Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Dark Matter Discovered

CowboyNeal posted more than 9 years ago | from the lost-and-found dept.

Space 386

sebFlyte writes "Wired is reporting that scientists have come up to a solution as to where all the matter in the universe actually is. Experiments being done with Chandra, NASA's X-ray telescope have shown up a likely candidate for the solution of the dark matter problem. There are massive quantities of Baryons in a super-heated gas cloud several hundred million light years away."

cancel ×

386 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Fascinating (5, Funny)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568045)

I'd love to see the modeling on this stuff, as they have some super computer up the road at UCSC probably grinding away on massive simulations this very minute, but it'd probably look less like those beautiful Hubble shots and more like a stack of paper covered with numbers.

There are massive quantities of Baryons in a super-heated gas gloud several hundred million light years away."

Which, IMHO, is a damn fine place for them to be, rather than here.

The absorption pattern, as detected by Chandra, is consistent with interference caused by carbon, neon, nitrogen and oxygen ions -- in other words, baryons.

It's really a neon sign on Frogstar World B announcing the construction of a restaurant to be constructed on this location in several billion years and reservations are welcome.

"Assuming that what we see is a standard portion of the universe, we extrapolated the data and derived the volume density (of baryons in all the clouds) -- and it's consistent with 50 percent," said astronomer Fabrizio Nicastro, of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and lead author of the study.

Later a two-headed, three-armed man entered and ate a piece of fairycake and destroyed their model.

Whereas baryons account for 4 percent of the total matter and energy in the universe, dark matter is thought to make up 23 percent. The remaining 73 percent of the so-called matter-energy budget consists of what scientists call "dark energy." This energy acts like an anti-gravitational force that, in theory, is causing the universe to expand rather than contract.

And here I thought it all existed somewhere along Lucas Valley Road and explained the Jar Jar character and Episodes I-III...

I knew they’d eventually find it (2, Funny)

Pan T. Hose (707794) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568175)

It was only a (dark) matter of (space) time.

Wait a sec, this story isn't about "dark matter" (4, Insightful)

turnstyle (588788) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568228)

It seems to me this story isn't actually about "dark matter" -- it's about locating some missing baryonic matter (ie, regular stuff).

In other words, if regular stuff is about 5% of the energy density of the universe, with dark matter at about 20%, and dark energy at about 75% -- the stuff in this story comes into that 5%, ie, regular stuff and not dark matter.

Re:Wait a sec, this story isn't about "dark matter (3, Interesting)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568331)

It seems to me this story isn't actually about "dark matter" -- it's about locating some missing baryonic matter (ie, regular stuff).

Which is what they're constantly doing. I heard the theories in my astronomy class. There's plenty of them, such as brown dwarves just drifting around out there. How do you explain them? Well some star has a vector or some light appears bent (lens effect) and it's figured there's some large enough object out there not emitting light which is doing it. And who's to say it isn't large amounts effectively of bits the size of pea gravel drifting around?

In other words, if regular stuff is about 5% of the energy density of the universe, with dark matter at about 20%, and dark energy at about 75% -- the stuff in this story comes into that 5%, ie, regular stuff and not dark matter.

Dark matter is, as I understood, matter which isn't emitting some radiation, i.e. visible light or gamma rays. It's predicted, because without something being somewhere a number would be +0.0000150 instead of +0.0000146 and we can pretty much drop the old Intel Pentium jokes.

Re:Wait a sec, this story isn't about "dark matter (2, Interesting)

halltk1983 (855209) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568346)

Not exactly... They think the regular stuff they CAN see is being held together by stuff they can't... Like when you glue your hand to a phonebook, you can't see the glue, but you know there has to ba a reason the phonebook isn't falling to gather all the "normal matter" in the Earth.

So they say they've found the missing matter... (3, Funny)

Gorath99 (746654) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568251)

So they say they've found the missing matter, but nowhere in the article do they actually tell us where all the missing [funbureau.com] socks [laundry-alternative.com] went. Sure sounds like a scam to me!

Re:Fascinating (1)

chaffed (672859) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568253)

...Lucas Valley Road...


And maybe the north shore accent

*runs from menacing Oxford shirts...

