Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

The Man Who’s Trying to Kill Dark Matter

#1
C C Offline
https://www.wired.com/2017/01/case-dark-matter/

EXCERPT: [...] The latest attempt to explain away dark matter is a much-discussed proposal by Erik Verlinde, a theoretical physicist at the University of Amsterdam who is known for bold and prescient, if sometimes imperfect, ideas. In a dense 51-page paper posted online on Nov. 7, Verlinde casts gravity as a byproduct of quantum interactions and suggests that the extra gravity attributed to dark matter is an effect of “dark energy”—the background energy woven into the space-time fabric of the universe.

Instead of hordes of invisible particles, “dark matter is an interplay between ordinary matter and dark energy,” Verlinde said.

To make his case, Verlinde has adopted a radical perspective on the origin of gravity that is currently in vogue among leading theoretical physicists. Einstein defined gravity as the effect of curves in space-time created by the presence of matter. According to the new approach, gravity is an emergent phenomenon. Space-time and the matter within it are treated as a hologram that arises from an underlying network of quantum bits (called “qubits”), much as the three-dimensional environment of a computer game is encoded in classical bits on a silicon chip. Working within this framework, Verlinde traces dark energy to a property of these underlying qubits that supposedly encode the universe. On large scales in the hologram, he argues, dark energy interacts with matter in just the right way to create the illusion of dark matter.

In his calculations, Verlinde rediscovered the equations of “modified Newtonian dynamics,” or MOND. This 30-year-old theory makes an ad hoc tweak to the famous “inverse-square” law of gravity in Newton’s and Einstein’s theories in order to explain some of the phenomena attributed to dark matter. That this ugly fix works at all has long puzzled physicists. “I have a way of understanding the MOND success from a more fundamental perspective,” Verlinde said.

Many experts have called Verlinde’s paper compelling but hard to follow. While it remains to be seen whether his arguments will hold up to scrutiny, the timing is fortuitous. In a new analysis of galaxies published on Nov. 9 in Physical Review Letters, three astrophysicists led by Stacy McGaugh of Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio, have strengthened MOND’s case against dark matter....
Reply
#2
Zinjanthropos Offline
I'd have no problem relinquishing Einstein's gravity definition to the trash can if Verlinde's is proven to be more credible. I love this kind of thinking.
Reply
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Research New research suggests that our universe has no dark matter + Matter's existence C C 0 40 Mar 18, 2024 07:04 PM
Last Post: C C
  Research Controversial new theory of gravity rules out need for dark matter C C 0 48 Mar 11, 2024 07:31 PM
Last Post: C C
  Article Is dark matter subatomic particles, or a superfluid, or both? C C 0 37 Feb 6, 2024 07:52 PM
Last Post: C C
  In a ‘Dark Dimension,’ physicists search for the universe’s missing matter C C 0 40 Feb 2, 2024 11:13 PM
Last Post: C C
  Lex Fridman talks to Lisa Randall about Dark Matter Yazata 1 77 Dec 4, 2023 08:07 PM
Last Post: C C
  Article The challenge to dark matter, MOND, is wrong C C 0 84 Nov 22, 2023 07:16 PM
Last Post: C C
  Research ‘Dark Big Bang’ theory: 2nd origin event explains dark matter + Lost toolbag in orbit C C 0 63 Nov 13, 2023 05:56 PM
Last Post: C C
  Why dark matter is SO boring Magical Realist 4 121 Oct 13, 2023 12:56 PM
Last Post: stryder
  Article Dark matter could be building up inside dead stars — explosive consequences? C C 0 74 Aug 29, 2023 05:59 PM
Last Post: C C
  Article Astrophysicists reveal nature of dark matter through study of crinkles in spacetime C C 0 74 Apr 27, 2023 05:58 PM
Last Post: C C



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)