“we have narrowed down the mass to 90 orders of magnitude. It’s between a neutrino and the mass of the observable universe” So you’ve basically nailed it
Thomas Urech It's called a loose upper and lower bound, the minimum maximum and the maximum minimum. Sometimes there is no minimum minimum or maximum maximum. You just keep finding more and more local maximums and minimums. 😐😐😐😐😐😐
This 5% thing. where does it come from? Of the Known universe, we can see 93 billion light years, but the constraint is unknown. Greene, Brian (2011). The Hidden Reality. Alfred A. Knopf.
I love stuff like this. I wasn't the only kid in the 60's to ask the geography teacher why the continents looked like a jigsaw puzzle. I wasn't the only student in physics to ask how come there are spiral galaxies when the solar system is not spiral at all. Even in my degree, they insisted that proteins denatured at high temps when you can clearly see the green slime in Iceland and Yellow Stone. Love listening to these young minds, this lady and Diane, their eyes are wide open to anything.
My last job interview I was asked, "What's your education background. I said "I was working toward my PhD in physics but I didn't quite complete it". Interviewer said, "Nice, how far did you get?" Me: "About the 10th grade."
At age 32, bog down by the responsibility and demands of society I kinda forgotten how it felt to be amazed by science. i remember as a kid how science was a lens to look at the beauty of the world. And that feeling is amazing. Science doesn't care about my emotions but I like to be sentimental and be inspired about it. Without the child like wonder of "Eureka" where is the motivation to go search for more knowledge? So thank you for doing this.
In the mythos of the original Star Wars continuity, there is a bubble that surrounds the Star Wars galaxy, this bubble is known as the circumferential hyperspace barrier and prevents travel outside of the galactic boundary.
@@JimFortune The kind used by scientists when they are conducting experiments and doing basic research. Their conclusion comes at the end of those processes. They don't come to a conclusion every time they do a math problem.
Hopefully next episode we will learn about black holes and event horizons.... Because that's also new information to the majority of the people who get recommended this.......... This video makes me so sad !
*+The One True Kira* sad :-? why sad¿ there are aplenty things that we (as a species) won't ever fully figure out. (including.. who we really are) and it's okay.. i guess we still don't close our minds (inquisitiveness)(
I love how you showed a clip of a vehicle digging when you said "...looked for dark matter here on Earth". I know it was probably them digging to make something like the LHC, but I just can't stop picturing scientists with little gold-pans sifting through all the dirt going "Nope, no dark matter in this pan" all day
That would mean an actual particle has to be produced, when it's math and speculation one can keep coming up with new ideas ad nauseum without having to evidence one's "discoveries".
I learned more from you than PBS Space Time, and any other channel. Thank you for speaking to people like me, who enjoy and are fascinated with space, but aren't a physics guru.
Thanks for the explanation. It really helped my understanding. However, the one question no one seems to address is how we know that the galaxies are spinning faster than they should be? How do we measure the speed of rotation of a galaxy? How do we measure their total mass and the mass of the inner and outer stars? What is the difference? What is the variation of results when multiple galaxies are compared?
@@malcolmhardwick4258 I suppose they measure the relative red shifts of known atomic bands on both sides of the galactic centre - I think that would work for a galaxy with an axis not pointing directly at us. Like measuring Hubble's constant except only looking at changes in speeds across a chosen galaxy.
You can measure the speed by observing the stars' motion relative to the center, and the mass based on the orbit relative to the center. The last part though, I think is what the woman in the video was saying, where dark matter is anywhere from non-existent in some galaxies, to 95% of the mass in others. So I guess the leading theory is it varies from galaxy to galaxy (?).
i saw someone who looked exactly like you the other day while i was playing piano at work, i was like omg are you physics girl, she was confused and asked if it was a super hero
So some people might be familiar with the name of Hannes Alfven. He was both an electrical engineer, and an astrophysicist. He applied what he knew of the laws of electrodynamics as laid out by Maxwell, Ampere, and Faraday to what he saw in the cosmos in what are still considered to be 'unconventional' ways, one of which was to interpret the rotation of spiral galaxies according to everyday electrodynamic principles. They even named some plasma phenomenon after him (Alfven waves), and he also was awarded a Nobel Prize in Physics for his work on magnetohydrodynamics, although he later went on to revise his understanding of electrodynamics to essentially revoke his earlier postulates on MHD. Anyway, Alfven noted that the rotation of spiral galaxies behaved like a Faraday disk, or a homopolar motor. Essentially, if you pump an electric current through a plasma, it will rotate due to the Lorentz Force. Since the galaxy is a big pool of plasma, it whirls due to the Lorentz Force but cannot escape because of the concurrent magnetic field created by the initiating electric current. This would also explain the 'how' of spiral galaxies, as well as the 'why'. An interesting sidenote to the above is that there is an almost equal amount of visible plasma as there is hypothesized 'dark matter/energy/etc'. Simply by considering basic nuclear chemistry and the behavior of dipolar atoms in electromagnetic fields, one is able to explain: the observations of the matter at the edge of galaxies and why they do not slingshot away into the void; the bipolar geometry of stellar systems/galaxies/galactic clusters/etc; the axial alignment of visible galaxies; magnetic fields at all scales of observation in the cosmos; high frequency emissions of cosmic objects of all scales. The list really does go on and on... The list really does go on an on and on. Just as Hannes Alfven, who is known as the Father of Plasma Cosmology, applied his knowledge of electrodynamics and the behaviors of plasma to astrophysics, I would encourage anyone interested in astronomy and astrophysics to consider taking a course in either Nuclear Chemistry or even just Basic Electricity. It really and truly makes SO much more sense of modern observations of the cosmos than the old Standard Theory does. Peace :)
You explained it better than my comment...those who believe in "dark matter" will not change their mind no matter the results of observations, the simplest explanation doesn't apply when you are receiving funding researching something that doesn't exist.
Wonderful video. Toward the end, Physics Girl said: "I'm still hung up on the fact that we can only see five percent of our universe." As a species, maybe our "seeing" is limited. We know that animals have a keener sense of smell than humans. Maybe our sense of sight is just as limited. From all the discourse on "dark matter" I have read about, the concept strikes me as being just a label for that which we do not understand. Couldn't we just as easily call it "dark chocolate"? And I further wonder whether dark "matter" is actually the same thing as dark "energy", but just in a slightly different form.
Agreed. With our use of detectors for non-visible light, we shouldn't be surprised that there are still things we can't "see". And "Dark Matter" is one of these two things: (1) Matter that exists (holds galaxies together, gravitational lensing, etc.) but we haven't figured out how to detect; or, (2) an indication that our theories on what matter and energy are are wrong, and that it's not a lack of matter that muck up our expectations of galaxy observations.
I'm also curious if this has something to do with why so far we are not detecting any other verifiable advanced civilizations in the observable universe. The argument has always been that we should be detecting radio waves if there were other civilizations because that seems the most likely way that any would be communicating, at least through a major portion of their history. It could be like Star wars or Star Trek out there but they are using some other form of communication and our species just can't detect it. Maybe other life forms are even invisible or noncorporreal from our point of view.
Scientists have been looking for this dark matter Me:*sitting on the couch* Scientists: have you seen the dark matter? Me: no Scientists: are you sitting on it? Me: no Scientists: stand up
But is it denser then iron or not? If so we should be able to see it. If its not... then can't we basicly Make it by using hydron colliders?? Fusion and stuff? We can create gold or artificial diamond. Nature can't make any element denser then iron without the help of massive heat and pressure from supernovea or planet cores. So... meh??? I cud be wrong tho
@@leqin No, but we'll need the cake batter to dip those birds in... CFGC...Canada Fried Goose Cake! ^_- Poultry based desserts are the next big thing. :-D
I saw somewhere the particle is so small you wouldn’t even bleed from a head wound from it. Could it clip a neuron and suddenly you don’t remember how to wiggle your right big toe though? That would be pretty boss.
I love how you present and explain the topic at hand. The way that you explain the descriptive nature of the subjects that you present makes it much easier to visualize the concepts of the subject matter.
The picture of the galaxy you posted on this show, is neat! I like M-33; i think galaxies are so cool. They resemble whirlpools, tornadoes, and hurricanes, i think there's a strong relevance there.
My favorite galaxy might be M81, which is some 11.7 light years distant. Hence we are seeing it as it was long before there were any humans on the earth-when our remote ancestors were little more than arboreal apes.
@Toughen Up, Fluffyedit: just realized you were talking about conversion between dark energy and dark matter. No, dark energy and dark matter are completely different things. Astronomers gave the name "dark matter" to objects that have mass, but do not interact with light. They gave the name "dark energy" to whatever phenomenon/property/entity that is causing the expansion of space itself to accelerate. So yes, the naming was arbitrary. There is no reason to believe they are convertible, or even related at all.