Great... (1)

robyannetta (820243) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568256)

Yet another place we'll soon see another Starbucks.

Re:Fascinating (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568283)

Great Book

Glouds (2, Funny)

peasleer (806038) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568341)

I can see the project now: "Gloud: The GNU open source cloud."

This is astrophysics, folks (2, Funny)

karlandtanya (601084) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568349)

+/- 3 orders of magnitude is considered precise.

Nibbler? (5, Funny)

blackicye (760472) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568048)

And would this "superheated gas pocket" perchance reside in Nibbler's lower intestinal tract? ;D

Nope... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568209)

Its the hunters running away from the stench of Bloodnut the flatulent...

Baryons (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568053)

In case anyone's wondering what a baryon is...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baryon [wikipedia.org]

Re:Baryons (1)

edward.virtually@pob (6854) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568143)

good. now if you could tell us what a "gloud" is. :-)

Re:Baryons (5, Informative)

FalconZero (607567) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568148)

In case anyone's wondering what slashdot is...

http://www.slashdot.org/ [slashdot.org]

Can I have my +5 informative now??

Re:Baryons (2, Funny)

rackhamh (217889) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568254)

I case anybody's wondering what "informative" means...

http://www.answers.com/informative&r=67

I got nuthin.

Re:Baryons (1)

Surt (22457) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568290)

You got nuthin because you didn't write your link right.

Re:Baryons (4, Funny)

rackhamh (217889) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568352)

You got nuthin because you didn't write your link right.

Yup, noticed that. Though I think what you wanted to say was, "In case anybody's wondering what a hyperlink [answers.com] is..." ;)

In case.... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568265)

> > In case anyone's wondering what a baryon is...
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baryon [wikipedia.org]

> In case anyone's wondering what slashdot is...
> http://www.slashdot.org/ [slashdot.org]

In [wikipedia.org] case [answers.com] anyone [reference.com] 's [merriam-webster.com] wondering [google.com] why [wikipedia.org] the [answers.com] hell [reference.com] am [merriam-webster.com] I [google.com] wasting [wikipedia.org] my [answers.com] time [reference.com] so [merriam-webster.com] pointlessly [google.com] .... I [wikipedia.org] have [answers.com] no [reference.com] life [merriam-webster.com] .

Re:Baryons (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568222)

oooookay

like that fucking helped

I think anyone that can understand that trozo probably already understands what they are

I'm too damn stupid to be reading slashdot these days I think.

Re:Baryons (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568267)

Just a wonderful definition. So now in order to understand what a baryon is, I must understand:

1) Particle physics
2) Nucleons, Hyperons, Fermions
3) The strong nuclear force
4) Fermi-Dirac Statistics
5) The Pauli Exclusion Principle
6) Hadrons, Quarks, and Pions

Re:Baryons (2, Funny)

CrackedButter (646746) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568343)

Doesn't the Enterprise have to clean this stuff off its hull every so often, it being a side effect of warp travel?

Hmm (3, Funny)

Elecore (784561) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568056)

I don't see anything??

What? (0, Offtopic)

Aggrajag (716041) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568058)

Wasn't it supposed to be the stuff that you can find inside packaging?

God was smart... (0)

RileyLewis (826273) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568064)

He didn't leave any Dark Matter in our solar system. He must have done a thorough wipe of Uranus.

Re:God was smart... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568192)

ouch.. you should be modded down

Picture (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568067)

Here's a picture [wustl.edu] .

Re:Picture (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568215)

Here's a picture.

Space is big
Space is dark
It's hard to find
A place to park
Burma Shave -- from WorkBench Lander

Another picture (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568303)

And here's a picture [zoy.org] in microwave sprectum.

Mmmm super heated gas gloud (1, Funny)

grahamsz (150076) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568071)

I think the dark matter is in the mods brain.

I think the dark matter is in the mods brain. (1)

de1orean (851146) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568200)

the fact that this got modded "funny" is proof of that.

Ummm (4, Informative)

christurkel (520220) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568073)

They found some of the ordinary matter that has gone unaccounted for, not dark matter. Read the article.

Re:Ummm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568138)

The question is now, will anyone notice that the parent is correct, or will the original story remain unchanged and completely wrong ?

