TL;DR What is dark energy and dark matter?

>>8003870
energy and matter that we cannot directly detect but we can detect indirectly.

A meme created by Astrophysicists to hide the fact that they actually know fuck all about the Universe.

>>8003888

Or in other words, GOD

>>8003870
dark energy: something that makes the universe expand faster and faster
dark matter: something that almost only (or only) interacts with everything else through gravity (no light for example). Without it, gravity doesn't explain how galaxies have the shape they do among other things.

>>8003899
Not him, but no.
"GOD" is a being that has intent, will, thoughts, form, etc... and speaks.
In 100% of all religions and cults.
Just because that concept now seems ridiculous doesn't mean people get to re-interpret in order to force-fit their old beliefs into the modern age.

>>8003870

Dark energy: Magic energy that causes the universe to expand
Dark matter: Magic mass that makes galaxies hold together but is invisible

Dark matter is just the higgs field. We're all on a huge graph and there are points for each atom.

>>8003889
/thread

>>8003889
>>8004291
>t. not astrophysicists (or anyone with any knowledge of astrophysics)

>>8003889
You are right. Here you can listen about model of universe that doesn't assume existence of dark matter and explains observable redshift.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUdI4lgpBKk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67UIccsEGmU

File: 1455727129939.jpg (141KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 480x640px

>>8003870
>dark matter
something that we need to explain the gravitational effects we observe in the galaxy, and that doesn't interact thru the electromagnetic force, it appears to be matter because we can detect the gravitational effects of clusters of it at specific points in space.

>dark energy
the energy of space when there is no matter in it, it is needed because the expansion of the universe is too fast in compassion with its matter density, its a mystery atm because although quantum mechanics predicts dark energy, it predicts 10^100 times more than we observe.

>>8004311
Standard cosmology explains the riddance of redshift without dark matter or dark energy. It's only when you get to quantitative cosmology that they are required. Claiming you have a "simpler" model is fine but until it's fit to the precision observable a it really explains shit all. Don't compare a model which can be compared to data with hand waving on YouTube.

>>8003889
Build a better model of prove LCDM wrong and collect your Shaw Prize. Shouldn't take you long.

>>8003870
Dark matter is the missing mass in the galaxies that holds them together, without this extra mass galaxies would rip themselves apart from centripidal forces. FYI this is about 5x the observable mass of each galaxy. It's important to note dark matter may just be that it may literally by dust and gas that we can't see, it just simply isn't observable. The reason we know it has to be there is because if not then we don't even understand the basics of gravity, which may be the case we don't know. Dark energy on the other had is whatever force is causing the universe to expand and accelerate in its expansion.

>>8004329
>important to note dark matter may just be that it may literally by dust and gas that we can't see,
No. Baryonic dark matter has been ruled out by the primordial abundance and importantly by the CMB power spectrum which is independently sensitive to both the total matter density and the baryonic matter density.

>>8003899
ATHEISTS BLOWN THE FUCK OUT FOR EVER AND EVER

>>8004329
>Dark energy on the other had is whatever force is causing the universe to expand and accelerate in its expansion
its not a force, its energy, like normal energy also causes the universe to expand.

>>8004342
Atheist here, can confirm. Am BTFO.

seems funny to me how tightly materialists will cling to their belief system despite not being able to interact with or even directly detect 4/5 of the universe

>>8004355
>yet

>>8004355
lmao, right? like how people claim cellphones work with some magical 'radio waves' or 'gamma waves'. Have any of them ever seen a radio wave? ofcource not, you need to indirectly detect with with a bunch of pseudoscience shit like magnets and strings.

>>8004358
we can directly detect radio waves, bud

try again

>>8004362
>we can directly detect radio waves
kek, how?

can you see it?

holes in equations that we can not explain. though we can observe them in the real world indirectly.

>>8004366
just turn the radio on and songs come out of it

>>8004373
Thats your definition of 'direct'? kek

>>8004329
>The reason we know it has to be there is because if not then we don't even understand the basics of gravity
this is my hypothesis. also that isnt a very good reason that it must be true.
>it must be true because if its not, it means we don't understand.
see how that reasoning doesnt sound that great?

newton thought gravity was one thing, and then it all changed only a few centuries later, and I bet our understanding of gravity is going to change again once the next newton or einstein comes along. since revisions happened only a few centuries apart I'd like to think theres a small possibility I might live to see it.

