Zeroing in on the Mystery of Dark Matter --"We are on the Verge of Detecting a New Particle of Nature"

 

 

          

 

The galaxies and other structures we see in the universe are made predominantly of undected dark matter. "We are so excited because we believe we are on the threshold of a major discovery," said Michael Turner, director of the Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics at the University of Chicago, at a conference of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). The existence of Dark matter presents a serious threat to the so-called Standard Model of physics mainly because it does not explain gravity.

"On the cosmology side we now understand that this mysterious dark matter holds together our galaxy and the rest of the Universe," said Turner. "And the tantalizing thing on the cosmology side is that we have an airtight case that the dark matter is made of something new... there is no particle in the Standard Model that can account for dark matter."

"The real question is why dark matter has six times the energy that is in ordinary matter," said Lisa Randall of Harvard University. "It could be 10 trillions times bigger... This is an intriguing sign that there is maybe some other interaction we can detect."

The ultimate dark-matter sleuth is the new Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer, also designated AMS-02, a particle physics experiment module aboard the International Space Station (ISS), which captures gamma rays coming from collisions of dark matter particles.

AMS functions by sampling these high-energy particles from deep space. The sensitivity of the AMS is more than 100 to 1,000 times more sensitive than previous instruments. The first results will be published in two to three weeks, according to Samuel Ting, a Nobel laureate and professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) who is the mastermind of the two-billion-dollar project. Its experiments will help researchers study the formation of the universe and search for evidence of dark matter and antimatter.

The device is equipped with over 300,000 data channels that require compression with an on-board supercomputer before the information can be transmitted to Earth. “The space station [AMS device] can detect particles of practically unlimited energy,” Ting says, which means that it can also hunt for proposed galaxies made of the elusive dark matter.

Ting oversees  a 500 member global team of scientist to work on this 1.5 billion dollar project, made possible because US President Barack Obama who proposed to extend the space station for a minimum of 5 years beyond 2015, with an additional budget of 3 billion dollars per year.

In an interview with BBC News Ting stated: “This really is the very first very, very precise particle physics detector. You enter into a totally new domain. It's very hard to predict what you'll find."

Space-based spectrometers are not something new, but this instrument is particularly important because it represents the first one of its type to take a superconducting magnet to low-Earth orbit. The international physics community hopes that, through measurements collected with the AMS, they will be able to answer at least a small portion of yet-unanswered, Universe-related questions that deal with the origins and the future of the cosmos.

Its observations will probably build up on those obtained by the Italian satellite PAMELA, a high-energy particle observer launched in 2006. This observatory has already gathered some interesting leads on pinpointing the first clear pieces of evidence on dark matter, and the AMS will have the ability to either permanently confirm or deny these findings, and the dark matter/dark energy theory as a whole.*

Dark matter makes up about 23 percent of the mass-energy content of the universe, even though we don’t know what it is or have yet to directly see it (which is why it’s called “dark”).

The image above is one of the most detailed maps of dark matter in our universe ever created. The location of the dark matter (tinted blue) was inferred through observations of magnified and distorted distant galaxies seen in this picture.

"Figuring out what is dark matter has become a problem that astrophysicists, cosmologists and particle physicists all want to solve, because dark matter is central to our understanding of the universe," says Michael S. Turner – Rauner Distinguished Service Professor and Director of the Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics at the University of Chicago.

"We now have a compelling hypothesis, namely that dark matter is comprised of WIMPs (Weakly Interacting Massive Particle), particles that don’t radiate light and interact rarely with ordinary matter. After decades of trying to figure out how to test the idea that dark matter is made up of WIMPs, we have three ways to test this hypothesis. Best of all, all three methods are closing in on being able to either confirm or falsify the WIMP. So the stars have truly aligned."

A theoretical cosmologist trained in both particle physics and astrophysics, Michael Turner coined the term “dark energy” and helped establish the interdisciplinary field that combines cosmology and elementary particle physics.

"Ten years ago," Turner says, "I don't think you would've found astronomers, cosmologists, and particle physicists all agreeing that dark matter was really important. And now, they do. And all of them believe we can solve the problem soon. It's wonderful listening to particle physicists explain the evidence for dark matter, and vice versa –astronomers explaining WIMPs as dark matter. "

"As cosmologists," said Rocky Kolb, who studies the application of elementary-particle physics to the very early Universe, and is the co-author with Michael Turner of The Early Universe, the standard textbook on particle physics and cosmology, "one of our jobs is to understand what the universe is made of. To a good approximation, the galaxies and other structures we see in the universe are made predominantly of dark matter. We have concluded this from a tremendous body of evidence, and now we need to discover what exactly is dark matter. The excitement now is that we are closing in on an answer, and only once in the history of humans will someone discover it. "

"Nothing in cosmology makes sense without dark matter, says Turner. "We needed it to form galaxies, stars and other structures in the Universe. And so it's absolutely central to cosmology. We also know that none of the particles known to exist can be the dark matter particle. So it has to be a new particle of nature. Remarkably, our most conservative hypothesis right now is that the dark matter is a new form of matter – out there to be discovered and to teach us about particle physics."