Oh, and paging CmrdTaco, your bridge is waiting...

Re:Ummm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568204)

But he isn't, so hopefully it won't

Re:Ummm (1, Informative)

bobhagopian (681765) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568147)

Dark matter isn't mysterious or unordinary. Dark matter is usually extremely cold but otherwise ordinary matter. Because it's so cold, it can't emit light, hence "dark" matter. So, while they did discover dark matter in the sense that most astrophysicists use the term, they did not discover the really weird stuff.

You have, however, picked up on an important distinction. They found dark matter, but what they really need to find is dark energy. Dark energy is thought to comprise something like 70% of the energy of the universe, and yet, even today, it is a complete mystery.

Re:Ummm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568178)

"So, while they did discover dark matter in the sense that most astrophysicists use the term"

So we should accept your use of the term and ignore those silly old astrophysicists ?

Re:Ummm (1)

Froggy (92010) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568166)

They found some of the ordinary matter that has gone unaccounted for, not dark matter.

It was in my daughter's bedroom closet. I could have told them that. (It's mostly in the form of My Little Ponies and clothes. Another cosmic mystery: she can't put her clothes away because her drawers are full, but she never has anything to wear...)

Re:Ummm (3, Insightful)

Tlosk (761023) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568179)

You seem to be under the impression that we know what dark matter is and isn't. Dark matter is postulated given gravitational effects that would arise from mass that we cannot detect, hence dark.

If it turns out that it is normal matter after all, and we just had trouble seeing it, we have still "discovered dark matter."

Another way of putting it would be, who killed the prime minister of Georgia? If it turns out later that it was an accident from a faulty space heater, did we find out who killed him? Just becuase we were expecting a who and got a what doesn't mean the question wasn't answered.

Re:Ummm (1)

Entrope (68843) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568221)

RTFA. It addresses this. The article explains that half of baryonic maass was unaccounted for, and if these clouds are typical of the whole universe, that explains the 50% of "missing" baryonic mass. Astrophysicists can explain 2% of the expected mass of the universe as visible baryons. These clouds would be another 2% of the expected mass. Dark matter is 23%, dark energy is the remaining 73%.

For this to explain dark matter, the clouds they discovered would have to be less than ONE TENTH of the average density of intergalactic baryons.

Re:Ummm (1)

Tlosk (761023) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568244)

You're assuming that this unknown matter is uniform. If you pull out an olive have you explained the salad? No, but you do know more about it then before you pulled it out.

Re:Ummm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568338)

Quit with weird analogies, RTFA, pull that olive stone out of the Georgian prime minister's arse and try and understand how the Slashdot story is not a correct description of the linked facts.

As usual, these days,

Re:Ummm (3, Informative)

Entropius (188861) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568301)

That's what dark matter is -- just ordinary matter that isn't part of luminous objects and, thus, is invisible.

Wired Magazine seems to be getting their terms confused:

Whereas baryons account for 4 percent of the total matter and energy in the universe, dark matter is thought to make up 23 percent. The remaining 73 percent of the so-called matter-energy budget consists of what scientists call "dark energy."

But one candidate for the "dark matter" (everything we can't see) *is* "baryons" -- which is just a funny term for "protons and neutrons", which is just a funny term for "ordinary stuff". (The other candidates for dark matter are unknown new particles--WIMPs and so on.)

So, basically, what these guys have found is an intergalactic gas cloud of heavy gas. They mention C, N, O, and Ne in the article; those are four of the principle products in stellar nuclear fusion, so that makes sense. However, they don't mention anything about H and He, the principal components of the universe. They used X-ray absorption, however, and since H (and I think He also) don't have electron transitions in the X-ray band, hydrogen would be invisible to their technique.

So they really don't know what the density of the cloud is, 'cause they can't measure the presence of hydrogen, which is *usually* the dominant component of the interstellar medium (as I recall).

If the cloud is principally heavy gas, then it's obviously left over from exploding stars. The explanation that comes to mind is that parts of the exploded star blew off with enough velocity to escape the local gravity and found themselves in intergalactic space. Whether it takes exotica to prevent them from being "pulled into galaxies" is another question. We know from previous observation that gravitationally-bound systems can contain local concentrations of matter whose kinetic energy keeps them from falling into the central concentration of mass in the system: q.v. Sol III (known as Terra to the locals).

