3 ms·
From what I understand about that (probably wrong): 1. That's about correct. They don't interact at all with electromagnetism so they'll give off no photons o
by simcop2387 11y ago
From what I understand about that (probably wrong):
1. That's about correct. They don't interact at all with electromagnetism so they'll give off no photons or radiation to be detected from that at least. They're not normal baryons so they shouldn't decompose into alpha or beta radiation either. I don't think they have an reactions that would cause anihilation of particles like antimatter and matter. Dark matter isn't antimatter, not sure that you've made that mistake but I've talked to other people who have and once they realized that it made much more sense.
2. Who would you say it isn't? From what we do know it's affected by gravity and doesn't interact with normal matter or photons. It could be passing through you without you noticing at all. That's one of the reasons that for a long time neutrinos were a big candidate for dark matter because they really don't react with anything at all most of the time (except time apparently).
3. As am I, assuming they decay anyway.
- letitgo12345 11y agoEarth's core cannot be filled with any significant dark matter I think because we know its composition and the calculated weight matches well with the gravity we experience. Dark matter doesn't collide w/ other non-dark particles usually so it cannot lose momentum so any dark matter would just pass through Earth.
- darkmighty 11y agoCorrect, Earth formed through accretion of a disk -- all which happen due to friction. If you have no friction and the velocities of particles are isotropic, then you should get something like a uniform cloud of particles (instead of a protoplanetary disk, which later condenses in planets). I guess the same dynamics apply on the scale of galaxies, which should explain the violation of the expected rotation curve. It should still be possible that those weakly interacting particles would be captured by some body; if there is enough material (plus some other assumptions?) however, they should behave more like a almost uniform fluid (and not lumps like moons or planets), making it undetectable at small scales. It'll be interesting to see how this hypothesis pans out.
- simcop2387 11y agoVery good point I hadn't thought of that. That'll teach me to try thinking hard about something after a long work day.
- cozzyd 11y agoThe astrophysical dark matter can't decay on any reasonably short timescale (since it's still here!) If there is only one DM particle and it's a Majorana (i.e. its own antiparticle), then they can annihilate and produce all sorts of things, which is why experiments like AMS-2, Fermi, and IceCube are looking for annihilation products (the keyword is "indirect dark matter detection").