Dark matter does not emit light and is therefore not visible. I can only image that the colors of the image are false colors which reflect the density of the bridge of dark matter.
Tullio

---

Dark matter is a hypothetical substance that is believed by most astronomers to account for around five-sixths of the matter in the universe. Although it has not been directly observed, its existence and properties are inferred from its various gravitational effects: on the motions of visible matter; via gravitational lensing; its influence on the universe's large-scale structure, and its effects in the cosmic microwave background. Dark matter is transparent to electromagnetic radiation and/or is so dense and small that it fails to absorb or emit enough radiation to be detectable with imaging technology.

The standard model of cosmology indicates that the total mass–energy of the universe contains 4.9% ordinary matter, 26.8% dark matter and 68.3% dark energy. Thus, dark matter constitutes 84.5% of total mass, while dark energy plus dark matter constitute 95.1% of total mass–energy content.

Pretty accurate forecasts for something nobody can prove exists???

Statistics can be used to prove that Unicorns are busiest at 3am in the morning. That to me is much more likely to be true!

I'd say detailed instead of accurate. Accurate implies verified truth.

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

I've been able to read on the Le Scienze page an article of "Symmetry" magazine which said that researchers of Fermilab have completed a survey of 26 million galaxies using a Dark Matter Camera mounted on a 4 meter telescope of the Interamerican Observatory at Cerro Tololo, Chile. They used the method of looking for gravitational lensing, a result of General Relativity, to look for dark matter. Their result follows closely that of the Planck spacecraft of European Space Agency and gives a result of dark matter being 26% of total Universe mass.
Tullio

---

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2149742-half-the-universes-missing-matter-has-just-been-finally-found/

Half the universe’s missing matter has just been finally found
The missing links between galaxies have finally been found. This is the first detection of the roughly half of the normal matter in our universe – protons, neutrons and electrons – unaccounted for by previous observations of stars, galaxies and other bright objects in space.

You have probably heard about the hunt for dark matter, a mysterious substance thought to permeate the universe, the effects of which we can see through its gravitational pull. But our models of the universe also say there should be about twice as much ordinary matter out there, compared with what we have observed so far.

Two separate teams found the missing matter – made of particles called baryons rather than dark matter – linking galaxies together through filaments of hot, diffuse gas.

“The missing baryon problem is solved,” says Hideki Tanimura at the Institute of Space Astrophysics in Orsay, France, leader of one of the groups. The other team was led by Anna de Graaff at the University of Edinburgh, UK.

Both the XENONIT experiment at Gran Sasso National Laboratory and the PandaX experiment in China report on the same day, October 30, that no WIMP particle was found. Dark matter is still wanting for an explanation, maybe a modified version of Newton theory on gravitation.
Tullio

---

One day the mystery will be solved.

---

The High Altitude Water Cerenkov experiment in the Sierra Negra,Mexico, an array of 300 cylinders filled with water, has reported that the number of positrons in space which annihilate with electrons producing gamma rays which , by hitting gas molecules in the high atmosphere, produce showers of charged particles which make flashes of light in the water, recorded electronically, cannot derive only from two pulsars, one is Geminga and the other is PSR B0656+14. So the question is still open. Do the positrons derive from dark matter annihilation?
Tullio

---

"A new model based on the scale invariance of space" - Phys.org

---

The XENONIT underground experiment at Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso presents the results of one year of observations using a detector with 1300 kg of liquid Xenon at -95 C. No WIMPS were found.
Tullio

---

Hi Lynn,

Yep, too many people wanting to jump to conclusions, without doing their homework.

+1

I also have a suspicion the mystery will soon be revealed once the Grand Unified Theory (GUT) sees the daylight.

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

I cannot understand why this thread was blacklisted. Anyway a Grand Unified Theory is only a dream. General relativity has had new confirmation in the vicinity of giant black holes. The LHC has not found anything beyond the Standard Model and has entered in a low mode because of the upgrade to the High Luminosity LHC. Maybe neutrino physics will tell us something new but much was already conceived by Bruno Pontecorvo with his oscillation model, that was confirmed. The search is on for sterile neutrinos, which go back to Ettore Majorana,. Nihil sub sole novi.
Tullio

---

I cannot understand why this thread was blacklisted.

I think the thread auto-locked due to inactivity, but I have unlocked it, now, so everyone can post again.

---

The mind is a weird and mysterious place

I think that we should re-examine why we think that there is so much dark energy and dark matter. Perhaps there are other explanations. Tell me again why we think that the universe expansion is accelerating.