Basically, this Wired article is *very* short on actual scientific facts. Maybe the original study actually says something and doesn't just try to impress readers with the word "baryon"; accurate measurements of the intergalactic medium *are* sorely needed by astrophysics, and whether the missing mass lurks in galaxies, in galactic halos, or between galaxies is (as I recall) an open question.

On a more technical note, it'd be interesting to see how much the X-ray absorbtion lines are smeared out in these measurements; I don't know if they have enough data for really good spectrography, but knowing that would give a rough estimation of the kinetic energy of the cloud: the gas atoms traveling away from us would have their spectra redshifted more than those traveling toward us.

Where it is... (1)

D-Cypell (446534) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568077)

scientists have come up to a solution as to where all the matter in the universe actually is.

In the middle somewhere?

Re:Where it is... (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568137)

scientists have come up to a solution as to where all the matter in the universe actually is.
In the middle somewhere?

Well, think about it, it doesn't sound very exciting to report that 'It isn't right here' and sure isn't as damn near scientific.

I'm bloody amazed that the NIH hasn't announced in a study that a diet based upon the missing Dark Matter helps reduce cancer in laboratory cheese.

Are you thinking what I'm thinking? (1)

phaetonic (621542) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568081)

This discovery will bring back Enterprise!

Re:Are you thinking what I'm thinking? (1)

readpunk (683053) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568113)

That will only happen if they also happen to find Berman and Braga in the dark matter as well.

Re:Are you thinking what I'm thinking? (1)

istewart (463887) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568201)

They can probably find plenty of dark matter between Berman and Braga's respective sets of ears.

Re:Are you thinking what I'm thinking? (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568190)

This discovery will bring back Enterprise!

Oh, why do you expect such miracles!?!?

on a five year mission to seek out and develop a new series to exploit the faithful

Must resist.... (1)

funwithBSD (245349) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568085)

Nope can't do it. =)

Those giant gas clouds got a Baryon enima?

Re:Must resist.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568142)

RTFA, the enigma has been solved.

whew, glad we figured that out! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568090)

/me goes back to fingerpainting a tree

Gloud (3, Funny)

rickst13 (723165) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568092)

"There are massive quantities of Baryons in a super-heated gas gloud"

Google wants to know if you mean "gas cloud".

If WIRED says it, it must be true! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568093)

Wired is reporting that scientists have come up to a solution as to where all the matter in the universe actually is.

WIRED also said that "Push is the next Big Thing."

Re:If WIRED says it, it must be true! (2, Informative)

Surt (22457) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568305)

It was. People were all over push for a while. Then it became passe.

"on" suffix (1)

thedogcow (694111) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568097)

I've always enjoyed how everything has an "on" suffix to it in physics.
What happens when someone by the last name of Mor finds exotic particles?
Morons I tells yous.
What about some science dude who goes by Hal?
Halon I tells yous.

Re:"on" suffix (1)

Professor Oompa (258687) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568353)

Dr. Poup discovers an entire class of particles and devises an intricate color scheme, prompting the immediately overused physicist joke: asking your lab partner, 'Pardon me, but do you have any Grey Poupon?'

Sadly, because of those commercials, Grey Poupon recieves nearly all attention, drawing researchers away from the less popular Sea Foam Puopon, a key part of the equation for Cold Fusion, time travel, and world peace.

Wrong Name (4, Insightful)

unclem0nkey (741514) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568101)

In physics we don't call it dark matter. We call it "make the theory fit the data" matter.

Re:Wrong Name (1)

ciroknight (601098) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568259)

At least they aren't "making the data fit the theory". Just imagine what gravity would work like if Newton wanted it to point away from the earth ;)

Re:Wrong Name (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568289)

At least it's not "make the data fit the theory" matter, which is currently copyrighted by the Bush Administration.

Dark Matter found? (0, Offtopic)

dgrgich (179442) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568102)

Guess I can almost scratch that one of my list of mysteries yet to be solved. Now, on to the puzzling challenge of explaining the reasoning behind female group behavior in restroom explorations...

