4 ms·
Honest question from a physics novice: Would it be wrong to say the same is roughly true of all of the first 4? I have heard it is plausible that Dark Matter i
by unholiness 5y ago
Honest question from a physics novice: Would it be wrong to say the same is roughly true of all of the first 4?
I have heard it is plausible that Dark Matter is merely another particle that fits in the standard model. I've heard it plausible that Dark Energy is e.g. a WIMP or other new particle in the standard model. And, on more-matter-than-antimatter, I imagine _some_ explanations of baryon asymmetry could come from outside the standard model but others (boundary condition, mirror anti-universe) would be fully standard-model-compatible, right?
That would leave only #5 as a mystery: Why is gravity as we know it in general relativity so different (weaker) than the force that a standard-model graviton would predict?
- T-A 5y ago> I have heard it is plausible that Dark Matter is merely another particle that fits in the standard model. I've heard it plausible that Dark Energy is e.g. a WIMP or other new particle in the standard model. Whoever told you that was getting dark matter and dark energy mixed up. Dark matter could be "another particle", possibly a sterile neutrino: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sterile_neutrino#Sterile_neutrinos_as_dark_matter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sterile_neutrino#Sterile_neutr... Dark energy however is definitely something else. WIMPs in particular are hypothetical dark matter particles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weakly_interacting_massive_particles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weakly_interacting_massive_par...