>>8004411
except for the fact that no modification of gravity can account for the observations

>>8004388
it's as direct as using a ccd to detect light, or an spl meter to detect sound

here's a link to help you understand the concept
http://www.andor.com/learning-academy/direct-detection-understand-direct-detection-ccds

>dark matter
some ad hoc "thing" that explains why galaxies move the way they do

>dark energy
another ad hoc which explain why the universe is accelerating

fucking hell
instead of inventing shit to make the results fit the laws, why don't we instead look inward and consider that MAYBE our laws aren't perfect
we did that with classical mechanics

>>8004455
We are doing that faggot, there's a whole host of possibilities that have already been proposed and are being tested, off the top of my head:
>Axions
>Chameleon particles
>WIMPS
>MACHOS
>MOND

And there's a lot more, including the possibility of so-called "new physics".

>>8004441
ok, but measuring gravitational lensing isnt a direct measurement of dark mater? its a bit confusing when we use the laws of electrodynamics to build devices to measure electrodynamic effects 'directly', but we cant use gravitational effects to build devices to measure matter directly.

>>8004455
>why don't we instead look inward and consider that MAYBE our laws aren't perfect
you must be some sort of fucking genius . why the fuck hasn't everyone ever tried to crease other theories of gravity to explain this stuff?
just look how empty this wiki page is
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternatives_to_general_relativity

>>8004469
>but measuring gravitational lensing isnt a direct measurement of dark mater?

it's a measurement of some mass, that's all

>>8004498
* in fact it's not even that, we assume it is mass because of how space is warped, it may be that mass isn't the only thing which can warp space

>>8004498
>it's a measurement of some mass, that's all
amazing, so we CAN detect dark matter after all!

i think its time you stopped watching all that popsci.

>>8004505
see >>8004504
though

or you know, ignore it and stay within your belief system

>>8004504
What else?

>>8004527
what?

dark lives matter

>>8004506
>It appears to be a mass, that can be clumpy, like you might expect from matter
>We know kinds of particles that don't interact with jack shit can exist, because we know at least neutrinos are real
> All the obvious ways to extend the Standard Model pop out new weakly-interacting particles that could fall within the necessary mass range

Gee, I wonder if the simplest and most obvious explanation might be that we're indirectly observing matter of some sort?

I mean, that wouldn't be enough on it's own, but there is also very active research into modified gravity and it just doesn't work well enough to justify the leap (yet).

>>8004541
well it could be that space is naturally warped, and matter accumulates there like water does in lakes

your tone is too condescending for someone with such a poor imagination

>>8004529
What else other than mass bends space time?

>>8003870
Fudge factors for physicists not named Carmelli.

>>8004555
nothing that we know of
but we don't know of dark matter either, we only know that some space is bent

>>8004546
And of it was just natural wells why would galaxies have the baryon acoustic peak?

>>8004566
>baryon acoustic peak
resonance?

>>8004568
Care to flesh that out into an actual answer?

>>8004573
no i'm completely out of my depth, i don't even study astrophysics lol

>>8004546
>well it could be that space is naturally warped, and matter accumulates there like water does in lakes

And how, exactly, would that work, and what would the side effects of that be? Physicists use math for a reason; there are an endless series of very nice models that explain where any given phenomenon could come from, but only a few nice models that explain why it's as big as it is while remaining consistent with other known quantitative observations.

>>8004597
idk but why does it have to be matter?
i understand it exhibits all the qualities we associate with mass btw

>>8004574
This is the problem with the crap this thread is filled with. Having mad ideas is fine but don't for a second believe that current cosmology is blind or a "belife system". If you've never even opened a copy of Peebles don't pretend you know better.

>>8004624
materialism is absolutely a belief system

>>8004627
Modern cosmology does not subscribe to materialism, case and point the cosmological constant.

>>8004622
>why does it have to be matter

Why does it have to not be matter? It behaves exactly like we'd expect if it were matter*, it's quite sensible to assume such matter could exist, and it's hard to find any other explanation that doesn't totally fuck up other bits of physics.

In the absence of any compelling evidence that it isn't matter, or even any compelling alternative theory**, assuming it is seems perfectly reasonable. Assuming it isn't seems odd.

*mostly; there's real questions that haven't been resolved

**MOND's got huge problems right now

>>8004648
well, i guess we'll see
my guess is we got gravity wrong

>>8004648
Yeah like aether right? There is no additional mass to be seen because it is not there.

>>8004663
>There is no additional mass to be seen because it is not there.

Lol.

>When will they learn?

>>8004662
We may very well might have. Dark matter and modified gravity aren't exclusive; the answer might well involve both.

But without any solid evidence that dark matter alone won't cut it, or any modification to gravity that actually works, there's no particular motivation to pursue that avenue.

>>8004663
The Aether was theoretically motivated, not experimental so no.

>>8003910
why?