"Dark matter is absolutely central to cosmology, said Turner, "and the evidence for it comes from many different measurements: the amount of deuterium produced in the big bang, the cosmic microwave background, the formation of structure in the Universe, galaxy rotation curves, gravitational lensing, and on and on."

"There is five times more dark matter than ordinary matter, and its existence allows us to understand the history of the universe beginning from a formless particle soup until where we are today," said Turner. "If you said, 'You no longer have dark matter,' our current cosmological model would collapse. We would be back to square one."

"Dark matter particles, or WIMPs," said Turner, "don’t interact with ordinary matter often. It's taken 25 years to improve the sensitivity of our detectors by a factor of a million, and now they have a good shot at detecting the dark matter particles. Because of the technological developments, we think we are on the cusp of a direct detection. Likewise for indirect detection. We now have instruments like the Fermi satellite (the Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope) and the IceCube detector (the IceCube Neutrino Observatory at the South Pole) that can detect the ordinary particles (positrons, gamma rays or neutrinos) that are produced when dark matter particles annihilate, indirectly allowing dark matter to be detected. IceCube is big enough to detect neutrinos that are produced by dark matter annihilations in the sun."

Answering the observation that the dark matter particle might not be detectable, Turner said that for 20 to 30 years, this idea that dark matter is part of a unified theory has been our Holy Grail and has led to the WIMP hypothesis and the belief that the dark matter particle is detectable. "But there’s a new generation of physicists that is saying, 'Well, there's an alternative view. Dark matter is actually just the tip of an iceberg of another world that is unrelated to our world. And I cannot even tell you about that world. There are no rules for that other world, at least that we know of yet.'

Sadly, this point of view could be correct and might mean the solution to the dark matter problem is still very far away, that discovering what dark matter actually is could be 100 years away.

The Daily Galaxy via http://www.kavlifoundation.org and AFP 2013

Image Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/ESA/Institute of Astrophysics of Andalusia, University of Basque Country/JHU

Related articles

"Gravitinos" --Will They Unlock the Mystery of Dark Matter in the Universe?

'Space LHC' to release first results

Dark Matter --Could It Play a Role in Creating Life in the Universe? (2012 Most Popular)

CERN's Research Confirms Existence of Higgs Boson --Will It Lead to a "New Physics"?

Comments

[Jack Butler]

I suggest once again that "dark" matter may be whorls in spacetime, perhaps caused during Rapid Expansion right after the Big Bang. What, did we think Rapid Expansion was perfectly smooth, involved no turbulence?

Since mass curves space, curved space may register as gravitation-producing mass, even though there is no "mass" there in the sense of accumulated particles. This "dark" attraction would gather normal matter the way whirlpools gather leaves and debris.

This may not be the case, but I cannot figure out why the astronomers are so fixated on the idea of "dark" matter being particles. It may be made of WIMPs, in fact, but so far we have absolutely no indication that it is.

What will happen to their thinking if it is discovered that "dark" matter CANNOT be WIMPs?

[Ivar Nielsen]

The scientifical "mystery of dark matter" can only be solved when scientists analyzes the "galactic rotation anomaly" thoroughly.

The formational process in our galaxy is circuital and spherical and therefore all gas and matter and stars is in a fluent motion of mass and weight which logically cannot be subsribed any specific locations in the galaxy.

The galactic rotation anomaly clearly contradicts a "black hole" or a "heavy central object" and logically there is no "dark matter" either.

The only darkness here is the black spots in minds of scientists because they outright failed to analyze the "galactic rotation anomaly".

[Allan W Janssen]

Being new to this whole physics thing, I have to wonder why dark matter is called "WIMPS" when I read articles like this:

"The real question is why dark matter has six times the energy that is in ordinary matter,"

Wouldn't some other name be more appropriate if it has that much energy?

Also, is there any connection between Dark Matter and the Dark Ages?

[J-C]

@Allan - the article clearly states that WIMPs is an acronym for Weakly Interacting Massive Particles. The name has nothing to do with their energy state. WIMPs do not reflect photons (therefore the reason they are 'dark' to us) and hardly interact with regular (baryonic) matter - they are, however, massively energetic.

[Resonanz]

If an instrument is designed to detect a WIMP, and detects a WIMP, that doesn’t necessarily mean WIMPS exist …just that the instrument works.

