Space

8746 readers

85 users here now

Share & discuss informative content on: Astrophysics, Cosmology, Space Exploration, Planetary Science and Astrobiology.

Rules

Be respectful and inclusive.
No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
Engage in constructive discussions.
Share relevant content.
Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
Use appropriate language and tone.
Report violations.
Foster a continuous learning environment.

Picture of the Day

The Busy Center of the Lagoon Nebula

Related Communities

🔭 Science

🚀 Engineering

🌌 Art and Photography

Other Cool Links

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

“We need to consider alternatives to dark matter that better explain cosmological observations” (see comments for discussion) (theconversation.com)

submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

13 comments fedilink hide all child comments

edit: title was modified to call attention to the discussion in the comments

The article is by Rajendra Gupta, Adjunct professor Physics @ L’Université d’Ottawa/University of Ottawa

First few lines:

Do constants of nature — the numbers that determine how things behave, like the speed of light — change over time as the universe expands? Does light get a little tired travelling vast cosmic distances? It was believed that dark matter and dark energy explained these cosmological phenomena, but recent research indicates that our universe has been expanding without dark matter or dark energy.

Doing away with dark matter and dark energy resolves the “impossible early galaxy problem,” that arises when trying to account for galaxies that do not adhere to expectations regarding to size and age. Finding an alternative to dark matter and energy that complies with existing cosmological observations, including galaxy distribution, is possible.

“We need to consider alternatives to dark matter that better explain cosmological observations” (see comments for discussion)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago (11 children)

Astronomers are surprised to learn that many observations show a complete absence of dark matter or dark matter-deficient structures. This leads one to question its existence.

This is evidence for dark matter, not against it.

Relevant xkcd

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Always a relevant xkcd

[–] [email protected] -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

If you knew it was bullshit, why did you post it? Shame on you

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Well I didn't, I'm not an expert in this topic. The article was written by an adjunct professor at uOttawa, so I judged it higher than the other pop science articles I come across.

I considered deleting the post, but since I still don't know if the content is completely false (disinformation) or just academic discussion, and since the comment section has good discussion, I left it up.

I can edit the title if that helps, maybe

"We need to consider alternatives to dark matter that better explain cosmological observations" (see comments for discussion)

I didn't know about this particular xkcd till now, and it's funny because of how relevant it is to this exact situation

load more comments (8 replies)