Re:Dark Matter found? (1)

Zakabog (603757) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568264)

Now, on to the puzzling challenge of explaining the reasoning behind female group behavior in restroom explorations...

Puzzling? You should hang out with more females. They're just talking about someone who's still sitting at the table. They usually know what each other is thinking about a person so when one says "I'm going to the bathroom" it's like announcing "If you're thinking what I'm thinking, come with me to discuss it." When the other says "Ok I'll come with you" they're acknowledging that they're thinking alike and they will come and gossip. There really isn't much mystery to females, but I've been fortunate enough to have a sister close to my age so we hang out a lot (usually with her girl friends) so I get to pick up a lot of info.

Anyway this is way off topic...

Aren't baryons just normal matter? (0)

DeadVulcan (182139) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568103)

Am I thinking of a different term, or aren't "baryons" just the counterpart to "tachyons?" And where tachyons are supposed to always travel faster than light, baryons always travel slower. In other words, I thought baryons represent everything we usually mean when we say "matter."

Is this a case of a reporter being out of his depth?

Or maybe it's me, a Slashdot poster?

Place your bets! :-)

Re:Aren't baryons just normal matter? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568238)

No, you're thinking of "bradyons" - a name for particles that travel below the speed of light.

Baryons are quark triplets. Two examples are the proton (two "up" quarks and one "down" quark, and
the neutron (two "down" quarks and one "up" quark).

--- Brian

Re:Aren't baryons just normal matter? (5, Informative)

randominator (753545) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568240)

Tachyons are in fact hypothesized faster-than-light-particles, appearing for instance in certain string theory scenarios.

But baryons are by no means the counterpart to tachyons. All known elementary particles in the universe are either fermions (particles with spin in integer multiples of 1/2) or bosons (particles with integer spin). Bosons include the photon, the gluon and many others. The fermions are further subdivided into leptons and quarks. Leptons include the electron and the electron neutrino among others. Baryons are particles made up of three quarks, and are fermions and include among others, the proton and neutron, which are the most commonly found baryons in nature, since all heavier baryons normally decay.

Two quarks (fermions) can combine to form mesons, which are in fact bosonic in nature (since two quarks with spin half combine to form a particle with integer spin).

Hope that confused the issue a little :-)

A bit more on-topic: Finding baryons in this amount is a big deal, since baryon has previously been suspected to primarily exist in galaxies, and only in small amounts outside galaxies. While it by no means doesn't solve all problems of cosmology, it is a big help.

Re:Aren't baryons just normal matter? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568245)

"Baryons" are a class of particles which experience the strong nuclear force. So, for instance, protons and neutrons fall into this category (as do a host of other particles) but a photon does not. /too lazy to log in so I'll just respond as A.C.

Re:Aren't baryons just normal matter? (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568273)

Am I thinking of a different term, or aren't "baryons" just the counterpart to "tachyons?" And where tachyons are supposed to always travel faster than light, baryons always travel slower. In other words, I thought baryons represent everything we usually mean when we say "matter."

Is this a case of a reporter being out of his depth?

I'm sure it's already in layman's terms as your average reader of Wired probably still has their eyes glaze over when you bring up the Life of Small Black Holes (an actual talk at our Astronomy Club, which still has me scratching my head.)

Or maybe it's me, a Slashdot poster?

<Bugs Bunny Voice>Nnnnnyyy could be!</Bugs Bunny Voice>

Place your bets! :-)

I'd go with the less general term 'baryons' over 'general purpose matter' as it give it some mystique, which always helps when going for funding.

Re:Aren't baryons just normal matter? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568319)

Actually, the term for STL (slower than light) particles is tardyons, but as this comprises pretty much everything that is talked about outside string theory, the word doesn't get used too often...

Re:Aren't baryons just normal matter? (1)

painandgreed (692585) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568337)

Am I thinking of a different term, or aren't "baryons" just the counterpart to "tachyons?"

You're thinking of "bradyons". Tacyons travel faster than light. Photons travel at light speed. While bradyons travel slower than light. Baryons are bradyons along with all other matter we've seen so far.

