Dark matter 'bridge to nowhere' found in cosmic void

I wonder if Palin is for or against this bridge.
 
French Ninja said:
Why the sad face, Atomic_Piggy? It sounds pretty awesome to me.
Click to expand...

Because as soon as we get closer to understanding our place in the universe, something else is always discovered that causes even more confusion
 
that's cool. Maybe this was caused by the hadron collider!!!
 
New Scientist has such misleading headings. I thought this would be some kind of wormhole that led into a new universe or something, but it's just a strand of dark matter with some galaxies stuck to it. Not that it isn't interesting of course, it's just not a mind-blowing as it sounds.
 
And I'm going to be studying it starting next week.
 
The only way these stars could have been formed in this strange unknown way is God!
 
Aliens. It's the only answer. But in all seriousness I think the idea of a "dark matter bridge" is ridiculous. Mainly because dark matter is bullshit to begin with. Just my two cents that no one cares for.
 
dark matter is the biggest cop-out in theorectical physics

"Oh wow there seem to be several inconsistencies between how general relativity says the universe should be and how it actually is.... well we'll just invent a new type of matter that can't be seen, touched or interacted with in any way but still exerts it's gravitational pull on our space-time!"

what a bunch of mooks
 
Note, the above two posters are not physicists and have no clue what the **** they are talking about. Thank you.
 
Haha yeah, I'm sure random people on an internet forum are more informed than actual scientists who've spent their entire lives studying this stuff.
 
Atomic_Piggy said:
Note, the above two posters are not physicists and have no clue what the **** they are talking about. Thank you.
Click to expand...

And you are a physicist? You can prove this bridge is real? I hope so, because that would be quite a sight to see.
 
Kale1937 said:
And you are a physicist? You can prove this bridge is real? I hope so, because that would be quite a sight to see.
Click to expand...

No, but I am not arguing against,um, you know, the people who have actually studied this shit they're entire lives and know far far far more than you about it.
 
Atomic_Piggy said:
No, but I am not arguing against,um, you know, the people who have actually studied this shit they're entire lives and know far far far more than you about it.
Click to expand...

Until I see real, physical proof that any of this shit exists I'm going to continue to dispute and just flat not believe them. But I guess I kind of understand what you're saying about believing the scientists, its just that all of this is entirely theoretical at this point.

EDIT: Grammar.
 
so you didn't happen to read the last paragraph of the article where another scientist says that says that questions the existence of the article?

Some caution it may be too early to say for sure whether the galaxies lie along a dark matter filament. "I think that is an interesting hypothesis, but a far cry from a solidly confirmed conclusion," says John Huchra of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Galaxies that are strongly bound by gravity should move quickly relative to each other. But these galaxies move too slowly to suggest there is a massive amount of dark matter hidden away, Huchra told New Scientist.

Solidifying the case for a filament might be possible by observing objects lying behind the void. If their light is bent travelling through the void, the gravitational effect of unseen dark matter could be to blame, Huchra says.

Brosch agrees that the results are still preliminary. He says further observations with larger telescopes could reveal more about the star formation history of the galaxies and show the order in which new material entered the area.

Your the one jumping to conclusions.
 
Atomic_Piggy said:
Note, the above two posters are not physicists and have no clue what the **** they are talking about. Thank you.
Click to expand...

thank you for pointing that out, i was getting abit worried there

so you didn't happen to read the last paragraph of the article where another scientist says that says that questions the existence of the article?

Some caution it may be too early to say for sure whether the galaxies lie along a dark matter filament. "I think that is an interesting hypothesis, but a far cry from a solidly confirmed conclusion," says John Huchra of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Galaxies that are strongly bound by gravity should move quickly relative to each other. But these galaxies move too slowly to suggest there is a massive amount of dark matter hidden away, Huchra told New Scientist.

Solidifying the case for a filament might be possible by observing objects lying behind the void. If their light is bent travelling through the void, the gravitational effect of unseen dark matter could be to blame, Huchra says.

Brosch agrees that the results are still preliminary. He says further observations with larger telescopes could reveal more about the star formation history of the galaxies and show the order in which new material entered the area.

Your the one jumping to conclusions.
Click to expand...

So your conclusion, that dark matter is bullshit because two scientists doubt it, isn't uh, jumped to?

Until I see real, physical proof that any of this shit exists I'm going to continue to dispute and just flat not believe them. But I guess I kind of understand what you're saying about believing the scientists, its just that all of this is entirely theoretical at this point.
Click to expand...

The interesting thing in all of this isn't necessarily whether dark matter exists or not, but the incongruity between the former view and what they're observing and picking up on. Science changes.
 
We HAVE dark matter. we have ACQUIRED and are storing quantities of it.

dark matter is real, it's just very difficult, expensive, and time consuming to get.


Think they would build a bajillion dollar atom smasher called a hadron collider for nothing?
 
Saruke said:
Your the one jumping to conclusions.
Click to expand...
No, you are. Atomic Piggy did not comment on the matter at hand (aha aha) but on the fact that, as a physics layman, you yourself should not be so unequivocal in your conclusions as you are.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hectic Glenn
Cold Case #1: Valve Voice Actress - October Moore
Replies
1
Views
18K
Gerzowktz
Gerzowktz
B
Marc Laidlaw releases Half-Life 2: Episode Three's plot
Replies
32
Views
39K
BabyHeadCrab
BabyHeadCrab
B
From Warren Spector to Arkane Studios: Half-Life 2's cancelled Ravenholm episode
Replies
2
Views
10K
Clan Wolf 2
Clan Wolf 2
B
Half-Life 2: Episode Two - Cyril, Fred, and friends
Replies
0
Views
5K
Barnz
B
B
The leaked maps of the Half-Life 2 episodes - Part 2
Replies
0
Views
9K
Barnz
B
Back
Top