Dark matter matters : Pharyngula

Search

Profile

PZ Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris.
…and this is a pharyngula stage embryo.
• a longer profile of yours truly
• my calendar
• Nature Network
• RichardDawkins Network
• facebook
• MySpace
• Twitter
• Atheist Nexus
• the Pharyngula chat room
(#pharyngula on irc.synirc.net)

• Quick link to the latest endless thread

Register for the Atheist Convention Melbourne 12-14 March 2010

I reserve the right to publicly post, with full identifying information about the source, any email sent to me that contains threats of violence.

I support Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

Random Quote

The applications of science are inevitable and unavoidable for all countries and peoples today. But something more than its application is necessary. It is the scientific approach, the adverturous and yet critical temper of science, the search for the truth and new knowledge, the refusal to accept anything without testing and trial, the capacity to change previous conclusions in the face of new evidence, the reliance on observed fact and not on preconceived theory, the hard discipline of the mind all this is necessary, not merely for the application of science but for life itself and the solution of its many problems.

[Jawaharlal Nehru, former Prime Minister of India]

A Taste of Pharyngula

Other Information

2005 Koufax Award
Best Expert

2006 Weblogs Award

« New York has everything | Main | The Catholic Church retreats into the darkness, again »

Dark matter matters

Category: Science
Posted on: August 23, 2006 9:10 AM, by PZ Myers

Wow…so this mysterious stuff called dark matter actually exists? Sean Carroll gives us the context and the beautiful pictures, while MarkCC explains the math.

Share this: Facebook Twitter Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/19487

Comments

Posted by: Julia | August 23, 2006 9:28 AM

Beautiful and fascinating! Thanks for the links.

Posted by: Bronze Dog | August 23, 2006 10:14 AM

It's proof that woos don't know what they're talking about when they say us skeptics don't believe in the invisible.

Posted by: G. Tingey | August 23, 2006 10:37 AM

But visible through our detectors, covering the whole e-m spectrum.....

Which is why my first testable postulate is:

No god is detectable.

Posted by: tacitus | August 23, 2006 10:54 AM

Heh, just had to post this "alternative" explanation for dark matter:

What then is dark matter? I have suggested that dark matter exists within galaxies, if not elsewhere. We have considered various physical micro and macro-size possibilities. But there is another option. Perhaps the dark matter we seek is in reality the unseen hand of the Creator. We know from Colossians 1: 17 that God in some way holds all things together. Therefore at some point, physical reality must mesh with the spiritual. And that point may lie in the unexplicable problems of modern science.

From: http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/36/36_4/darkmatter.html

So what we think of as dark matter might actually be the cosmic manifestation of those trillions of little angels required to keep the orbits of the stars and planets in place. Comforting to know, I guess...

Posted by: Richard Harris | August 23, 2006 10:57 AM

Gillian (?), of course god is detestable. Well it would be, if there were one.

Posted by: Bronze Dog | August 23, 2006 11:48 AM

Perhaps the dark matter we seek is in reality the unseen hand of the Creator. We know from Colossians 1: 17 that God in some way holds all things together. Therefore at some point, physical reality must mesh with the spiritual.

Sooooo... We're back to Intelligent Falling and God pushing stuff down with his finger?

Posted by: Grumpy Physicist | August 23, 2006 12:44 PM

Sooooo... We're back to Intelligent Falling and God pushing stuff down with his finger?

Damn! Does that mean that we get to call ourselves Newtonists, then?

Oh wait, that's not quite right. And it would get mixed up with that ignorant Gingrich jerk.

Einsteinists! Yes, I'm a godless Einsteinist! Hmm..doesn't quite trip off the tongue.

But when a right-winger accuses me of being a 'relativist', I reply "yes, Generally", but they never get it.

Posted by: Stogoe | August 23, 2006 12:54 PM

My physics prof's favorite woo example was invisible green goblins pushing down on everything. Maybe they're the dark matter.

Posted by: Dustin | August 23, 2006 1:48 PM

Heh, just had to post this "alternative" explanation for dark matter:
What then is dark matter? I have suggested that dark matter exists within galaxies, if not elsewhere. We have considered various physical micro and macro-size possibilities. But there is another option. Perhaps the dark matter we seek is in reality the unseen hand of the Creator. We know from Colossians 1: 17 that God in some way holds all things together. Therefore at some point, physical reality must mesh with the spiritual. And that point may lie in the unexplicable problems of modern science.
From: http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/36/36_4/darkmatter.html

So what we think of as dark matter might actually be the cosmic manifestation of those trillions of little angels required to keep the orbits of the stars and planets in place. Comforting to know, I guess...

Wow... that must mean that when God gets smacked with the spin operator, he spits out complex eigenvalues. I bet I could run a whole theology class on that. Oh, the profundity!

#10

Posted by: Dustin | August 23, 2006 2:21 PM

Heh, sorryfor the double post, I just couldn't resist this:

The Creation Research Equation:
S|God> = (3+5i)|God>

The Nietzsche Equation:
a_-|God> = 0

The Jack Chick Equation of Jesus Potential:
Jesus(r) = -(g^2)(e^(-mr))/r

#11

Posted by: DominEditrix | August 23, 2006 5:55 PM

On the subject of beautiful things that do not owe their existence to any deity other than the FSM, is anyone else getting chain-letter spammed with this, exhorting the recipient to 'make a wish - you have looked into the Eye of God' ? A lovely picture, but it's the freaking Helix Nebula, not some Omniscient Oculus.

#12

Posted by: Dustin | August 23, 2006 9:35 PM

That's a freaking planetary nebula for chrissake! It's a dead star. If that's his eye, God needs to get his omnipotent butt to the optometrist in a hurry.

"So, God, what seems to be the problem?"
"Man, I left a contact in for the last few million years, and now I've got this electron degeneracy. Hurts like hell. Do you have any eyedrops for this?"

#13

Posted by: Torbjörn Larsson | August 24, 2006 10:35 AM

"But when a right-winger accuses me of being a 'relativist', I reply "yes, Generally", but they never get it."

Heh! Well, I would like to say that I'm a 'quantist', but I'm uncertain about the interpretation.

#14

Posted by: Keith Douglas | August 24, 2006 11:24 AM

Bronze Dog: Actually, if you think about it, the vast majority of things and processes are unobservable in the strict sense. On the other hand, if we have good warrant to postulate their existence, there are indicator hypotheses that link the observable with the unobservables in question. (Warning: "Observable" here does not have its meaning sometimes used in QM.)

#15

Posted by: Kayla | August 24, 2006 4:17 PM

That's so cool!

#16

Posted by: DP | August 25, 2006 6:46 PM

At what point do you just say, "the theory is wrong" instead of trying to put band-aids on it?