Dark Energy seems to be matter and the fabric of space falling into a black hole from another universe. The increasing mass and speed of matter falling into the other universe's black hole may be why the expansion of this universe is accelerating. This universe may be a white hole, and is the 'other side' of a black hole. Dark MATTER may be explained by gravity being not uniform. My explanation: Gravity is explained by the strong and weak nuclear forces leaking through from countless other universes. These other universes have changing fundamental forces, causing planets and matter itself to disintegrate in almost all of them. This gradient of disintegrated matter in these other universes causes particles in our U to move toward the higher concentration of particles. So, near the edge of galaxies, there is a bigger large-scale gradient of other universe's matter, vs closer to the center of a galaxy. - A youtube commenter.
FLPhotoCatcher If the universe has different phisics, why would it form also galaxies? Or if it doesn’t have gravity, how does it form a black hole? If it forms a black hole, why is it leaking to this universe convinient places? If the other universe has gravity, where is it getting it? Gravity was already present after the Big Bang. So the other universes formed black holes faster to pump stuff over here? I feel like you are throwing darts at the wall and connect the random dots as a meaningful argument, just to have a theory.
I wonder if faster 'time' rather than faster speeds could be anything to do with what you are seeing if the universe appears to be spinning faster than it's calculated mass appears to be, so you don't really need any more matter to explain the speeds you think you are observing. It's a calculation taking into account the affects of mass and gravity on time that you need.
That would be an idea to make sense, but only if the stars near the center appeared like they were moving slower than they should be. Because our time frame should be faster than theirs.
@@mickrussom ...hence all the references to her previous work on dark matter. OBVIOUSLY she wouldn't know anything about what she spent a lot of time studying. Perhaps if we studied in your proximity we could observe small scale gravitational lensing just above your neck.
@@hqcart1 In a SImulation it will probably be a Batch Routine that runs on a schedule, depending on triggers or run manually. Not extremely clear the details of manual instigation. But then I am not a Theoretical Physics Scientist. My bias is Software Engineering and the Turing machine. Off-Topic: I want to wish Physics Girl and all her followers the most wonderful and warm Generic Holidays! Emphasis on Generic, of course. Go Woke, Go Broke and have to add "Epstein Didn't Kill Himself".
@@Milamberinx I wanted to point out this dude just paraphrased the top comment for likes and how lame that is, but you're right - that's Numberwang, too.
@@Arthur0000100 because a dark force is totally evil and we will have a bunch of weirdo running around waving a plasma torch like it is a completely sensible use of energy weapon.
"Is it possible we don't understand gravity?" Here is the question. There is a hole in modern physics, and it is filled with the idea of 'Dark Matter'.
Good question! That hole can only be filled with the acceptance of god in science by the scientific community! Only then the we will move beyongd this dead end of ignorance and a new era of physics will open it doors! Its the only way forward but it goes against all norms! Lets see it wouldn’t be in our life times I guess
@@abutorab1004 religion is the only thing in our world that is not related to science at all, so yeah that’s not the answer because it’s not scientific and can’t be measured scientifically in any way. You can’t just go “oh I guess god is science now hooray all our problems are solved and everything makes sense” because that would just be a cheap way of brushing off the unknown
@@abutorab1004 I can't tell if you're an embarrassing cartoon or completely unhinged, but this isn't the place to spread your obnoxious, hateful vitriol. If you want to fellate a genie, do it in the privacy of your own home and keep it to yourself. Your invisible fairy is an artefact of a collection of phantasmagorical twaddle that has absolutely no relevance in 2024. You should be embarrassed. And you should definitely stop.
@@Jmp5nb Close! It's really an Electric Universe! Electricity is 39 times more attracting than gravity. And there is a theory that gravity is a property of electricity, that is still being researched. Also, electricity repels, as well as attracts, which can explain why cosmic structures, like galaxies, retain their structures over time. Electricity also has a dark mode, when current flow, in space, can't be seen. When the current is strong enough, it goes into a glow mode. The best example of it working, is in incandescent lights. If you're interested, you can go to The Electric Universe, or Thunderbolts.info.com sites.
I mean, the answer is that we _don't_ know that dark matter exists. The concept was invented to resolve the conflict between our observations and our models. There's nothing inherently wrong with that, in fact, this kind of thing is very common. But dark matter may just be the next ether, or centrifugal force. The results that we get maybe not be due to a "quirk in math" but maybe a flaw in the way we are observing the universe overall.
What isn't mentioned here is gravitational lensing. Gravitational lensing causes optical illusion when a light source behind an object is seen at multiple points around the object. It is also why we see the sun set yet it has already set. Gravitational lensing is happening in areas where the math says the dark matter should be there. If the math is wrong, there wouldn't be the gravity in the area bending the light.
Question: are scientists assuming that the observed galaxy is in equilibrium, so has a static shape with time? If we assume dark matter doesn't exist, and stars moving faster than the gravitational model predicts, the speed distribution could simply be expanding (unstable) galaxies, which over our observational time scale only look static.
*Correction: It was astronomer Fritz Zwicky who made the first observations of what we now call dark matter in the 30's.* Lord Kelvin first presented math postulating dark bodies, in 1906 Henri Poincare coined the term 'dark matter' in discussing Kelvin's work, but the first evidence of dark matter using stellar velocities was Dutch astronomer Jacobus Kapteyn, and Jan Oort in 1932 before 1933 when Fritz Zwicky a Swiss astrophysicist obtained the first evidence at CIT. Vera Rubin was in the half a century later, and she was part of a team working for Ken Freeman. All they did was re-measure the same data with 'greater accuracy' using a spectrograph.
I first learned about this when I was 14, and I was excited that something hadn't been discovered yet and I would get to eventually learn what it was. I'm 41 now, and still waiting.
@@V3ntyl if you're _good_ at seeing you'll see the type of tree, current and recent weather conditions, the time since the stick fell from the tree, the types of biome you could be in, and more. "Don't complicate things" is nice but ignores reality and possibility.
Lee Blaclock . Hello darkness my old friend I’ve come to look for you again In a buried tank of liquid xenon I wait for a flash to spur my dreams on And the vision of my Nobel Prize Is still alive Within the bounds of funding
If you think the edge of the galaxy defies known physics, just imagine how much the edge of the universe defies known physics. Could you even see it if you were standing at the edge? boggling
Well, that's the ultimate question, isn't it? If you believe that the universe is finite and created from a big bang event, then it must have delimiting boundaries, perhaps on one side being the universe, and on the other being nothing at all, not even space. Or, more likely, does space wrap around so that the other side of the boundary is actually a continuation from the other side of the universe? Like the globe of the earth, could you get to one side of the universe by actually traveling in the opposite direction to your ultimate destination? In such a case, the universe would indeed seem infinite.
The Universal “Edge” is a very tricky subject. The big bang isn’t expansion from a single point, like that of a Baloon. But it’s more thought of as the expansion of an area on the *surface* of the balloon. tThat means the Universe isn’t expanding from a single point, but everywhere at once, all the time, at a rate that’s increasing every second. The “Edge” of the Universe is the Edge of “Our” Universe/The Universe we can see. The Universe is most definitely larger than we can see. What we call the Edge is just the edge of what we are able to see. Think of the Edge as the Render Distance of a video game like Minecraft.
Yes, Im not referring to the the edge of the 'known universe', that which we simply cannot see beyond, but rather the edge that started out in the big bang and delimits the actual edge of the entire universe. Is it possibly true that the universe is unbound, and that there may not be an edge, the universe actually looping back upon itself, meaning that if you were to continue traveling in the same direction would you eventually arrive at your starting location? Space may indeed have been concentrated in a single point at the time of the Big Bang, which would explain the Cosmic Microwave Background. I'm inclined to believe that the universe is not infinite, as infinity is a purely mathematical concept that really has no examples in reality. Again, boggling.
Random thought: - Evidence for dark matter is based on seeing effects related to it's gravitational influence. - Gravitational force can be considered (equivalent to) an emergent property of time dilation, in a way - If one considers the universe as analogous to a simulation, one could consider mass as we know it plus a certain overhead to be the computational cost of a given planck length region of space. One could consider time dilation (and thus gravity) to be emergent from (or at least analogous to) a local computational bottleneck in the universe - If you can only interact with something via gravity... well essentially you can only interact with it via a local computational bottleneck... essentially like how much CPU resources you're taking from each other... and well that really sounds like a virtual machine situation doesn't it - So depending on the nature of dark matter, it may well be that searching for it could be considered akin to breaking out of a virtual machine into the host system to find out what the heck else is taking CPU resources
Or the one who created the simulation didn't care to realistically "paint" the galaxies. They just put everything far away and out of reach, they are essentially an animated matte painting.
