> the evidence points to matter that hardly, or perhaps not at all, interacts* with the stuff we are familiar with I think this is why people get frustrated wi

> the evidence points to matter that hardly, or perhaps not at all, interacts* with the stuff we are familiar with I think this is why people get frustrated with the DM story. It's not the evidence that points to that. It's the lack of evidence that points to that. Specifically speaking, we keep hypothesizing limits on interaction in the hopes of finding it below some threshold but keep pushing those limits back. A multimodal observation would be clutch, but we keep confirming that a multimodal observation can't happen.