[The Scientist (OP)]

We know that:
Dark matter = mass
Dark matter ≠ matter
Dark matter ≠ electrical magnetic

There is a 77% prove it exist (if I remebered correctly).

So SPECIFICALLY, what is DARK MATTER? I hope this puzzles you as much as I do.  []

[Chemistry4me]

I hope this puzzles you as much as I do.  []

Well if you type 'dark matter' into the search bar you get 16 pages of results!

[The Scientist (OP)]

I hope this puzzles you as much as I do.  []

Well if you type 'dark matter' into the search bar you get 16 pages of results!

I infer that it is something hard to explain?

[graham.d]

Nobody knows what dark matter is. Its presence may be deduced from the gravitational effects it has, specifically on the rotation of galaxies and clusters of galaxies. The velocities of stars in the galaxies (or of galaxies in clusters), in relation to the distance from the centre of rotation seems only to be explicable if there is a sphere (not a disc) of gravitationally attractive matter around the galaxy (or cluster). This matter is not visible (does not interact electromagnetically) hence the name "dark matter". I think it also possible to conclude it doesn't interact with itself very much either or it would have probably formed into a disc also.

[Bill S]

Could it be a re-incarnation of the aether, or even the crystal spheres?

[imatfaal]

Could it be a re-incarnation of the aether, or even the crystal spheres?

No it's less unknown than that - whilst we do not know what it actually comprises, we are pretty damn certain that it exists.  Google 'bullet cluster' which provided the first evidence for physical dark matter; before that dark matter had arisen as an inference from anomalous rotational calculations of galaxies and extreme gravitic lensing results.

IIRC correctly; the bullet cluster is in the midst of a galactic collision, (we can ignore the stars which even in a cluster are too far apart too acutally collide with any regularity and make up only a small part of the mass) the interacting and luminous baryonic matter (dust/gas etc) of each cluster has collided,is clumped, very hot, and giving off x-rays, whereas the weakly interacting ie dark matter has passed through.  The baryonic matter makes up a significant proportion of the ordinary matter of a galaxy or cluster - and yet when using gravitational lensing to determine where the mass of the cluster is situated, it is not where the dust is all colliding, it is way out with the non-interacting stars.  The hypothesis is that the stars and the dark matter of the galaxies passed straight through each other and the dust crashed into each other; the fact that the dominant part of the mass of the galaxies has followed the non-interacting part lends great credence to the idea that much of each galaxy is composed of weakly interacting darkmatter.

[lennonmichael]

Galaxies in our universe is not composed exclusively of things we can see, but it is held together by the gravity of dark matter itself. We should not assume that everything is visible and should not be surprised by this discovery.

[graham.d]

I'm not wholly sure I agree that we should be "not surprised". I think it depends on how much you know. People with a good and reasonably up-to-date knowledge of particle physics and quantum mechanics may not be surprised as they know that there are particles that exist that do not interact with ordinary matter very much and are charge neutral (like a neutrino for example). And people with very little knowledge of any physics may not be surprised, as they would not know what to expect or have much knowledge of preceding ideas of how the universe might work. However most of those people, with a little knowledge of such things, did find it surprising. It was not surprising that there was matter we could not see but that there was a huge amount of it and that it was clearly not like the ordinary matter we are used to (but merely cold) but actually non-interacting.

[The Scientist (OP)]

It all seems interesting. Do you think we're able to find dark matter on Earth? Welcome lennonmichael btw.  []

[graham.d]

It all seems interesting. Do you think we're able to find dark matter on Earth? Welcome lennonmichael btw.  []

I think there is a good chance. It seems well distributed. The problem will be more in detecting it rather than there actually none being here.

[rwjefferson]

dark matter.101

1. What else did einstein not imagine?
2. What property do firmament and sphere and epicycle upon epicycle and warp and string of spacetime fabric hold in common?
3. Is geometry the same as force?

...So SPECIFICALLY, what is DARK MATTER? ...

Dark Matter is a Name ...for the quantum particles that constitute spacetime aether.
Atomic Matter is a State ...of the electromagnetic particles that constitute earth's molecular atomsphere.

Could it be a re-incarnation of the aether, or even the crystal spheres? 

4. Aether is not disproved.
Don't get me started on propagation of dogma by holy science authority. -Doh. Too Late. Again.

It all seems interesting. Do you think we're able to find dark matter on Earth?

Interesting does not come close to render the justice of seeing something once again for the very first time.

5. Stand on a scale; look up.
Measure the relative aether wind. Or not. As you wish.
Imagine the eye of a cyclone reduced to a singular point. Better still, look up through the eye of hubble; try to find the only one. Or not. As you wish.

6. The force of all and everything is inertial differential.
7. Space is all so fluent.
8. Bernoulli predicts topspin lift. Really.

Kind and well reasoned questions and comments are all ways greatly appreciated.

We don't need to think more, we need to think differently.

peace
rwj~

Consider the tail of dark spacetime monkeys. Called by sum as gravitons, they fly and gravitate toward massive spacetime bananas even as they are repulsed by energetic spacetime bananas.