Nice video !! One thing I'd like to know though, that I've never seen in video from the CERN is....how is the CERN working? Not 'technically', but more like 'administratively'. Are they doing tons and tons of collision every day with different parameters, and put the data available to the researchers, that could find what they need? Does researchers have to make protocols first (if yes, how long does it take between the draft of the protocol and getting the results of the experiment)? How many collision per day are happening? All this kind of stuff :) What is the life of a CERN researcher basically :)
That's a nice of a subject for a video. I'll talk with the people in the video / media dept In the meantime here's some starters ruclips.net/video/-fXAsrZ-ePM/видео.html ruclips.net/video/-fXAsrZ-ePM/видео.html ruclips.net/video/AdJn82JwhTM/видео.html and of course the official youtube channel ruclips.net/user/CERNTV
They do like 20 million collisions per second. Then they have software to sort the ones that are not really that interesting. They store only the interesting ones. So theres this big chache of collision results researchers have access to.
Who could not love her energetic M.O.... She's always smiling, positive vibes, a mind 20,000 times brighter than mine... and yes, a great sense of humor... I bet she has Gary Larsen "Scientist" cartoons in her pad.... I do... His "Paramecium Humor" is off the charts... Bless you Physics Girl...
Physics, especially astrophysics, has always been something that I am very interested and passionate about. I never took any Physics classes in HS as my interest mainly developed from star gazing, in my earlier days, to watching countless youtube videos learning about Physics. I'm 32 now and recently started re attending my local Community College to resume the process of getting a degree in Computer Programming. I enjoy computers and love to tinker with them and play games, but I would love to take some Physics classes as well. The joy I feel from thinking about taking Physics classes makes me want to take a full course load and just soak up all the info I can. So therefore, I'm starting to think I should consider switching my major but I don't really know what all fields are out there...tbh, I don't really know what kind of jobs are out there for it or even if it's in demand. The only careers that I could think of would be to teach (not a fan) and I would assume that NASA would need to hire some people who are educated in the field.
Dianna I got a question that has always given me some fun. If you launch a huge mirror at 99% of light speed, facing towards earth and you take a telescope and look at your mirror 50 years later. What will you see? 100 years? longer? What if we could send it 100 light years away but like through a wormhole just in 1 year. What would we see?
so, since light doesn’t slow down(supposedly), then when light is reflected off of it, the light will still be moving towards us at light speed, so that we would see(in years ago) however many light years away it is.
Amazing video, am very excited to explore more of your content. I teach English overseas in a primary school and I have many students that are so very interested in science. Many of them are young girls, so that is awesome, and sharing your videos in class will certainly help encourage them. Makasih banyak!
"We don't know what this is, we don't know how that works, it's all theoretical. I can tell you what's what and change my mind in ten years. And I still get paid. And I can never be proven wrong". I want that gig.
Wowwww! How clever Mr. NeverWashHisCock, I have a real issue with your so called "joke". It first begins with the fact I dont like you. And yea, i guess that basically ends all my facts up to this point. Go squander the streets for nickles dated before the 1980's and get lost.
I am a science teacher, and not a physicist, so my lifelong interest in astronomy and cosmology is more a hobby than even a study. I tried to understand Neutron Stars at age 15 in the mid seventies, so yes we have come a ways since then. As an occasional listener to Matt O'Doud, Anton Petrov, and Dr. Becky, I am finding you a lot of fun to listen to. I like folks like Matt O'Doud because I try to keep up a little, and he stretches my mind past my ability to even believe that I 'got it'. Your approach to your videos is a little history ( yay! ), with some credit where due, and very easy to understand for the layperson. I also appreciate that you find the subject matter itself exciting without need for extra sensationalism. I really liked this dark matter vid for how much you packed into ten minutes. Keep up the good work, Physics Girl!! Ranger G.
Science question: The same way gravity is so weak on the atomic scale that it's immeasurable, wouldn't it be possible that there's a 5th force that is as weak on macro scale as gravity is on the atomic and only becomes noticable at the galactic scale?
clearly it's possible. it's a rather annoying possibility for scientists tho since they're still struggling to unify all the forces they already know about; they don't need another.
totalolage _ It is possible but it would have a hard time accounting for galaxies with no dark matter and galaxies where gravitational effects are not where normal matter is
Old and mostly discarded idea. You can measure dark matter by gravitational lensing. Sure there could be more forces than we know of, but curvature of space is what gravity is and dark matter whatever it is causes it the same as normal matter does. Plus some galaxies have more of the dark matter than others and you can't have a force that works for some galaxies and not the others.
8:12 "It doesn't have to be any one thing! It could be 40% birds, 60% cake batter." A beautifully ditzy yet somehow appropriate summation of our ignorance. Well done!
I liked this presentation. Dark matter and dark energy are fascinating and incredibly important topics. Very recently, some physicists have theorized that there is an "anti-universe" out there, in which many of the "known" laws of physics run backwards. Some physicists even think that time runs backward in this "anti-universe." Some people think that this "anti-universe" is the source of dark matter and dark energy. I would love to hear what you think about this.
I wonder if people that believe in dark matter and dark energy criticize people that believe in ghosts. Yes, I know that the concepts were introduced to explain certain observations, but also ghosts were.
The disciple Thomas once said: I'll believe it when I see it. And then he saw, and he believed, that his late master had miraculously come back to live. Compare that to a magic trick: What you see happening is not always what is actually happening, but it certainly looks that way. But we don't believe it, even though we see it right before our very eyes. Just because you see it doesn't mean it's real. Take an optical illusion for example. Your eyes can deceive you. Don't trust them. Astronomers don't rely on just their eyes. They have all kinds of clever devices that can see things that elude human perception. And they contrast and compare what those devices record, and analyse the measurements in minute detail. What they find is often surprising. And this dark matter is a really big one. Unexplained phenomena are expected. And many of them have been explained eventually. How the mass of something can increase by burning it. How the Sun keeps burning. How the sky is not bright in every direction. And now this.
Makes me wonder if "space" (the stuff that we know to be expanding between objects continuously) is in some form of turbulent flow, and pockets of turbulence are spinning counter to other pockets, creating the illusion that galaxies are spinning faster than should be possible.
Thinking that you are a stationary observer, when in reality you are within a car travelling in the opposite direction on the highway could lead to discrepancies in velocity calculations.
This could be explained by Moshe Carmeli's modification to general relativity. This allows a differential rotation due to gravity which would come into play in very heavy objects like galaxies. There has been some evidence collected agreeing with this by John Harnett the inventor of the atomic fountain clock.
What if there's no such thing as "Dark Matter", but instead the effects we observe in those regions are because of those other dimensions that intertwine with ours in said regions? 😯
@@SolarizeYourLife if you truly believe that hypothesis and Theory always mean the same thing, then you may need to study the English language a little more before you respond to comments on physics. Try looking up Theory with a capital T
@@tracewallace23 I get that "hypothesis" is different than "Theory," but Theory isn't the same as fact, right? I mean, a Theory COULD be factual (such as the Theory of evolution) but isn't necessarily so (such as the big bang Theory.) Is that accurate? Maybe a good synonym for laymen like myself would be "explanation," as in speculation (hypothesis) led to an investigation, which led to an explanation (Theory) ... yes? No? Maybe?
Donald Saari, a mathematician with expertise in mechanics, has argued that the rotation curve velocity discrepancies are essentially the result of astronomers using a continuous mass distribution of matter in a galaxy in their calculations. When you discard that approximation and work with the mechanics of stars locally attracting each other in various configurations, the case for dark matter (at least from the point of view of galactic rotation velocity curves) disappears.
I agree completely with this rationale. I tend toward the incomplete understanding of gravity and how it can appear to manifest itself differently from expectations. As we see with everything in nature, the manifestations of physics at the quantum scale to the atomic scale to microscopic scale, to the scale of human unaided eyesight, to macro scales, and galactic scales - things appear to work very differently because of cumulative emergence of 'behaviours' that don't necessarily follow expectation. And in such a way to not yet be able to adequately explain with current mathematical formulations that can't yet explain observed behaviour without dark matter/energy. I have always seen dark matter and energy as fudge factors of convenience. Which is fine, because it is natural to begin to explain unknown phenomena with simpler explanations. But I firmly believe that the answer is much more nuanced than saying there is this matter that we just can't see. I don't buy it. In my opinion, not unlike human conscience - it may not be a 'thing' at all, it is an abstract emergence from synergistic effect and interactions - Gestalt. It forms from atoms being together, from cells being together that are made up of atoms and molecules, and cells form complex organs, evolving into a collective manifestation of what we see as a conscience. I argue a similar manifestation of gravity behaviour at enormous galactic scales are just as nuanced and complex, obviously beyond human comprehension at this point.
@@anabelcamacho6584 Nobody actually believes that the Earth is flat. It's too easy to prove that it's a sphere. Anyone can do it. "Flat earthers" are all trolls .
@@ThatBoomerDude56 So you just say: 'Nobody actually...' so you don't know and there for look up to others? (1 Question ) If it was easy to prove suggested imagination about globe, you would already did that and because you personally have no evidence , you hide by word 'anyone' it means not you. There is no such a thing as 'flat earthers' usually it is CIA agents playing a clowns controlled opposition . Would you like to know the truth? (2 Question)
If I’m following along correctly - of that 4.9% which is ‘regular matter’, maybe 99.9% is plasma. Meaning that only 0.049% of the universe is solid, liquid or gas. Then there is the minuscule percentage of that which is considered to be ‘embodied’ in a life form. Any guesses what that percentage is ? We are SO anomalous!
