back to article Astroboffins map GIANT MASS of dark matter

Astrophysicists have mapped the first 3D image of a gigantic dark matter filament for the first time. Hubble image with dark matter mass overlay Dark matter can't really be "seen" as such, it can only be detected by looking at the gravitational effects it has on the space around it. But by collating images from the Hubble …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. PaulW
    WTF?

    But it all looks blue to me in that pic?

    .... oh wait - is that the point?

    (well other than the white bits which look more like stars)

    1. Grikath
      Happy

      Re: But it all looks blue to me in that pic?

      (Choose either Pratchett's description of the Cosmic Zoom away from A'Tuin ( with operatic score) , or Douglas Adams' "Space is Big...etc." to taste.)

      Each "star" you see in that picture is a whole galaxy.

    2. Crisp
      Coat

      Re: But it all looks blue to me in that pic?

      Well, the thing about a bit of dark matter - its main distinguishing feature - is it's dark. And the thing about space, the colour of space, your basic space colour, is black.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "A Weak-Lensing Mass Reconstruction of the Large-Scale Filament Feeding the Massive Galaxy Cluster MACSJ0717.5+3745"

    Catchy title!

  3. Toothpick
    WTF?

    Big Bang Batter ?

    sounds like a pr0n flick

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Its an intergalactic

    POO!

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Dark Matter ..

    Why doesn't dark matter clump ?

    What imparts mass to the Higgs boson ?

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/24/what_next_for_higgs/

    1. Vladimir Plouzhnikov

      Re: Dark Matter ..

      Most importantly: how will it help us build a flying car, finally already?

    2. This post has been deleted by its author

    3. Gob Smacked
      Alien

      Re: Dark Matter ..

      "Why doesn't dark matter clump ?"

      Dark matter has a sort of repulsive trade, at least towards regular matter, but it seems to dark matter itself too.

      It doesn't clump: it wants to distribute itself as evenly as possible in the available space and would have done so if it wasn't affected by gravity.

      A sort of an energy field for which we have no means of detection rather that the gravity with which it interacts.

      Very strange stuff indeed...

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

        1. This post has been deleted by its author

        2. Gob Smacked
          Paris Hilton

          Re: Dark Matter ..

          @HolyFreakinGhost "The point of dark matter is that is *does* clump."

          I'm not mathematically involved, but I beg to differ... :) If it really did clump, it would concentrate right in the core of stars, galaxy's etc. or in itself for that matter. It does not. It just floats in the vicinity of great lumps of matter (halo's of galaxies/clusters), "trying to get away" but grabbed by gravity. Gravity seems to win upto a point where the repulsion gets the upper hand, so it ends up in an awkward equilibrium.

          This is for me the only way I can explain it for myself as far as I understand it, but, IANAM(athgeek)...

          1. This post has been deleted by its author

            1. This post has been deleted by its author

              1. Gob Smacked
                Thumb Up

                Re: Dark Matter ..

                @HolyFreakinGhost

                TYVM for the food for thought.

                I only just recently started taking more interest in the DM/DE physics and don't know all these facts yet, so your story helps. An amateur with a keen mind, no more. It needs a bit of time to sink all in though.. :) I am thinking about an astronomy study after my retirement: a.t.m., I'm just an IT guy and need another 15 years or so before I really get the time to do that.

                1. This post has been deleted by its author

        3. The last doughnut

          Re: Dark Matter ..

          With respect, this is not an observation.

          They have taken some images and written some fancy software that generates a new image, that may represent what they think the distribution of dark matter might look like if it fits with what they think it should do.

          1. This post has been deleted by its author

            1. Gob Smacked
              Thumb Up

              Re: Dark Matter ..

              @HFG

              And TY for this one too :)

    4. ian 22
      Big Brother

      Re: Dark Matter ..

      And who will watch the watchers?

    5. hplasm
      Coat

      Re: Why doesn't dark matter clump ?

      Soft shoes.

      1. Steve Knox
        Coat

        Re: Why doesn't dark matter clump ?

        EXTREMELY low humidity.

        1. Ed_UK

          Re: Why doesn't dark matter clump ?

          Contains magnesium carbonate, E504

    6. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
      Stop

      Re: Dark Matter ..

      > What imparts mass to the Higgs boson ?

      That question doesn't actually make massive sense. The Higgs has energy, hence mass. The fact that it "imparts mass" to other particles is something else entirely (it is also wrongly formulated as the Higgs boson is just a side-effect of the mass-imparting mechanism in the first place).

