Dark matter detected?

DaveR · #1 18-12-2009, 06:55 PM

Interesting article on the Guardian website re dark matter. Will be really important if verified.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/20...atter-detected

AG Hybrid (Adrian) · #2 18-12-2009, 07:00 PM

It was only a matter of time. A great find indeed.

Esseth (Alan) · #3 18-12-2009, 07:07 PM

Damn, "The claim, if confirmed next year, will rank as one the most spectacular discoveries in physics in the past century."

Pretty much covers it, i've been hearing about Dark Matter since i got interested in science... epic indeed.

gary · #4 18-12-2009, 07:22 PM

Hi Dave,

Thanks for the link to the article which is also a good piece of journalism.

It certainly is tantalizing and hopefully we will see the published results soon!

Robh (Rob) · #5 18-12-2009, 07:36 PM

Most interesting!
But we need more confirmation. As stated, the result has a 1 in 4 chance of being due to some other effect in the detectors.

Regards, Rob.

Ric · #6 18-12-2009, 11:51 PM

I really hope that they have discovered Dark Matter.

It's these type of discoveries that really give science the shot in the arm that it needs every so often.

Cheers

michaellxv (Michael) · #7 19-12-2009, 12:39 AM

If this turns out to be true does that then mean that they know how to do it and can then refine the equipment to produce more succesful results?

Baron von Richthofen (Vaclav) · #8 19-12-2009, 07:35 AM

I wonder what is the particle density of dark matter is per cubic meter

renormalised (Carl) · #9 19-12-2009, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baron von Richthofen

I wonder what is the particle density of dark matter is per cubic meter

Had to calculate that for my exam this semester. Can't remember the answer offhand, but I'll see if I can find it

#10 19-12-2009, 02:18 PM

It's drawing a large bow when you claim to have detected dark matter when now one has ever captured dark matter. How can they prove this...It could also be a new undiscovered element. Without a proven model or physical sample it's still only theory.

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck then it must be a duck QED

sjastro · #11 19-12-2009, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gemini2544

It's drawing a large bow when you claim to have detected dark matter when now one has ever captured dark matter. How can they prove this...It could also be a new undiscovered element. Without a proven model or physical sample it's still only theory.

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck then it must be a duck QED

The particles are believed to be WIMPS and behave like massive neutrinos.

If it is confirmed as dark matter it is going to mess up the Standard Model of Particle Physics

Steven

Baron von Richthofen (Vaclav) · #12 19-12-2009, 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by renormalised

Had to calculate that for my exam this semester. Can't remember the answer offhand, but I'll see if I can find it

If you could find out that would be fantastic

renormalised (Carl) · #13 20-12-2009, 01:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjastro

The particles are believed to be WIMPS and behave like massive neutrinos.

If it is confirmed as dark matter it is going to mess up the Standard Model of Particle Physics

Steven

Oh yes

TrevorW · #14 20-12-2009, 10:07 AM

Well I didn't see that one coming

marki · #15 20-12-2009, 11:29 AM

I have worked in underground mines and let me tell you it is no suprise that they found dark matter down there. When the lights go out the place is full of the stuff

.

Mark

sjastro · #16 20-12-2009, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by renormalised

Oh yes

Then we can apply the "The can't prove anything with String Theory" and hey presto DM becomes part of the Standard Model.

Steven

renormalised (Carl) · #17 20-12-2009, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marki

I have worked in underground mines and let me tell you it is no suprise that they found dark matter down there. When the lights go out the place is full of the stuff

.

Mark

Yeah, large stopes and cutaways you can disappear down really quickly

Oh, and bat droppings...maybe that's what they found

renormalised (Carl) · #18 20-12-2009, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjastro

Then we can apply the "The can't prove anything with String Theory" and hey presto DM becomes part of the Standard Model.

Steven

No "hey prestos" in science, Steven. That's magic

Oh, I forgot, that's what the SM is

sjastro · #19 20-12-2009, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by renormalised

No "hey prestos" in science, Steven. That's magic

Oh, I forgot, that's what the SM is

That's right Carl. When you don't know the mathematics behind the SM it does appear to be magic.

Steven

renormalised (Carl) · #20 20-12-2009, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sjastro

That's right Carl. When you don't know the mathematics behind the SM it does appear to be magic.

Steven

You know yourself Steven, the biggest criticism of the SM is that it's not entirely without fault itself. In many cases, it's been a matter of finding the particle first then fudging the maths in order to get the new particle to fit the model. The maths themselves are fine (for the given particles, now they've found them), it's the pulling of rabbits out of a hat which many scientists don't like, or would wish wasn't the case. In some cases, it's been things coming out of left of field which has thrown a spanner in the works, Or, like DM, stuff which appears to be real but just doesn't fit in anywhere. The SM needs more than a top overhaul, now. More like a replacement crankshaft