What I always find myself thinking, is that how can you detect rogue planets? I mean my theory is that there is A LOT more rogue planets. I think the most mass in the whole universe is rogue planets. Planets that were NOT formed around the star, but around packs of dust and gasses in the "empty space", for example after supernova explosions, and some just general large nebulae. I bet most of the stuff escaped the star and clumped up in small objects that never returned, but instead flee randomly all over the universe. It would make sense that only small part of the mass actually stays near star to form planets that go around the star. Specially when supernovas can happen many times for just one star. If always a lot of the dust escapes, it would make sense that there is a lot of that extra stuff going in empty space. But those objects are so small in universal scale that their existance and gravity is practically impossible to even detect from such large distances. There can be large nebulae that never even gathered in one single point and made a star, but instead created tons of dwarf planets and rocks.
This is why I came to the comments. We've only observed a few thousand planets in total. I can imagine a solar system with thousands of planets orbiting, perhaps chaotically, or in huge orbits (larger star, larger range to hold more planets) or just plain rogue. Once we put a few 100 million observed planets under our belt, I think we'll have a better idea of what's actually out there regarding planet mass.
Exactly. We may find that clumps of matter actually coming together in big enough quantities to make a star only occur one out of every 20 times ... I mean when it does happen, the resulting stars are trillions of miles apart, right? i bet there's a lot of dense clumps of stuff in-between that is still small enough and spread out enough to be "invisible" to our current observational capabilities.
To my understanding a planet is rogue when it is knocked off of its original place by another massive object. Asteroid. Comet. Meteor. The mass of the planet will only weigh what it weighs. Force of gravity. it gets hit and loses mass and becomes lighter and moves away or combines with during impact and gets closer to the sun or star. The drifting lighter planet will continue to drift endlessly in space as it will find its own rotation around the star. The weigh is either too heavy to go against the gravitational pull and fall in or is too light and bounces away. It will either continue to fall into the star or orbit the star when it has reached its distance based on the weight of the planet and the force of gravitational pull. Now mind you when it comes to rotation and speed of any one planet. It can also have another in the same system further away traveling at a comparative speed to the sister planet in the same system and we will not see the second planet ever.
What if dark matter isn't really mass, but an effect? Like what if spinning mass increases the gravity field very slighting, so on galaxy wide scale of rotating matter, the effect is huge? Perhaps the spinning or rotating matter amplifies the gravitational field by interacting with other fields that permeate the universe (like the Higgs Field).
Alternatively what if things we define as mass-less (like photons, x-rays and microwaves) do have mass, but it is so tiny we cannot detect it (much like people thought electrons didn't have mass but they do). There is so much electromagnetic radiation out there that, it is the dark energy or matter?
As she says in the video, that would mean you would find "dark matter" everywhere. Some galaxies don't have it though, so it can't be an effect like that or those galaxies would also have "dark matter".
David Enrique, what about some black holes having such a deep gravity well that they punch through space time to form a wormhole to another universe (not all galaxies would have this). And the gravitational field from matter on the other side of the wormhole, be it another universe or just another location in this universe pass through the even horizon, unlike electromagnetic energy?
I'd rather underline that plasmas can be contained and accelerated by EM fields. I agree with your point; as gravity is not necessarily the only force acting on these systems, it doesn't follow that dark matter needs to be proposed. We also see dust hiding light (= mass) as well as hiding current within itself (= magnetic fields). I think the first step is to make sure we actually quantify what's taking place using the forces we know, not only 1 and barring the rest.
You asked the question whether dark matter does not exist and we simply have a limited understanding of gravity at a very large scale. I have wondered this myself, but your explanation early in this video of why the existence of dark matter seems more likely was very good. I've listened to a lot of people talking about the subject, but this is the first time I have felt half-convinced.
One solution to negate dark matter: Gravity is a bipole. iow: Without matter, gravity reverses. So ... outside galaxies, the matter is pushed together by the big nothing outside it. Well .. that could be an explanation. I would urge to think of alternatives like this way of thinking, since we have been looking for it for decades and found nothing. I would suggest that our physics and basic ideas of gravity, is wrong.
By the way ... The notion that gravity could be a bipole (like everything is), would also explain dark energy. Galaxies are pushed away from each other by gravity. Or more accurately: Spactime is bent the other way in the absence of matter.
You all need to stop believing everything ALL the governments keep telling you, they are just trying to control you by making you think the world is round. Its FLAT, plain and simple. I know people around the globe that can prove me right.😜😜🤣 FYI the International Space Station is just hologram projected from earth, that's why you can see it on a telescope. I saw that on a youtube video so that's proof its true.
The universe is like a balloon expanding with dots all over it. “Spheres” seem to be the shape of the universe so why wouldn’t the universe itself be spherical shaped. All the dark matter is in the center of the galaxy that we don’t see. Also, why can the fabric of space not be the dark matter just no way to “measure” it at our current understanding
That is what I think as well. We have no idea what 'it' is. We observe some effect we were not expecting. We only know that with our current understanding of physics, the math doesn't add up. It is all theoretical physics at this point. It is not our fault for not understanding (yet). The tools we have now are too limited for the scope of the universe.
You are brilliant at this - You make science fun - and easy to learn and watch :) - Also if history has taught us anything its that when it comes to science the explanation is always way more complicated than we first thought - and usually the solution isn't even the thing we imagined at first - fun times ahead if the LHC finds anything :)
Two possibilities: 1.) There some magical 'dark matter' that makes up most of the mass of the universe, but we can't find it. or 2.) Our understanding of gravity is flawed. She said it best at 3:02 "We find that galaxies are spinning way faster than they should be able to _according to our laws of physics."_ So between _magic_ or _an incomplete understanding,_ I have to go with option 2.
Congrats, that's almost basically what dark matter is. They know it has to be something, hence the "matter" in the name. But it's totally different from normal matter, because it does not follow the same accepted theories and models that we have for normal matter and does not even interact with the EM spectrum, hence the "dark" in the name.
@@johncox9868 They did not "invent" new matter. It's been one hundred years since scientists found evidence for dark matter, you don't think questioning assumptions is the first thing they did? Pretty sure many scientists are still questioning it right now, but no progress on that end either. You're not smarter than them.
@@astablemultivibbrator8538 Inventing new matter is exactly what they did. The math doesn't line up with current assumptions, so their answer is that there must be some new undiscovered substance to balance the equation. They may be right, but I find it more likely that one of their current assumptions is wrong.
Crazy question: We only know the visible universe. If outside the visible universe there exists an infinite amount of matter then it must exert gravitational forces on our visible universe and in a asymmetric manner. Stars at the outer spiral of a galaxy would be pulled out making them move faster. Could gradational forces outside our visible universe be interacting with our visible universe?
![Journey to the Edge of the Universe [4K]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QhM5zAVvOI4/mqdefault.jpg)
Anyone who has dropped a guitar pick knows about searching forever to find something you know is there.
Or a mechanic and a bolt.
Or the push pin/nail when you drop it, trying to hang something up
or a bead on the carpet
@@Crazy_Kakoos 9l9999999ll9999lll99lll9999llllll9lll999l9ll9l99999999lll999lll99ll9llllll9ll9llll99l9l9llll9l9lll9lll99999lll9lll99lll9llll999ll9llllll9l9lll9l99l9lll99llll9lll9lll99l9l9ll9l9llllllll9lllll99lll9llll9l9l9llllllllll9l9llll9l99l9llll9999l
@@MrHappy4311 9l9ll99l99ll9l9ll9l9l99lll
“we have narrowed down the mass to 90 orders of magnitude. It’s between a neutrino and the mass of the observable universe”
So you’ve basically nailed it
she explained it VERY badly,lol
lol
Thomas Urech: "So you’ve basically nailed it"
Maybe she was hammered at the time?
We are so close.
Thomas Urech It's called a loose upper and lower bound, the minimum maximum and the maximum minimum. Sometimes there is no minimum minimum or maximum maximum. You just keep finding more and more local maximums and minimums. 😐😐😐😐😐😐
Teacher: "Why is your score so low?"
Me: "You only seeing 5%."
*4.9℅
This 5% thing. where does it come from? Of the Known universe, we can see 93 billion light years, but the constraint is unknown. Greene, Brian (2011). The Hidden Reality. Alfred A. Knopf.
There is no peer space it comes in different thicknesses
wackywong I taught science and math for 15 years, and if I were hit with this one, I'd have given it an A for comprehension.
dark answers?
I love stuff like this. I wasn't the only kid in the 60's to ask the geography teacher why the continents looked like a jigsaw puzzle. I wasn't the only student in physics to ask how come there are spiral galaxies when the solar system is not spiral at all. Even in my degree, they insisted that proteins denatured at high temps when you can clearly see the green slime in Iceland and Yellow Stone.