[Allan W Janssen]

J-C Thank you for enlightening me on such a dark subject!

Rezonanz - That almost makes sense!

[yash]

"The galaxies and other structures we see in the universe are made predominantly of undected dark matter. "We are so excited because we believe we are on the threshold of a major discovery,""

I expect dark matter is a compressed atom structure matter that is when in atoms; electrons, proton and neutron get compressed to become absolute dense. In space dark matters fleet with ultra high velocity.

[Ivar Nielsen]

@Allan
"Dark matter" is an illusion made of cosmologists and astrophycisists and mathematicians who failed to see that the formation in our galaxy is circuital and therefore there cannot be neither a "black hole" nor a "heavy gravity object" in the galactic centre.

- Because of the "galactic rotation anomaly" the scientists "were forced" to ASSUME AN EXTRA FORCE, partly in order to save the assumption of "celestial movement around a gravity centre" and partly to continue with this contradicted "Newtonian law".

It is very obvious that in a fluent galactic circuit of formation of gas and dust, stars and planets, a local heavy gravity force cannot be subscribed to any specific location.

SO: By failing to interpret the galactic rotation anomaly, the scientists have to add an extra assumptive "dark matter" force to the first assumption of a heavy gravity centre which really is contradicted by scientifical measurements and observations.

Links:

http://vixra.freeforums.org/stories-of-creation-the-primeval-toe-t10.html

http://vixra.freeforums.org/gravitational-assumptions-and-confusions-t25.html

Ivar Nielsen
Natural Philosopher

[Ivar Nielsen]

This sentence really says it all:

"The existence of Dark matter presents a serious threat to the so-called Standard Model of physics mainly because it does not explain gravity"

AD: They ASSUME "dark matter" and at the next moment take it for granted - and then they ASSUME a "gravity" which is DIRECTLY CONTRADICTED by the galactic rotation anomaly.

And out of these ASSUMPTIONS they build up a whole "dark issues"-cosmology on pure ASSUMPTIONS, now searching after a "gravity-particle-ghost" they temselves have created by NOT working after strict scientifical rules when something is contradicted.

This is just pure non sense.

[Allan W Janssen]

Ivar, this "galactic rotation anomaly" is making me dizzy!
To throw a bit of Occam into the soup, any form of Universal expansion will result in galactic rotation during formation.
So what's the big deal?

[Ivar Nielsen]

@Allan,

I´m sure the "galactic rotation anomaly" also made all cosmological scientists very dizzy when discovered.

Accordingly to the "laws of celestial movements around a gravity centre", objects should move faster and faster the closer to the centre - but all objects in our galaxy moves at the same orbital velocity in relation to the galactic centre, thus "the galactic rotation anomaly"

That is: This "celestial law" is directly contradicted by observation regarding the galactic movement. This again contradicts a "heavy gravity centre" or a heavy "gravity object" in the middle of our galaxy.

And because of this odd and very unscientifically movement of objects in our galaxy, the scientists meant that without any heavy gravity source in the Milky Way centre, all objects would be slung our of the galaxy which they don’t, and therefore they have to ad a “dark matter” in order to get the cosmic observation to fit to their gravitational hypothesis, which is completely wrong from the very beginning.

Hope this makes it clearer – I almost got dizzy myself when writing this ;-)

[Allan W Janssen]

I'm aware of the argument for dark matter, but what gets me is the decision I now have to make.
Let's see, there is you on the one side.................!
And all those guys on the other side!

[dr burke]

G=Qe*m*c2

Gravity-Quantum entaglement*mass*speed of light(squared)?

[dr burke]

Is the duality of light, a wave and a quantum entangled particle?

[Reg Mundy]

Sorry to butt in on this "galactic rotation anomaly", but isn't it obvious that the galaxy is actually flying apart, there ain't no such thing as gravity, because we and everything else are also "flying apart" (expanding) we do not "perceive" this.
The various attempts to disparage expansion theory contain unwarranted assumptions in their logic, and I can provide a perfectly consistent logical explanation for this theory which is based on exactly the same irrefutable evidence as is used to prove gravity actually exists - i.e. NONE!

[Allan W Janssen]

Reg, I agree!

With a personal example, my waistline has been expanding for years, and I have no idea why.

[Ivar Nielsen]

@Reg Mundy,

I wouldn´t say our galaxy is flying apart, rather that it´s objects are flying in electromagnetic circuits much stronger than "gravity" - and much more logical.

Some says that the (extra) expansion of the universe just origin from the false redshift ideas.