[yor_on]

Take a look here.

"Dark matter: this generally refers to "exotic" non-baryonic matter that interacts only weakly with ordinary matter. While no such matter has ever been directly observed in the laboratory, its existence has long been suspected for reasons discussed in a subsequent page. This form of matter also has no cosmologically significant pressure.. Dark energy: this is a truly bizarre form of matter, or perhaps a property of the vacuum itself, that is characterized by a large, negative pressure. This is the only form of matter that can cause the expansion of the universe to accelerate, or speed up.

[graham.d]

"Dark Matter is a Name ...for the quantum particles that constitute spacetime aether." - rwjefferson.

rwj, you are confusing dark matter with dark energy, I think.

[rwjefferson]

Energy and matter tend to be dark and confusing for those that believe geometry is the same as force. The energy that spins and condenses galaxies into vortices is carried by the aether wind.
 
Energy is equal in verse opposite mass by spacetime constant. Mass is gravity; energy is anti gravity in verse right angle. What happens as countless suns convert immeasurable mass in verse eons of time?
think in verse as in crossing over
by right angle

Please focus just one singular bit closer to the images graven [nofollow] by the foundation of science authority.
.02. What properties do flat and hyperbolic and spherical and epicycle upon epicycle and dark matter upon dark energy hold in common? What is the difference between exotic non-atomic matter and fluxions in verse fluent gravitons?
Is geometry the same as force? Really?

ItS
truth
r~

sum questions answer them selves
even as you are unwilling

[bardman]

Dark matter = mass
Dark matter ≠ matter
Dark matter ≠ electrical magnetic

Dark matter is matter which creates observable gravitational fields. Dark matter is called dark for the reason that it does not "shine," which means that it does not emit or reflect light. Thus, it must act via the weak interactions, I cannot recall the reason it is not baryonic in nature (ergo no strong interactions either). However, the known leptons associated with the weak interaction have been ruled out, much to their minuscule mass. One suggested theory, I first came across in Robert Kirshner's "The Extravagant Universe," is that there are undiscovered particles sitting out there waiting to be discovered. This is a largely improbable theory, due to last century's advancement in particle physics. It is unlikely that we have not found all the stable, relatively massive particles.

[imatfaal]

Dark matter is matter which creates observable gravitational fields. Dark matter is called dark for the reason that it does not "shine," which means that it does not emit or reflect light. Thus, it must act via the weak interactions, I cannot recall the reason it is not baryonic in nature (ergo no strong interactions either). However, the known leptons associated with the weak interaction have been ruled out, much to their minuscule mass. One suggested theory, I first came across in Robert Kirshner's "The Extravagant Universe," is that there are undiscovered particles sitting out there waiting to be discovered. This is a largely improbable theory, due to last century's advancement in particle physics. It is unlikely that we have not found all the stable, relatively massive particles.

Why must it interact through the weak force? - why not just gravitationally? There are thoughts that it could be made up of the super-symmetric partners of our known particles (which must be much more massive).

[bardman]

I had not considered it only interacting via gravitation, although, I cannot think of one particle that does not interact via one of the other three forces. Since the other two were ruled out, I assumed the weak was all that is left. But, you may be right in saying that there are theories along those lines.

I thought that sparticles still interacted through the same forces as their partners. However, I am not very familiar with superpartners and what you're saying may be the case. What are the expected lifetimes on these though? Are there stable configurations?

[imatfaal]

Bardman - the point is, how would we know of the existence of a particle that did not interact via EM/Strong/Weak? . We could only know of if via its gravitational effect- ie we can only detect via interaction.  At present we only have gravitational evidence for dark matter (galactic rotation and light lensing); so without a free-standing theory that requires weakly-interacting massive particles that makes further testable predictions I don't see the reason to postulate anything more.  I think the weak interaction is postulated as it enables the particles to form halos - if no mechanism to remove energy/angular mom then gravity isnt enough to allow formation of clouds/haloes

On the super-symmetric side - I think the postulate mass is so high that they are likely to decay and there is no way we are even close to being able to produce them in the lab to check this out.  But as super-symmetry (acc some theories) must be conserved ie sparticles can only decay to energy and other sparticles - then there is the possibility that there are clouds of these forming at least part of the dark matter halo.  Its all up in tha air and guesswork at present though.

[bardman]

I see what you mean. I think scientists are hoping these particles of dark matter do interact via the weak because we are trying to detect neutrino emissions from the dark matter. I do believe that is one branch of the Antarctica Ice Lab's research, along with cosmic rays.

[kornbredrsqar]

Here's something to ponder, what if we think of dark matter as an ocean of photons and all larger forms of matter are made up of molecules that are soluble and or saturated in them. now let's think about light in the same way we understand sound, it moves through a medium in waves of a presice range of frequencies caused by vibrating molecules ,but as the sound travels the molecules do not , at least not very far and only in a back and forth motion as they are compressed and then expand back to ambient pressures. my theory is this, light waves travel through this vast ocean of photons ,"dark matter" in the same way and the individual particles are compressed and relaxed in these waves of vibration and  these movements are what we perceive as light.