Love listening to these young minds, this lady and Diane, their eyes are wide open to anything.
it's funny you say that, even my my mum wondered as a child why all the continents seemed to "fit together"
Have you seen Particle Fever?
My last job interview I was asked, "What's your education background. I said "I was working toward my PhD in physics but I didn't quite complete it". Interviewer said, "Nice, how far did you get?" Me: "About the 10th grade."
I would have given you the job on the spot...
haha..... me too.
HaHa :)
I need to remember that one. :)
Good joke. I will have to remember that one
At age 32, bog down by the responsibility and demands of society I kinda forgotten how it felt to be amazed by science.
i remember as a kid how science was a lens to look at the beauty of the world. And that feeling is amazing.
Science doesn't care about my emotions but I like to be sentimental and be inspired about it.
Without the child like wonder of "Eureka" where is the motivation to go search for more knowledge?
So thank you for doing this.
They only ask "what is dark matter", they never ask "how is dark matter' :(
I'll do you one better: why is dark matter?
@@888PsyMike888 "I would catch it"!
WHO is Dark Matter?!
Dark matter matters.
@@888PsyMike888 darkmatter is gamora
In the mythos of the original Star Wars continuity, there is a bubble that surrounds the Star Wars galaxy, this bubble is known as the circumferential hyperspace barrier and prevents travel outside of the galactic boundary.
I like that she used Siri to confirm her answer, not to give her the answer.
If you need Siri to do a simple subtraction, physics is not the field for you.
@@craigcorson3036 And if you never check your conclusions, science of any type is not the field for you.
@@JimFortune So, you think that the result of subtracting a number from 100 counts as a conclusion? Only by a very broad definition of that word.
@@craigcorson3036 What narrow definition of "conclusion" excludes it?
@@JimFortune The kind used by scientists when they are conducting experiments and doing basic research. Their conclusion comes at the end of those processes. They don't come to a conclusion every time they do a math problem.
I'd just like to point out that Dork Energy would make a good name for a band of physics researchers.
Or “W.I.M.P gang” 😂
Jim's videos brilliant idea! I work at CERN and I am part of it's music's club. I'll suggest your suggestions and credit you. Promised!
@@aurora2319 Thank you! The ATLAS folks made an album a couple years ago which I enjoy, I'm curious to see what else comes out of your community!
Big Dork Energy?
So you're saying we're completely in the Dark, literally and figuratively.
Nah, only 95%.
@@VoltisArt Ah good, so there's a light at the end of the Large Hadron tunnel.
@@KimberlyGreen At the end of $50 Billion LHC.
Hopefully next episode we will learn about black holes and event horizons.... Because that's also new information to the majority of the people who get recommended this.......... This video makes me so sad !
*+The One True Kira* sad :-?
why sad¿
there are aplenty things that we (as a species) won't ever fully figure out.
(including.. who we really are)
and it's okay.. i guess
we still don't close our minds (inquisitiveness)(
That was a solid video!. I'm familiar with the content, but still found your descriptions and information to be a big value added!
_NASA ANNOUNCEMENT_
"We know this sounds weird, but dark matter turns out to be mostly birds... and cake batter."
Oooh, BIRDS! I thought she said "Berts", like multiple people called Bert and I got so confused by that 🙈
What flavor?
Deep fried?
@@midnight8341
Bert and Ernie memes are waiting for you on the Internet to be discovered.
*+Kevin McDougall*
it _always_ is your (our) fault
whether we accept it or not :P
I love how you showed a clip of a vehicle digging when you said "...looked for dark matter here on Earth". I know it was probably them digging to make something like the LHC, but I just can't stop picturing scientists with little gold-pans sifting through all the dirt going "Nope, no dark matter in this pan" all day
That would mean an actual particle has to be produced, when it's math and speculation one can keep coming up with new ideas ad nauseum without having to evidence one's "discoveries".
I learned more from you than PBS Space Time, and any other channel. Thank you for speaking to people like me, who enjoy and are fascinated with space, but aren't a physics guru.
That PBS Space Time guy is really hard for the lay person to understand. I wish I did understand better.
Sorry Trevor I just posted up here so people would see the truth about the Dark matter farce...
You learned nothing. Space is a fantasy and dark matter is just a distraction from the fact that their "science" is nonsense.
@@jeremywallis1960, right. Physics says otherwise. I trust scientists far more than someone else who doesn't believe the basics of science.
Thanks for the explanation. It really helped my understanding. However, the one question no one seems to address is how we know that the galaxies are spinning faster than they should be? How do we measure the speed of rotation of a galaxy? How do we measure their total mass and the mass of the inner and outer stars? What is the difference? What is the variation of results when multiple galaxies are compared?
Earth has to send them a speeding ticket !
@@malcolmhardwick4258 I suppose they measure the relative red shifts of known atomic bands on both sides of the galactic centre - I think that would work for a galaxy with an axis not pointing directly at us. Like measuring Hubble's constant except only looking at changes in speeds across a chosen galaxy.
Great Question Jon. Whats the difference in the rotational variation against the calculated mass of a given galaxy.
You can measure the speed by observing the stars' motion relative to the center, and the mass based on the orbit relative to the center.
The last part though, I think is what the woman in the video was saying, where dark matter is anywhere from non-existent in some galaxies, to 95% of the mass in others. So I guess the leading theory is it varies from galaxy to galaxy (?).
i think relativity best explains how this speed can be measured
i saw someone who looked exactly like you the other day while i was playing piano at work, i was like omg are you physics girl, she was confused and asked if it was a super hero
😂😂😂
Of course
Wkwkwk
So some people might be familiar with the name of Hannes Alfven. He was both an electrical engineer, and an astrophysicist. He applied what he knew of the laws of electrodynamics as laid out by Maxwell, Ampere, and Faraday to what he saw in the cosmos in what are still considered to be 'unconventional' ways, one of which was to interpret the rotation of spiral galaxies according to everyday electrodynamic principles. They even named some plasma phenomenon after him (Alfven waves), and he also was awarded a Nobel Prize in Physics for his work on magnetohydrodynamics, although he later went on to revise his understanding of electrodynamics to essentially revoke his earlier postulates on MHD.
Anyway, Alfven noted that the rotation of spiral galaxies behaved like a Faraday disk, or a homopolar motor. Essentially, if you pump an electric current through a plasma, it will rotate due to the Lorentz Force. Since the galaxy is a big pool of plasma, it whirls due to the Lorentz Force but cannot escape because of the concurrent magnetic field created by the initiating electric current. This would also explain the 'how' of spiral galaxies, as well as the 'why'.
An interesting sidenote to the above is that there is an almost equal amount of visible plasma as there is hypothesized 'dark matter/energy/etc'. Simply by considering basic nuclear chemistry and the behavior of dipolar atoms in electromagnetic fields, one is able to explain: the observations of the matter at the edge of galaxies and why they do not slingshot away into the void; the bipolar geometry of stellar systems/galaxies/galactic clusters/etc; the axial alignment of visible galaxies; magnetic fields at all scales of observation in the cosmos; high frequency emissions of cosmic objects of all scales. The list really does go on and on...
The list really does go on an on and on. Just as Hannes Alfven, who is known as the Father of Plasma Cosmology, applied his knowledge of electrodynamics and the behaviors of plasma to astrophysics, I would encourage anyone interested in astronomy and astrophysics to consider taking a course in either Nuclear Chemistry or even just Basic Electricity. It really and truly makes SO much more sense of modern observations of the cosmos than the old Standard Theory does.
Peace :)
Who would have thought that atomic structure would have anything to do with the visible universe.
You explained it better than my comment...those who believe in "dark matter" will not change their mind no matter the results of observations, the simplest explanation doesn't apply when you are receiving funding researching something that doesn't exist.
Yes! Plasma Cosmology!
@Craig Carmichael No sir, a bit south of there in Minnesota, USA :)
Tesla thought we live in an electromagnetic universe. He's probably right
Dark Matter is a myth: stars get a Gravity Multiplier when they're on a kill streak.
That is at least a better postulation than dark matter.
@@MegaBanne Yeah, it's the other big guess. No proof for either, barring super-cool online roleplaying jokes!
@@shifttheshaman
Your suggestion does at least have creativity and openmindedness.
Now see, right there? Your theory makes sense to me 😂
Lol
Wonderful video. Toward the end, Physics Girl said: "I'm still hung up on the fact that we can only see five percent of our universe."
As a species, maybe our "seeing" is limited. We know that animals have a keener sense of smell than humans. Maybe our sense of sight is just as limited.
From all the discourse on "dark matter" I have read about, the concept strikes me as being just a label for that which we do not understand. Couldn't we just as easily call it "dark chocolate"? And I further wonder whether dark "matter" is actually the same thing as dark "energy", but just in a slightly different form.
Agreed. With our use of detectors for non-visible light, we shouldn't be surprised that there are still things we can't "see".