Not quite... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568112)

The summary is not correct (big surprise there) in that this is a confirmation of a long-suspected theory as to where the missing ordinary (baryonic) matter in the universe is. This does not solve the dark matter problem at all.

Read more at the press release from the Chandra team at Marshall: http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=16049 [spaceref.com]

Dark matter is yet another topic altogether, as is the even more elusive dark energy.

More Information (3, Informative)

NEOtaku17 (679902) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568120)

Here [lanl.gov] is a link to some of the more recent papers written on dark matter kinematics.

They are extremely interesting for anyone fascinated with physics.

I thought that solution had passed away (1)

ScentCone (795499) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568122)

With the massive quantity of Barry Whiteon gone, cool, heavy dark matter is ruled out, I guess.

But was it in Iraq? (0, Offtopic)

BandwidthHog (257320) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568123)

I mean, if we can find something a squillion miles away that is by its very nature hard to spot...

WRONG TITLE, Sigh...... (5, Insightful)

FalconZero (607567) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568126)

This should be "Missing Matter Discovered" not "Dark Matter Discovered"
They HAVE NOT found dark matter, they've found the 'missing matter' as the article says. They have found a clue as to the dark matter, as a result of the discovery.
Although discovering the dark matter would be much cooler, (yeah I was excited when I read the title).

[rant] Why is it the only 3 times I've 'emailed the on duty editor' before publishing, I've been ignored and the mistakes gone through?? [/rant]

Re:WRONG TITLE, Sigh...... (1)

Staos (700036) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568185)

I got a dupe pulled once... YMMV, WFM

but I thought... (1)

interactive_civilian (205158) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568334)

I though all of the missing matter was actually the the packaging in the boxes used to ship the scientists their equipment that they use to search for missing matter...

but then again, some crazy girl with a bird hit me over the head with a rock, so I'm not thinking very clearly...

Wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568127)

Wrong! This discovery is about missing "normal" matter. Not the missing Dark Matter. Read the article.

But now where... (2, Funny)

wh173b0y (825454) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568129)

...Are we gonna find a something as cool as "dark matter" to toss into casual conversation to give the impression of superior intelligence.

I mean really now, Baryons, oh come on nasa. Try something new and exciting like, antiquantafusitrons.

It beats (1)

Rares Marian (83629) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568145)

all those Water discovered on Mars stories. Astronomers invented dupes. Or maybe they were trying to give someone a hint.

this just coming across the wires: (1)

de1orean (851146) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568151)

google has bought up all known dark matter.

Cleared up nicely... (4, Funny)

Electronik (821589) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568153)

"Baryons, along with mesons, belong to the family of particles known as hadrons, meaning they are composed of quarks. Baryons are fermions composed of three quarks, while mesons are bosons composed of a quark and an antiquark."

Wikipedia cleared that one up nicely!

Dark Matter NOT Discovered (1)

potatoBBQ (855766) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568168)

This title is somewhat misleading... considering they did NOT actually find dark matter. They found baryons... baryon != dark matter.

Difference between Baryons and Dark Matter (1)

LeiGong (621856) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568173)

I thought Baryons and dark matter are two different things. It was my impression that the clouds of baryons mass they discovered were suppose to be "out there" and and we know what it's comprised of. Where as with dark matter, our scientists have no idea what it is or what it's made of. All we know is it's exerting gravitational forces and is holding back the expansion of the universe. As far as I'm concerned this discovery did nothing to shed light on dark matter... Can any astrophysists out there explain more?

But, what I'd like to know... (2, Insightful)

ejamie (765128) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568177)

Is how do these extremely difficult scientific questions get answered so quickly lately.

It was just a couple days ago that slashdot reported that dark matter was being postulated as the reason for the extra mass of galaxies:

Simulating the Universe with a zBox [slashdot.org] .

Now, in less than a week, we have proof for the existence of dark matter? Amazing!

How can scientists go from hypothesis to proof in such a short time? Are we really progressing by such leaps and bounds? Or, is this an example of media jumping to conclusions about initial research.