Einstein warned to be very skeptical of things that you cannot see

The accelerated expansion is proved by the red shift of supernovae in distant galaxies. Since we know the luminosity of a type 1a supernova (called a standard candle) if we measure its red shift we can infer its velocity. All this is based on a constant called the Hubble constant (should be called the Hubble-Lemaitre constant by the name of the priest who first proposed that the universe is expanding). There are two different values of the Hubble constant, measured by two different methods, so there is some uncertainty. V=HR is the basic equation, so the values of V can differ. R is the distance.
Einstein did not know radio astronomy, X ray astronomy, gamma ray astronomy and IR astronomy. But you cannot see the gravitational waves too, that he theorized in 1916 and were detected in 2015.
Tullio

---

In which way are electrons responsible for that of any radiation?

Reading a little down, that it perhaps could be the neutrino here, except for not any colorful picture either.

Think of an elementary particle bound to another, for that of making it an atom, in a more natural sense, and you have the proton versus electron.

But next free particles only, and it becomes that of radiation, and next also heat as well, except for not something which could perhaps penetrate through either.

Almost like still the gaseous surface of the sun only, for also that of a substance as well, because at best X-rays here, if not any cosmic radiation, in a similar way.

But also that these things are not meant for you or me just to live either, for also that of living nature around, at least here on Earth.

If such a thing as just giving a chance, for next also a small one, for that of a Probabilistic equation, next at least assume such a thing as life in its present form,
except for still not any possibility, or likelihood either, for that of rather only making it a slim chance.

If the old phrase was perhaps that everything could be on the table, next also still that of nothing versus everything, except for perhaps not something either.

Therefore, perhaps sometimes drowning, for just that of a bath, except for not any bird Phoenix either, for that of rising from the shadows, and next also
believing in such a thing as Eternity, next for that of life itself.

I think that we should re-examine why we think that there is so much dark energy and dark matter. Perhaps there are other explanations. Tell me again why we think that the universe expansion is accelerating.

Einstein warned to be very skeptical of things that you cannot see

I agree. I think there is a great possibility that something else has been missed or overlooked. Adding an "X" factor to equations so that they might work is going way out on a limb.

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

Yes That is the conventional wisdom. What we see in distant Galaxies is what was happening billions of years ago--maybe by now gravity has caught up with the big bang.

if in fact the rate of expansion is accelerating then the galaxies are gaining equivalent mass and require ever increasing amounts of energy to sustain the acceleration of the expansion. All a little too much to abide--How do it know ? (as they say in the mountains of Tennessee) how much extra energy to find and where does it come from?

More space, more vacuum, more energy of the vacuum. Energy cannot be created or destroyed in a closed system.--all very interesting

Energy cannot be created or destroyed in a closed system.

String theory implies this may not be a closed system.

---

Energy cannot be created or destroyed in a closed system.

String theory implies this may not be a closed system.

Then you have to accept the idea of multiverses that somehow are connected to our universe.
But our universe has a finite mass/energy and the law of conservation of energy rules here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_string

Depending on which link you choose, but if the Universe was once in its infancy, for also that of its moment of birth,
what now are perhaps both filaments and also voids, could represent, or make for a similar thing, almost in miniature,
for also the large versus the small.

If it all blew up in scale, for also becoming magnified as well, I mentioned that of making a galaxy only a speck in the sky, when rather perhaps 50,000 light years across.

If rather fragments, except for only bits and pieces, perhaps cosmic dust making for future generations of stars and galaxies, and next also present, or located
across the whole Universe, making it almost like dark matter, except for not the other discussion here for this.

Here I am not keeping a track of it, as I perhaps should, but if it could still be that of emptiness, while also that of the singularity in the center of Black Holes,
perhaps no such thing as any walls either, for making it borders separating parts of the Universe, from each other.

So here it became a thought about how a massless particle could be playing a part in all of this, when still both that of large and small,
for also that of an expanding Universe, which also could be an inflating one for such, and also that of perhaps a "primordial" atom,
being the ancestor, or starting point for it all.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino

Next that protons should attract each other, while electrons should repel, only because of that of magnetism, where perhaps no electricity is involved either.

The most strange of it all, is that when this initially happened, it took off for that of quite good space already present, or found,
and perhaps being once only complete emptiness, before matter came racing outward, from the explosion itself.

If perhaps needed, or any better, we could also make it the Big Bang, or the like here, for such a thing, but rather that such a thing as cosmic strings,
could be telling about a property of space, except for the Initial Moment of Creation itself, together with that of Instantiation.