And "Dark Matter" is one of these two things:
(1) Matter that exists (holds galaxies together, gravitational lensing, etc.) but we haven't figured out how to detect; or,
(2) an indication that our theories on what matter and energy are are wrong, and that it's not a lack of matter that muck up our expectations of galaxy observations.
@@my-back-yard " I consider myself a materialist, but I don't like that term because it implies that we know what matter is". Sir Roger Penrose :)
In response to your last sentence, all known matter is the same thing as energy just in a slightly different form, so yeah.
I'm also curious if this has something to do with why so far we are not detecting any other verifiable advanced civilizations in the observable universe. The argument has always been that we should be detecting radio waves if there were other civilizations because that seems the most likely way that any would be communicating, at least through a major portion of their history. It could be like Star wars or Star Trek out there but they are using some other form of communication and our species just can't detect it. Maybe other life forms are even invisible or noncorporreal from our point of view.
I definitely prefer "dark chocolate." At least it's delicious!
Scientists have been looking for this dark matter
Me:*sitting on the couch*
Scientists: have you seen the dark matter?
Me: no
Scientists: are you sitting on it?
Me: no
Scientists: stand up
Me: No...
But is it denser then iron or not?
If so we should be able to see it.
If its not... then can't we basicly Make it by using hydron colliders??
Fusion and stuff? We can create gold or artificial diamond. Nature can't make any element denser then iron without the help of massive heat and pressure from supernovea or planet cores.
So... meh??? I cud be wrong tho
HAAAA
@Despiser Despised OMG
@@cherrydragon3120 lol
When the LHC is done with its primary mission, they should use it to crack walnuts.
Why do that when your livelihood is directly tied to GDP of the nations who fund it? #GravyTrain
They should use it to crack open those pistachios that got into the bag with their shells intact.
@@commentfreely5443 So we have walnuts and pistachious and fudge....... are we baking a cake.
@@leqin
No, but we'll need the cake batter to dip those birds in...
CFGC...Canada Fried Goose Cake! ^_-
Poultry based desserts are the next big thing. :-D
I saw somewhere the particle is so small you wouldn’t even bleed from a head wound from it. Could it clip a neuron and suddenly you don’t remember how to wiggle your right big toe though? That would be pretty boss.
I love how you present and explain the topic at hand. The way that you explain the descriptive nature of the subjects that you present makes it much easier to visualize the concepts of the subject matter.
The picture of the galaxy you posted on this show, is neat! I like M-33; i think galaxies are so cool. They resemble whirlpools, tornadoes, and hurricanes, i think there's a strong relevance there.
My favorite galaxy might be M81, which is some 11.7 light years distant. Hence we are seeing it as it was long before there were any humans on the earth-when our remote ancestors were little more than arboreal apes.
Love the book on the shelf "We have no idea" - quite an apropos title for this subject .. matter.
“Without this the Milky Way couldn’t exist”
Thumbnail: points to PBS
they changed the title lol
Yeah i just noticed that
How can one change an alleged universal law?
donepearce Its was a play on the importance of PBS.
ＲＥＬＡＸ.
@@ugoeze7360 It*
Brief mention of dark energy as a whole other can of worms - can we have a video on it please?
@Toughen Up, Fluffy Try the Entropic Gravity theory of Erik Verlinde.
You need to hear him explain it many times before you understand it. Lol
@Toughen Up, Fluffyedit: just realized you were talking about conversion between dark energy and dark matter.
No, dark energy and dark matter are completely different things. Astronomers gave the name "dark matter" to objects that have mass, but do not interact with light. They gave the name "dark energy" to whatever phenomenon/property/entity that is causing the expansion of space itself to accelerate.
So yes, the naming was arbitrary. There is no reason to believe they are convertible, or even related at all.
Dark Energy seems to be matter and the fabric of space falling into a black hole from another universe. The increasing mass and speed of matter falling into the other universe's black hole may be why the expansion of this universe is accelerating. This universe may be a white hole, and is the 'other side' of a black hole.
Dark MATTER may be explained by gravity being not uniform. My explanation: Gravity is explained by the strong and weak nuclear forces leaking through from countless other universes. These other universes have changing fundamental forces, causing planets and matter itself to disintegrate in almost all of them. This gradient of disintegrated matter in these other universes causes particles in our U to move toward the higher concentration of particles. So, near the edge of galaxies, there is a bigger large-scale gradient of other universe's matter, vs closer to the center of a galaxy.
- A youtube commenter.
@@FLPhotoCatcher wow, thats a bit arbitrary.
FLPhotoCatcher If the universe has different phisics, why would it form also galaxies?
Or if it doesn’t have gravity, how does it form a black hole? If it forms a black hole, why is it leaking to this universe convinient places? If the other universe has gravity, where is it getting it?
Gravity was already present after the Big Bang. So the other universes formed black holes faster to pump stuff over here?
I feel like you are throwing darts at the wall and connect the random dots as a meaningful argument, just to have a theory.
I wonder if faster 'time' rather than faster speeds could be anything to do with what you are seeing if the universe appears to be spinning faster than it's calculated mass appears to be, so you don't really need any more matter to explain the speeds you think you are observing. It's a calculation taking into account the affects of mass and gravity on time that you need.
At relativistic speeds , perceived mass increases in proportion to the energy input. So you are probably correct
That would be an idea to make sense, but only if the stars near the center appeared like they were moving slower than they should be. Because our time frame should be faster than theirs.
I'm pretty sure some physicists already had the same idea but they found a way to prove it wrong
@@Henning_S. yes ..i expect that's true
Dark Matter: "You merely adopted the dark. I was born in it, molded by it"
Proceeds to break regular matters spine.
@@Snoogen11
You fight like younger matter, nothing held back...
They say Light travels at 186,326 miles per second.
But what about the SPEED OF DARK?
@@rdelrosso2001 Dark is the absense of light; therefore 186,282 mps.
ruclips.net/video/iEzTO-T9H9o/видео.html
the passion you have is contagious and precious.
i concur. she should change her name to PhysicsGoddess. her enthusiasm is divine (and refreshing) 💯
Oh daddy!
she is a layman speculating on things she knows nothing about unfortunately.
@@mickrussom ...hence all the references to her previous work on dark matter. OBVIOUSLY she wouldn't know anything about what she spent a lot of time studying.
Perhaps if we studied in your proximity we could observe small scale gravitational lensing just above your neck.
Dark Matter is a Batch that fixes the Universe simulation Bugs.
you mean a patch?
@@cheesywiz9443 when your software needs an update, you give it an update batch ;)
@@hqcart1 In a SImulation it will probably be a Batch Routine that runs on a schedule, depending on triggers or run manually. Not extremely clear the details of manual instigation. But then I am not a Theoretical Physics Scientist. My bias is Software Engineering and the Turing machine.
Off-Topic: I want to wish Physics Girl and all her followers the most wonderful and warm Generic Holidays! Emphasis on Generic, of course. Go Woke, Go Broke and have to add "Epstein Didn't Kill Himself".
@@hqcart1 well it might be a batch file but is still an update patch...
True.
Great video, Dianna presented in a way that we can follow and understand the subject.
Dark Matter is science speak for we don't have a clue.
I agree, like retrograde orbits when we thought Earth was center. So we "invent" something to make the MATH work.. "Fudge Data"
@@omrirotcod7035
Or "Luminiferous Aether". 😑
Could be 5 dimensional super beings playing with gravity magnets for all they know 🤷♂️
True
+1
Quiz show host "What is dark matter?"
Contestant "Er, no idea"
Quiz show host "somehow,... that is correct"
The Chase:
Bradley Walsh: What is dark matter?
Contestant: Pass
Bradley Walsh: Correct
Contestant: 👁👄👁
That's Numberwang!
@@Milamberinx I wanted to point out this dude just paraphrased the top comment for likes and how lame that is, but you're right - that's Numberwang, too.
"The only thing that can hold stars in our galaxy is gravity" and what about the power of friendship?
Stars are notorious loners, they don't believe in it.
This comment might be onto sth. Why can't there be a new force that we don't know of
@@Arthur0000100 because a dark force is totally evil and we will have a bunch of weirdo running around waving a plasma torch like it is a completely sensible use of energy weapon.
damn i gotta send this signal to Murphy using gravitational waves
That's magic. We ain't gotta explain that.
"Is it possible we don't understand gravity?" Here is the question. There is a hole in modern physics, and it is filled with the idea of 'Dark Matter'.
Good question! That hole can only be filled with the acceptance of god in science by the scientific community! Only then the we will move beyongd this dead end of ignorance and a new era of physics will open it doors! Its the only way forward but it goes against all norms! Lets see it wouldn’t be in our life times I guess
@@abutorab1004 religion is the only thing in our world that is not related to science at all, so yeah that’s not the answer because it’s not scientific and can’t be measured scientifically in any way. You can’t just go “oh I guess god is science now hooray all our problems are solved and everything makes sense” because that would just be a cheap way of brushing off the unknown
Yep. Like the old "Phlogiston" theory of combustion.