[Reg Mundy]

@Ivar
Stick to your guns, Ivar! I enjoy anybody's theories which cannot be contradicted by the establishment producing evidence discounting them! Unlike their own "true" theories where mounting evidence on the non-functioning aspects occur everywhere with increasing frequency - but they just continue blindly on, sticking to their "religion", looking for gravitons and gravitinos, dark matter, dark energy, etc., etc. They have ignored the galactic rotation anomaly for years, except to produce "tweaks" to the gravitational constant to accomodate it!

[Jaleesa Tenney]

The image above is one of the most detailed maps of dark matter in our universe ever created. The location of the dark matter (tinted blue) was inferred through observations of magnified and distorted distant galaxies seen in this picture.

[Reg Mundy]

@Jaleesa
The "map" as you call it is actually a computer-generated image based on calculations assuming gravitic attraction of "dark matter" to account for light effects, similar to the assumption that "gravitational lensing" takes place. In fact, "gravitational lensing" does not account for observational facts, as per a quote from Evalyn Gates, an astronomer at the University of Chicago, and the author of a great new book on the science of gravitational lensing, "Einstein's Telescope: The Hunt for Dark Matter and Dark Energy in the Universe (Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Powell's)".

"The model of the lens outlines the (projected 2D) mass profile of the cluster – which doesn't seem to agree with numerical simulations for clusters, assuming a standard ΛCDM cosmology. The mass concentration in the center of the cluster is higher than predicted, a result that has also been found for other massive clusters studied with gravitational lensing. This implies that we're either missing some physics in our simulations, or we may need to modify our cosmological model."

See http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2009/07/13/guest-post-evalyn-gates-on-cosmic-magnification-or-invasion-of-the-giant-blue-space-amoebas/#.USYlrB3Gq8A
for the complete article.
So, all this stuff based on gravity is just supposition - gravity doesn't actually exist...

[Ivar Nielsen]

@Reg Mundy,
I totally agree with you that "gravity doesn´t exist". I´ve noticed your book on this issue. I have my explanation of the "feeling of weight on the Earth?" What are your explanation on this?
Regarding "Gravitational Lensing" the scientists just try to connect Einsteins "curvature of space gravity" to this idea. As if space can have any curving qualities itself. In my opinion this is just "refraction of light" just like in our atmosphere when the Sun set and rise.

[Reg Mundy]

@Ivar
Expansion theory. All the refutations I have read for dismissing this theory are riddled with unwarranted assumptions, akin to the "invention" of the mysterious force "gravity" for which there is no solid proof whatsoever.
I can't explain my take on the theory in isolation, it depends on my other theories regarding the nature of time, how matter is created, what momentum is, etc. If I try to explain it in a condensed form it will merely attract the usual howls of derision from the establishment, none of whom are prepared to read and understand the book with an open mind and refute the theories therein with logic and fact.
We must await the results of the gravitic wave detection project (LIGO) in all its re-iterations (I think it is now on Mark III or IV, each costing billions...) which has so far failed to detect any sign of a gravitic wave. In common with projects searching for the graviton, the gravitino, dark matter, etc., we must be keeping thousands of establishment scientists in lucrative work forever, whilst you and I and everyone like us who propose possible alternatives are labelled crackpots.

[Ivar Nielsen]

@Reg,

OK, anyway, my main hypothesis of the “weight feeling on the Earth” is that:

"Gravity" in the Solar System really origin from the "ORBITAL SPEED PRESSURE"

1) The orbital speed of the Earth path around the Sun creates the pressure that creates a force of weight on everything on Earth. This pressure also is measured as the variable "atmospheric pressure" that again is very similar to the "gravity measurements" and “gravity laws”.

2) The Earth rotation creates the daily tide rhythms together with a pressure from the Sun - and the variable pressures is created when the orbital pressure on the Earth is shaded, and not, by the Moon, thus creating the lunar tide rhythmic.

Furthermore: This orbital speed pressure on planets can be used as "gravity assist" for spacecrafts. When spacecrafts enter behind a planet, the spacecraft is shaded by the pressure on the orbital planet and also shaded by the pressure on the spacecraft. This momentary shading of orbital and velocity pressure then gives more speed velocity to the spacecraft.

Read more here: http://vixra.freeforums.org/gravitational-assumptions-and-confusions-t25.html

NB: Without the existence of historical and present crackpots, science has no chances for renewal. It is really a quality mark.

Cheers Ivar

[Tom Barbour]

destiny is density. m=E/√c

[Durgadas Datta]

Read balloon inside balloon theory of matter and antimatter universe ON OPPOSITE ENTROPY PATH producing Dark energy at common boundary by annihilation and injected into both the universes as dark energy published by DURGADAS DATTA in year 2002.He said dark energy is composed of graviton and and anti graviton and recently CERN has found two HIGGS BOSONS which are graviton and antigraviton. More when you read new pear shaped atomic model without strong and weak forces --also published by DURGADAS DATTA.