      The gist of the matter: Learn Group Theory and Quantum Field Theory first, then start discussing. Not that I know anything about second quantization and whatnot.

  6. Daniel von Asmuth
    Headmaster

    "Big bang theories predict"

    Nobody predicted the Big Bang - they just came up with excuses and explanations afterwards.

    1. SkippyBing Silver badge
      FAIL

      Re: "Big bang theories predict"

      That's not what they're saying, they're saying that theories that explain the universe by having it start with a Big Bang, Big Bang theories as opposed to say Steady State theories or religion, predict that dark matter will exist.

      If they find dark matter where the theory says it should be then their theory isn't proved wrong.

  7. wavettore

    Wavevolution

    Contrary to what science still believes, at the time of the Big Bang there were no atoms but only waves carrying energy through the infinite Void.

    If we could view the Universe from outside, It would look like an egg-shaped cloud with winds running in perpetual motion inside of It.

    The energy is like those winds running at maximum speed and pushing out the borders of the Universe.

    The Universe continues to expand as the waves that travel at the border of the Universe have never encountered, nor will ever encounter, any interference from the Void. These waves will forever expand the Space of the Universe they create and leave behind.

    Wave-behavior relates to the medium in which the waves travel.

    Thus, wave-behavior at the border of the Universe is different than wave-behavior within the Universe.

    Inside the Universe, waves change their frequencies by colliding with other energy during their travel. These waves, because of the encountered interference, continue to transform part of their original energy in other forms. Waves travel gradually releasing heat, or amounts of energy, and their original short wavelengths, in time become longer and longer as they carry less and less energy than they did when they first started to travel. These waves lose energy releasing it in form of other waves with wavelengths longer than their own.

    For example, the gamma rays, over time, diminish their energy level (and their frequency) to become X rays, from X rays they will become ultraviolet and so on. The original quantum is not lost but distributed into other forms of energy through "spontaneous symmetry breaking".

    Once reached an almost flat longitude (and lower critical energy level) these waves solidify into hydrogen atoms breaking up their energy in opposite elements, like the split ends of a broken hair.

    When the hydrogen atoms are reached by the heat of other incoming waves they fuse together to create more complex forms of energy.

    http://www.wikinfo.org/Multilingual/index.php/Wavevolution

    1. m4r35n357

      Re: Wavevolution

      mmm, grade " A" gibberish . . .

    2. hplasm
      Angel

      Re: Wavevolution

      And the elephamts and turtle are created when, exactly?

      1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
        Windows

        Re: Wavevolution

        > And the elephamts and turtle are created when, exactly?

        Dunno, it was clearly ants what put them together. Yes, ants! IT'S THE ANTS, I SAY!!

    3. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge
      WTF?

      Re: Wavevolution

      "Contrary to what science still believes"

      Science is not a thing. It does not hold beliefs.

      And as for the rest...

    4. Knochen Brittle
      Flame

      Re: Wavevolution

      J'accuse Lewis Page for attracting this born-again tub-thumper contingent.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "when the universe was first created"

    You sure you don't mean "when the universe first happened" ? :-)

    Quis creat ipsos creatores?

    Good article, though.

  9. nuked
    Mushroom

    I hear Apple are preparing a patent...

    1. Martin Huizing
      Facepalm

      And...

      ...there it is...

  10. Martin Budden Bronze badge
    Coat

    That picture looks 2D to me.

    1. Michael Dunn
      Pint

      That picture looks 2D to me.

      Well said, Sir! Have one on me.

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

      2. The Serpent

        Re: That picture looks 2D to me.

        I’m looking at a pretty, blonde girl in the office right now. From my current perspective she appears to be 2 dimensional, however if I accidentally happen to change my perspective over to the kettle in a minute, or she does something similar, I’m sure I’ll find there are aspects of her I haven’t seen up to now..

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: That picture looks 2D to me.

          "I’m looking at a pretty, blonde girl in the office right now. [...] I’m sure I’ll find there are aspects of her I haven’t seen up to now.."

          Hmm. You raise a couple of interesting points.

          1. The Serpent

            Re: That picture looks 2D to me.

            Later I was in a position to address the subject in more depth - it was no disappointment I assure you!

            Fear not moral behavior fans, I have not resumed any kind of observations today. She's not in.

        2. Kamal Hashmi

          Re: That picture looks 2D to me.

          You have only one eye?

          1. Kamal Hashmi

            Re: That picture looks 2D to me.

            Sigh.

            In reply to The Serpent: I’m looking at a pretty, blonde girl in the office right now....

            You have only one eye?

            (I'll type slower next time...)

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020