EDIT: Let’s cool it with the downvotes, dudes. We’re not out to cut funding to your black hole detection chamber or revoke the degrees of chiropractors just because a couple of us don’t believe in it, okay? Chill out, participate with the prompt and continue with having a nice day. I’m sure almost everybody has something to add.

  • brain_in_a_box@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    Other way around, the math model worked fine without dark matter, and it was experimental observation that revealed DM. And yes, the term dark matter is a catch all by design because we don’t have a single theory on it yet.

    • bitwaba@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Do you think solutions to dark matter are tied up in a unified GR + quantum mechanics theory?

      • brain_in_a_box@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        I would be surprised. Quantum Gravity becomes relevant in very extreme energy conditions, while dark matter is relevant in the normal universe.

    • Treczoks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      The experimental observation did not reveal Dark Matter. Nobody has seen or proven Dark Matter, actually. That’s why it is called Dark Matter. The observation just showed that the math model was flawed, and they invented “Dark Matter” to make up for it.

      My personal take is that they will one day add the right correction factor that should have been in the fomulas all the time.

      Just like with E=mc² not being completely correct. It’s actually E²=m²c⁴ + p²c². The p²c² is not adding much, but it is still there.