@@abutorab1004 I can't tell if you're an embarrassing cartoon or completely unhinged, but this isn't the place to spread your obnoxious, hateful vitriol. If you want to fellate a genie, do it in the privacy of your own home and keep it to yourself. Your invisible fairy is an artefact of a collection of phantasmagorical twaddle that has absolutely no relevance in 2024. You should be embarrassed. And you should definitely stop.
This is like saying electricity, in 1850, is "Dark steam" . It does work. It causes change.
That’s it! I’m naming an electronica band “Dark Steam”. Sounds way better than my first idea of, “smog.”
Electricity is “Ether”.
@@Jmp5nb Close! It's really an Electric Universe! Electricity is 39 times more attracting than gravity. And there is a theory that gravity is a property of electricity, that is still being researched. Also, electricity repels, as well as attracts, which can explain why cosmic structures, like galaxies, retain their structures over time. Electricity also has a dark mode, when current flow, in space, can't be seen. When the current is strong enough, it goes into a glow mode. The best example of it working, is in incandescent lights. If you're interested, you can go to The Electric Universe, or Thunderbolts.info.com sites.
@@williamrthompsonjr556 the "electric universe" is a pseudoscientific conspiracy theory
@@flamingspinach Thsnks for your opinion.
I mean, the answer is that we _don't_ know that dark matter exists. The concept was invented to resolve the conflict between our observations and our models. There's nothing inherently wrong with that, in fact, this kind of thing is very common.
But dark matter may just be the next ether, or centrifugal force. The results that we get maybe not be due to a "quirk in math" but maybe a flaw in the way we are observing the universe overall.
What isn't mentioned here is gravitational lensing. Gravitational lensing causes optical illusion when a light source behind an object is seen at multiple points around the object. It is also why we see the sun set yet it has already set. Gravitational lensing is happening in areas where the math says the dark matter should be there. If the math is wrong, there wouldn't be the gravity in the area bending the light.
And what if it's electro-magnetism!?
We know it's there as much as we know gravity is there. However, both of them got some splainen to do!
.
Actual newspaper article: "Scientists Cannot Find Invisible Dark Matter"
One. It's invisible.
Two: it's dark.
Three: it's the Hide and Seek champion!
Journalism at it's peak.
Bet they didn't check the back of the sofa.
I like your comment
I vote on answer 3, just because it makes me chuckle the most.
Question: are scientists assuming that the observed galaxy is in equilibrium, so has a static shape with time? If we assume dark matter doesn't exist, and stars moving faster than the gravitational model predicts, the speed distribution could simply be expanding (unstable) galaxies, which over our observational time scale only look static.
By the thumbnail, thought it could not exist without Dianna.
*Correction: It was astronomer Fritz Zwicky who made the first observations of what we now call dark matter in the 30's.*
Lord Kelvin first presented math postulating dark bodies, in 1906 Henri Poincare coined the term 'dark matter' in discussing Kelvin's work, but the first evidence of dark matter using stellar velocities was Dutch astronomer Jacobus Kapteyn, and Jan Oort in 1932 before 1933 when Fritz Zwicky a Swiss astrophysicist obtained the first evidence at CIT. Vera Rubin was in the half a century later, and she was part of a team working for Ken Freeman. All they did was re-measure the same data with 'greater accuracy' using a spectrograph.
dark matter is another word for the either...lol
Dark matter is comprised primarily of odd socks and coat hangers.
And 10mm sockets.
And tupperware lids
@@nasonguy 10mm sockets? No wonder they haven't found it.
wunnell
Plectrums too.
And biro tops.
I first learned about this when I was 14, and I was excited that something hadn't been discovered yet and I would get to eventually learn what it was. I'm 41 now, and still waiting.
"The simple things you see are all complicated" The Who - Substitute
not exacly if you see a stick you see stick nothing more nothing less. Do not try to make it something more than it is.
It wasn't intended as a stand-alone generalization by The Who or me. If you read the lyrics you will understand the context.
@@V3ntyl Try looking at a stick under a microscope, it's complicated.
@@V3ntyl if you're _good_ at seeing you'll see the type of tree, current and recent weather conditions, the time since the stick fell from the tree, the types of biome you could be in, and more. "Don't complicate things" is nice but ignores reality and possibility.
@@williamchamberlain2263 Exactly. A misleading oversimplification.
So what you're to say is that we're still in the dark when it comes to matter?
Apparently to Everything.. we understand 4.9% what grade is this on a completed test?
@synchromorph 97% of scientists agree about climate change. 100% agree that Epstein didn't kill himself.
@Toughen Up, Fluffy Orange man bad. C02 making the world die. That's the consensus of 151% of scientists now.
To conclude a fractional percentage of a thing you first need to know what a 100% of the thing is .
@@tracker001 1000% of politicians agree with everything they are paid to.
*Hello darkness my old friend...*
I’ve come to look for you again...
Mit Seraffej 😂🤣😂
Lee Blaclock .
Hello darkness my old friend
I’ve come to look for you again
In a buried tank of liquid xenon
I wait for a flash to spur my dreams on
And the vision of my Nobel Prize
Is still alive
Within the bounds of funding
Reiya Aurum I`ve come to talk to you again.
Nothing even matters anymore
If you think the edge of the galaxy defies known physics, just imagine how much the edge of the universe defies known physics. Could you even see it if you were standing at the edge? boggling
"The edge of the universe"?.. The universe has an edge??🙃
Well, that's the ultimate question, isn't it?
If you believe that the universe is finite and created from a big bang event, then it must have delimiting boundaries, perhaps on one side being the universe, and on the other being nothing at all, not even space. Or, more likely, does space wrap around so that the other side of the boundary is actually a continuation from the other side of the universe? Like the globe of the earth, could you get to one side of the universe by actually traveling in the opposite direction to your ultimate destination? In such a case, the universe would indeed seem infinite.
The Universal “Edge” is a very tricky subject.
The big bang isn’t expansion from a single point, like that of a Baloon.
But it’s more thought of as the expansion of an area on the *surface* of the balloon.
tThat means the Universe isn’t expanding from a single point, but everywhere at once, all the time, at a rate that’s increasing every second.
The “Edge” of the Universe is the Edge of “Our” Universe/The Universe we can see. The Universe is most definitely larger than we can see. What we call the Edge is just the edge of what we are able to see.
Think of the Edge as the Render Distance of a video game like Minecraft.
Yes, Im not referring to the the edge of the 'known universe', that which we simply cannot see beyond, but rather the edge that started out in the big bang and delimits the actual edge of the entire universe. Is it possibly true that the universe is unbound, and that there may not be an edge, the universe actually looping back upon itself, meaning that if you were to continue traveling in the same direction would you eventually arrive at your starting location?
Space may indeed have been concentrated in a single point at the time of the Big Bang, which would explain the Cosmic Microwave Background. I'm inclined to believe that the universe is not infinite, as infinity is a purely mathematical concept that really has no examples in reality. Again, boggling.
Random thought:
- Evidence for dark matter is based on seeing effects related to it's gravitational influence.
- Gravitational force can be considered (equivalent to) an emergent property of time dilation, in a way
- If one considers the universe as analogous to a simulation, one could consider mass as we know it plus a certain overhead to be the computational cost of a given planck length region of space. One could consider time dilation (and thus gravity) to be emergent from (or at least analogous to) a local computational bottleneck in the universe
- If you can only interact with something via gravity... well essentially you can only interact with it via a local computational bottleneck... essentially like how much CPU resources you're taking from each other... and well that really sounds like a virtual machine situation doesn't it
- So depending on the nature of dark matter, it may well be that searching for it could be considered akin to breaking out of a virtual machine into the host system to find out what the heck else is taking CPU resources
Or the one who created the simulation didn't care to realistically "paint" the galaxies. They just put everything far away and out of reach, they are essentially an animated matte painting.
@Lalrivunga Hnamte Could it be delayed gravity from past times that only gradually gets there acting on things just now?
I love how you showed a clip of a vehicle digging when you said "...looked for dark matter here on Earth".
Would love to see an update to this with the new modified gravity information coming out that might explain it without dark matter.
They used to say bumble bee flight defied known physics, until high speed camera's came along.
I wish you could have been my teacher in High school, would have liked Physics more.
Word.
She isn't bound by curriculum, national expectations and the spectrum of classroom capabilities.
@@suraj9 that's true
man if she was phy teacher here it ends she woildnt be this interested in physics cause that job is really heavy.....
What about the object that appeared inside the vacuum chamber. Just appeared out of nowhere.
Nice video !! One thing I'd like to know though, that I've never seen in video from the CERN is....how is the CERN working? Not 'technically', but more like 'administratively'.
Are they doing tons and tons of collision every day with different parameters, and put the data available to the researchers, that could find what they need? Does researchers have to make protocols first (if yes, how long does it take between the draft of the protocol and getting the results of the experiment)? How many collision per day are happening? All this kind of stuff :)
What is the life of a CERN researcher basically :)
That's a video idea for The Administration Girl.
