Physicists look for new alternatives to explain dark matter


Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

The uncertainty of science: Having failed to detect WIMPs, their primary dark matter suspect, physicists are now looking at new and different candidates that might explain dark matter, and the new leading candidate is something called SIMPs.

The intensive, worldwide search for dark matter, the missing mass in the universe, has so far failed to find an abundance of dark, massive stars or scads of strange new weakly interacting particles (WIMPs), but a new candidate is slowly gaining followers and observational support.

Called SIMPs – strongly interacting massive particles – they were proposed three years ago by UC Berkeley theoretical physicist Hitoshi Murayama, a professor of physics and director of the Kavli Institute for the Physics and Mathematics of the Universe (Kavli IPMU) in Japan, and former UC Berkeley postdoc Yonit Hochberg, now at Hebrew University in Israel.

Murayama says that recent observations of a nearby galactic pile-up could be evidence for the existence of SIMPs, and he anticipates that future particle physics experiments will discover one of them.

We shall see. The mystery remains, that we do not understand why most galaxies do not fly apart because their outer stars simply move too fast. Since all searches for ordinary matter have come up well short, dark matter remains the simplest explanation, though it still reminds me the theories of ether that once dominated physics, and never existed.

Share

6 comments

  • wayne

    Me thinks, they are just making it all up wholesale, at this point.

    Freedom Exists
    Jim Morrison- An American Prayer
    https://youtu.be/DKSGb4xFnbc
    (0:24)

  • LocalFluff

    The general impression is often that relativity and quantum physics are the two big pieces that might be unified, or not. But there’s more to it. Neither theory predicts the other. And neither predicts dark matter, big bang or even intergalactic space. There’s obviously more to it than what is known. What else is real that cannot be derived from physics of today? Missing intergalactic space and big bang are pretty big omissions, don’t you think? If mommy missed out corresponding parts of the good night story she reads, I wouldn’t fall asleep.

  • mpc755

    There is evidence of the smoothly distributed, strongly interacting, supersolid dark matter every time a double-slit experiment is performed, as it is the dark matter that waves.

  • wayne

    I’d reference the Michelson-Morley experiment.

  • m d mill

    let me repeat a thought on this subject:

    Most elite physicists were accepting the dark matter hypothesis as a necessary truth long before there was any specific evidence (you can find many you tube lectures by prominent physicists). That is why they are so shocked by the absence of wimp detection.

    IF gravity is an emergent property (not a fundamental force, as has been recently hypothesized), then dark matter is not required.
    And the difficulty of uniting the weak gravitational fundamental force with the other strong fundamental forces ,i.e. the problem of uniting general relativity and quantum mechanics MAY not be required either.
    Which means string theory is not required.

    In fact string theorists have long touted that gravity, as a fundamental force, is an essential and completely consistent part of their theory. And they predict super symmetric particles must exist. But these particles have not been found in the super collider at energies where they should be seen.
    Which means string theory MAY be falsified on two fronts.

    Is it possible the best(?) and brightest minds in theoretical physics have been delusional for the last 30+ years?

  • wayne

    m d mill-
    I do recall your previous comment.

    >Definitely probable, some very bright people, have been chasing their particular variant, to the exclusion of others, and the string-people are definitely guilty.

    I’ll pivot to ‘my-guy,’ ‘cuz he’s actually correct in all this! (har)
    :)

    Sir Roger Penrose,
    “Aeons before the Big Bang”
    Copernicus Center Lecture 2010
    https://youtu.be/4YYWUIxGdl4
    (1:57:35)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *