the text at https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v487/n7406/full/nature11224.html.

ummm, why copypasta if you’re going to post the link?
EDIT: Pretty awesome btw, I wonder what their plans are from here.

Some have a fear of links. (Linkophobia )

I was under the impression that this ‘gravitational lensing’ effect has been known for quite a while. Is this actually the first attempt at calculating a precise gravitational field value for a specific cluster? Or is the first to feature a large enough amount of collected data to make it credible?

I wonder what can you do with the Dark Matter, or the Anti-Matter?

I found some of this in my garden last week.

I’ve never quite fully understood the theory of dark matter. Does it actually reside in our universe? Is it possible to find some of this in my garden, like Dr. Karamazov said, or is it in a parallel universe or some such? Or does it just exist in space? And what’s the difference between dark matter and dark energy, or is there any? I’ll probably end up researching this myself but feel free to answer me anyway!

This is actually a useful resource for beginning to understand strange concepts: https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter

The problem is, up until this report nobody knew. We still might not know if this report hasn’t been verified yet. Dark Matter and Dark Energy were just names given to unknown quantities of the universe. Dark Matter is for the unaccounted for gravity in the universe, and Dark Energy for the unaccounted for expansion beyond the Big Bang.

Which begs the question, how is this the first “confirmation” of dark matter when they’re simply observing what dark matter was created to explain?

Hmm, I see, that is a useful feature.

I can’t help but wonder then if the Higgs boson is in any way related to this. If the Higgs boson normally attracts to matter to give it mass, and it is freakish hard to detect, then perhaps it is possible that there are massive amounts of Higgs bosons unattached to any matter out in space, thus responsible for dark matter?

@TIKI: exactly. As I understand it, this ‘discovery’ is just* a set of measurements and subsequent calculations concerning the amount of dark matter within a certain galaxy cluster. Since the results fall within the predicted (and not so narrow, really) margin, this is considered a confirmation of the theory.
One must bear in mind that it takes an infinite amount of positive results to prove a theory and just one negative to disprove it.

*not to demean the amount of work put into this research.

You are jumping to conclusions. It was never said that dark matter was scaffolding between galaxies when the term was coined. It was just used as a placeholder term for unknown gravity in the universe. It could have been any one of dozens of other theories. Dark matter had legitimate scientists considering god particles, alternate universes, and all sorts of other whacked out stuff. They actually didn’t know what or where it was until now, assuming this has been peer reviewed and verified by multiple scientists.

That’s not whacked out. The God Particle, or Higgs Boson, has been verified.

https://forums.blackmesasource.com/showpost.php?p=468364&postcount=67

The term ‘alternate universe’ is a general term that could mean different things.

Do you mean the many-worlds interpretation of wavefunction and wavefunction collapse (or no collapse, in this case)?

Or do you mean the idea of multiverse, which speculates that since the universe is a quantum event, and it is, then there could be others in the same manner? That’s not verifiable, so it doesn’t fall within the realm of physics. It’s just a speculative notion, but it’s not an insane notion. And it’s not verifiable, so it’s not something that is or can be addressed by physics.

Because of the context, gravitation, I think you might be referring to multi-dimensions. That’s String Theory - superstrings and M-theory. String theory isn’t whacked out. Some string theory, like M-theory, is incomplete, and some aspects are untestable at this time, other aspects are not and have been verified. I mention string theory because that’s what I think you might be referencing here, but multi-dimensions isn’t exclusive to string theory, it’s necessary to a lot of physics. There’s nothing whacked out about it. You can’t have a lot of necessary wavefunction equations without multi-dimensions, so you’d have to throw away just about all of physics since the 19th century.

The gravity is not unknown. It’s observable. It’s the mass that hasn’t been observed.

No - mass. And the mass is ‘accounted for’, it’s source has not been observed.

No - acceleration. The expansion of the universe is understood. It’s the acceleration that’s not understood. And the acceleration is observed.

The interesting aspect of this, the acceleration, is that it may mean that General Relativity breaks down at the cosmological level, as Newtonian Physics breaks down at the Quantum level. But that’s not a bridge we’ve come to yet.

You are right, I meant gravity sources, not the actual gravity.

And I meant all of the multiverse, and many-world choices that you labled. I have heard them all for explanations to dark matter.

But either way, dark matter was coined long before they knew what it was.

And when I said “expansion beyond the big bang” I couldn’t think of the word acceleration, which is what I meant by “beyond” the big bang. The big bang should have sped us off at a certain speed, and we are exceeding that, so I said, “beyond”.

OK - the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is a mainstream theory in physics. It’s not fringe. It wasn’t created to explain dark matter.

So, my impression from comments ITT is that some people have this idea that dark matter is this strange stuff, but really it’s just a term for stuff we can’t see. Yeah, it’s unknown, because we don’t know what it is exactly. But that doesn’t mean that it’s some weird stuff. It’s really just stuff that’s dark - not luminescent and not reflecting energy, so we can’t see it to determine what it is.

It’s like if you step on something while walking across a dark room. You don’t know what it is, but you certainly wouldn’t think that it must be some strange thing that you’ve never encountered. For now, it’s dark matter. We know it’s there, we just can’t see it because it’s dark.

That’s what I think TGP was getting at with the ‘placeholder’ comment - that dark matter isn’t a discrete, ‘substance’, but rather a generic term for stuff we can’t see. Is that what you were saying TGP? Because that’s spot-on.

We still don’t know what it is. These guys just got a tiny glimpse. It’s a big deal because it is an observation of dark matter and verifies the existence of dark matter. But it doesn’t tell us what it is. It’s cool for the guys that do that kind of stuff - they’ve made a big step toward how dark matter can be observed and can move forward now.

Right - I gotcha. Yeah, the universe is accelerating. That’s really interesting for a lot of different reasons.

No, not really. It is so not understood that they haven’t even classified it as matter or energy. It is just an unknown source of gravity in the universe that they gave a name to. It could have been called Fred for all anyone cared at the time (and by anyone I meant Neil Degrasse Tyson).

You said “No” and then essentially said “Yes”.

You said it isn’t an exotic substance. I am saying it could be because we don’t know.

Yes, it is likely to be exotic, but not in the sense of a weird substance.

About 80% of dark matter is non-baryonic and 20% is MACHO, which is baryonic and is described by the standard model. The standard model can’t describe non-baryonic dark matter - that’s the real problem. The missing mass problem will be explored through SUNY unified with the standard model through Higgs. SUNY, or supersymmetry, describes exotic particles.

So, yes, you can say that dark matter is exotic, not in the sense of being weird or whacked out, but in the sense that it’s description will require the use of particles outside the standard model.

Founded in 2004, Leakfree.org became one of the first online communities dedicated to Valve’s Source engine development. It is more famously known for the formation of Black Mesa: Source under the 'Leakfree Modification Team' handle in September 2004.