3 ms·

I just find this odd... we've seen Dark Matter fill in the gaps of standard astronomy (general rel) models of galactic evolution, but it's been predicted and se

by kurthr 6y ago

I just find this odd... we've seen Dark Matter fill in the gaps of standard astronomy (general rel) models of galactic evolution, but it's been predicted and seen in multiple places over the last 50 years and the measurements keep getting stronger (cosmic background spatial distribution, galactic rotation, bullet cluster). Each measurement rules out some model explanation, and we search for different particles (WIMPs, MACHOs, neutrinos) that fit the models that work. We still have interesting testable explanations... but let's give up now, it's boring? MOND again? Sorry, axions are interesting and may explain other things (antimatter ratio etc) and if that fails I think others will pop up, that don't require reexplaining astronomy. https://phys.org/news/2020-06-case-axion-dark-gains-traction.html https://phys.org/news/2020-06-case-axion-dark-gains-traction...

sanxiyn 6y ago
I think an argument can be made that we should have given up (figure of speech: rather, distributed most of resource to other experiments) on WIMP much sooner. These days we agree "WIMP didn't work out", but in retrospect, was it actually the most promising prospect for dark matter, even in 2010? Why was XENON a better experiment than, say, ADMX? I mean, if it were up to me I would fund both, but I think there was certain inertia and undeserved bias for WIMP.
AmericanChopper 6y ago
The very nature of the study of physics has created a long history of untestable theories to fill in the gaps. Because candidate theories that can be tested either solve the problem or remove themselves from contention, so until the problem is solved, the untestable ones are the only ones that last any significant amount of time. The theory of luminiferous ether had a large amount of circumstantial experimental evidence for quite a long time, but all it really was, was a placeholder waiting for an actual explanation. Theories like that will always exist on the frontiers of science. It’s not really unique to physics either. Miasma theory played a similar role in the history of biology for instance.

by kurthr 6y ago

sanxiyn 6y ago

I think an argument can be made that we should have given up (figure of speech: rather, distributed most of resource to other experiments) on WIMP much sooner. These days we agree "WIMP didn't work out", but in retrospect, was it actually the most promising prospect for dark matter, even in 2010? Why was XENON a better experiment than, say, ADMX? I mean, if it were up to me I would fund both, but I think there was certain inertia and undeserved bias for WIMP.

AmericanChopper 6y ago

The very nature of the study of physics has created a long history of untestable theories to fill in the gaps. Because candidate theories that can be tested either solve the problem or remove themselves from contention, so until the problem is solved, the untestable ones are the only ones that last any significant amount of time. The theory of luminiferous ether had a large amount of circumstantial experimental evidence for quite a long time, but all it really was, was a placeholder waiting for an actual explanation. Theories like that will always exist on the frontiers of science. It’s not really unique to physics either. Miasma theory played a similar role in the history of biology for instance.