Dark matter question (1)

Epistax (544591) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568210)

Every component of matter has an anti, correct? Light itself is a wave/matter combination, notably photons. However, what I read says that photos are their own anti. Does this mean I have no hope of making a flashlight which makes things darker? Is it possible for two photons moving in different directions to cancel eachother out (destructive interference)?

Re:Dark matter question (1)

SUB7IME (604466) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568328)

If you take two light bulbs and put them in the same room, do you get a dark spot in the middle?

That's strange.... (2, Funny)

vought (160908) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568231)

I have it on good authority that all the dark matter is in Iraq, and that's why we had to invade.

Hum.... (1)

michelcultivo (524114) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568250)

I thought baryons [wikipedia.org] was under my bed, now I dunno what is that stranger things.....

Dark matter (1)

celeritas_2 (750289) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568279)

As I understand it dark matter is a broad term for matter that equations tell us exists, we just can't see it. These Baryons, apparently very heavy, solve some of the problem, maybe all, because it's more mass that we didn't know was there before. It came out of the dark. Nobody knows if there is another class of matter but clouds of baryon fill the gap.

How they found it (4, Funny)

fiannaFailMan (702447) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568282)

They reversed the anti-proton to tachyon ratio in the main deflector array after flooding it with a plasma burst diverted from the warp core and then polarising it by reinforcing the nucleon field.

Google? (2, Funny)

Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568288)

Wasn't Google looking to buy up all the Dark Matter, not too long ago? Sware I read it here...

Topic is innacurate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568296)

This thread should be deleted since it is completely misleading and innacurate. Read the real story from the actual peer reviewed publication on this weeks issue of Nature.
http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.ta f?file=/n ature/journal/v433/n7025/full/nature03245_fs.html& content_filetype=pdf

Hopefully that link works.

This has only to do with missing baryon mass, nothing to to with dark matter. IMO this grapevine science is the reason so many people believe in urban legends - and this thread should be destroyed.

But what about galactic cohesion? (2, Interesting)

Huntred (198920) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568306)

I thought one of the sure indicators that showed the presence of unseen matter was that most galaxies behaved as though they were more massive. That the rotational energy of many/most/some galaxies should be ripping it apart, yet clearly there was some extra amount undetected mass in a galaxy that held it together.

These clouds are great for a macro-framework missing mass solution but unless they are found to exist in a somewhat smooth (or central) distribution in a galaxy how would massive clouds several hundred million light years away provide a solution for cases like this?

Huntred

The premise of Dark Matter is flawed... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568320)

And all the proponents of this rubbish should know it. The idea of Dark Matter evolved because of the idea by Cosmologists that gravity has to dominate the Universe, but if one understands that it is infact Plasma and Electromagnetism that dominates then there is no need for dark matter to explain for example why the rim of galaxies spin at the same rate as the hub. Experiments with plasma have already indicated that such phenomena evolve naturally out of interactions between bits of plasma, there is no need to use gravity or fanciful notions such as a "halo" of Dark Matter around the galaxy or any other to account for the apparent same speed of rotation.

Assuming... (5, Funny)

podperson (592944) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568324)

Assuming that what we see is a standard portion of the universe

An astrophysicist, a physicist, and a mathematician are attending a conference in Scotland. During a break, they take a walk through some of the countryside, and come upon a black sheep.

"Aha," exclaims the astrophysicist. "I had no idea that all sheep in Scotland are black."

The physicist looks at her colleague in disbelief. "All sheep in Scotland are black? Are you nuts? We've only seen one sheep!"

The mathematician interrupts. "And only one side of that sheep."

Not the case (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11568342)

What has been found is the missing baryonic 'normal' matter- the missing '50%' of normal matter that can not be found.

Dark matter is not the same thing, and then there is dark energy beyond that.

Normal matter, icluding both the matter observable and the matter located in these newly observed super-hot clouds account for only a small porportion of the matter in the universe.

DL

I should've got credit... (1)

game kid (805301) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568347)

I found it [lunar-net.com] 10 years ago! Oh, real dark matter...nevermind.

DMARP (0, Offtopic)

Columcille (88542) | more than 9 years ago | (#11568351)

Yes, but how long until HAARP gets changed to DMARP (Dark Matter Advanced Research Project) and starts bombarding these clouds with radio waves to see what could happen?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?