That's a nice of a subject for a video. I'll talk with the people in the video / media dept
In the meantime here's some starters
ruclips.net/video/-fXAsrZ-ePM/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/-fXAsrZ-ePM/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/AdJn82JwhTM/видео.html
and of course the official youtube channel ruclips.net/user/CERNTV
They do like 20 million collisions per second. Then they have software to sort the ones that are not really that interesting. They store only the interesting ones. So theres this big chache of collision results researchers have access to.
8:13 "it could be 40% birds, 60% cake batter...metaphorically speaking". LOL just killing me. I love this sense of humour.
I believe this theory.
who does birds cake on butter ... oO
Who could not love her energetic M.O.... She's always smiling, positive vibes, a mind 20,000 times brighter than mine... and yes, a great sense of humor... I bet she has Gary Larsen "Scientist" cartoons in her pad.... I do... His "Paramecium Humor" is off the charts... Bless you Physics Girl...
I think it's probably 38% the feeling of a triangle, 62% sadness
Physics, especially astrophysics, has always been something that I am very interested and passionate about. I never took any Physics classes in HS as my interest mainly developed from star gazing, in my earlier days, to watching countless youtube videos learning about Physics. I'm 32 now and recently started re attending my local Community College to resume the process of getting a degree in Computer Programming. I enjoy computers and love to tinker with them and play games, but I would love to take some Physics classes as well. The joy I feel from thinking about taking Physics classes makes me want to take a full course load and just soak up all the info I can. So therefore, I'm starting to think I should consider switching my major but I don't really know what all fields are out there...tbh, I don't really know what kind of jobs are out there for it or even if it's in demand. The only careers that I could think of would be to teach (not a fan) and I would assume that NASA would need to hire some people who are educated in the field.
So dark matter is just stuff with stuff that we just don’t don’t know what this stuff is. Awesome.
probably just normal matter but inside a thing which information can't get out so we can't know they exist like a matter inside a blackhole
Well, we have to given the observation a name, even if we don't understand it..... better than saying, "that stuff, you know.... out there!"
@@Vvopat96 Lol, that sentance 😂
Dianna I got a question that has always given me some fun. If you launch a huge mirror at 99% of light speed, facing towards earth and you take a telescope and look at your mirror 50 years later. What will you see? 100 years? longer? What if we could send it 100 light years away but like through a wormhole just in 1 year. What would we see?
This is the most intriguing question I've heard in a long time!.
I want an answer too!!♥️
so, since light doesn’t slow down(supposedly), then when light is reflected off of it, the light will still be moving towards us at light speed, so that we would see(in years ago) however many light years away it is.
and i apologize for the run on sentence, i should’ve read it over.
To calculate the answer, you have to use the Lorentz transformation.
So, you'd see the Earth, massively red-shifted, 49.5 years ago and as you watched, things on Earth would move at 1% normal speed.
I new the "Dark Side" was strong, but I never knew it was this strong!
You can pause this randomly, and she almost always looks utterly enthralled in what you have to say.
Amazing video, am very excited to explore more of your content. I teach English overseas in a primary school and I have many students that are so very interested in science. Many of them are young girls, so that is awesome, and sharing your videos in class will certainly help encourage them. Makasih banyak!
"We don't know what this is, we don't know how that works, it's all theoretical.
I can tell you what's what and change my mind in ten years. And I still get paid.
And I can never be proven wrong".
I want that gig.
Become a preacher then
Or a weather man! Who else can be so wrong so often, and then claim a 99% success rate?
Psephologist anyone?
@@AnalyseThiswithIO Gesundheit
Psychiatry is the same kind of hustle
*Fun Fact:*
The Big Bang was just Michael Bay directing the Universe
Wowwww! How clever Mr. NeverWashHisCock, I have a real issue with your so called "joke". It first begins with the fact I dont like you. And yea, i guess that basically ends all my facts up to this point. Go squander the streets for nickles dated before the 1980's and get lost.
@@plint99 toxicity is starting to become a problem
I'm going to follow you simply because Cash Lint is such a monumental douchnozzel
Oh my - @@plint99 doesn't think his dad respects him. Poor Mr @Cash Lint ; cry for him.
This is not true, because then the contents would be boring.
I am a science teacher, and not a physicist, so my lifelong interest in astronomy and cosmology is more a hobby than even a study. I tried to understand Neutron Stars at age 15 in the mid seventies, so yes we have come a ways since then. As an occasional listener to Matt O'Doud, Anton Petrov, and Dr. Becky, I am finding you a lot of fun to listen to. I like folks like Matt O'Doud because I try to keep up a little, and he stretches my mind past my ability to even believe that I 'got it'. Your approach to your videos is a little history ( yay! ), with some credit where due, and very easy to understand for the layperson. I also appreciate that you find the subject matter itself exciting without need for extra sensationalism. I really liked this dark matter vid for how much you packed into ten minutes. Keep up the good work, Physics Girl!! Ranger G.
When I turn off all lights in my room and I close all of the curtains then all I see is dark matter.
Science question:
The same way gravity is so weak on the atomic scale that it's immeasurable, wouldn't it be possible that there's a 5th force that is as weak on macro scale as gravity is on the atomic and only becomes noticable at the galactic scale?
clearly it's possible. it's a rather annoying possibility for scientists tho since they're still struggling to unify all the forces they already know about; they don't need another.
totalolage _ It is possible but it would have a hard time accounting for galaxies with no dark matter and galaxies where gravitational effects are not where normal matter is
There are a few weird galaxies with weird galactic gravitational behavior as an extra, so dark matter exists
Old and mostly discarded idea. You can measure dark matter by gravitational lensing. Sure there could be more forces than we know of, but curvature of space is what gravity is and dark matter whatever it is causes it the same as normal matter does. Plus some galaxies have more of the dark matter than others and you can't have a force that works for some galaxies and not the others.
@@aleksandersuur9475 So technically speaking flat-earthers are correct. The earth is flat and gravity is what makes it round. 🤔
I clicked on this video hoping to understand something, now i think i know less. So im subscribing.
Thank you for describing the amount of amazed I feel every time I watch this channel. Thank you Diana!
That's how learning works. The more you know, then the more you realize how much you don't know.
8:12 "It doesn't have to be any one thing! It could be 40% birds, 60% cake batter." A beautifully ditzy yet somehow appropriate summation of our ignorance. Well done!
Needs to say "The observable Universe"
ju-....just stop
Accuracy is paramount. otherwise it's just more muddle.
7:49 "nor has anyone found any wimps"
well... here I am
No true wimp has the courage to call him or herself a wimp.
Machos either :P
@@MrGoatflakes
MAssive Compact Halo Objects?
@@rdelrosso2001 something like that
2:28 best explanation of centripetal force.
I liked this presentation. Dark matter and dark energy are fascinating and incredibly important topics. Very recently, some physicists have theorized that there is an "anti-universe" out there, in which many of the "known" laws of physics run backwards. Some physicists even think that time runs backward in this "anti-universe." Some people think that this "anti-universe" is the source of dark matter and dark energy. I would love to hear what you think about this.
I wonder if people that believe in dark matter and dark energy criticize people that believe in ghosts.
Yes, I know that the concepts were introduced to explain certain observations, but also ghosts were.
@@usuarioenyt Not even close the same thing. I don't see how it corelates
"For decades, scientists have looked for dark matter here on Earth..."
Did they check under the couch cushions?
There is a very good possibility it just may be in couch lint balls... :)
Only loose change and some M&M's.
Ask the cat.
@@PMLT3400 before you checked under the cushions they were dark m&ms and dark coins
Im always dark matter in my pockets AFTER I do laundry.
"To see is to believe" is not always basic principle to approve something existence...
@@sleepstalker4467 No!
The disciple Thomas once said: I'll believe it when I see it. And then he saw, and he believed, that his late master had miraculously come back to live.
Compare that to a magic trick: What you see happening is not always what is actually happening, but it certainly looks that way.
But we don't believe it, even though we see it right before our very eyes.
Just because you see it doesn't mean it's real. Take an optical illusion for example.
Your eyes can deceive you. Don't trust them.
Astronomers don't rely on just their eyes. They have all kinds of clever devices that can see things that elude human perception. And they contrast and compare what those devices record, and analyse the measurements in minute detail. What they find is often surprising.
And this dark matter is a really big one.
Unexplained phenomena are expected. And many of them have been explained eventually.
How the mass of something can increase by burning it.
How the Sun keeps burning.
How the sky is not bright in every direction.
And now this.
Makes me wonder if "space" (the stuff that we know to be expanding between objects continuously) is in some form of turbulent flow, and pockets of turbulence are spinning counter to other pockets, creating the illusion that galaxies are spinning faster than should be possible.
👍, take a look at the superstructure and it sure looks as if all the galaxies are in rivers
Thinking that you are a stationary observer, when in reality you are within a car travelling in the opposite direction on the highway could lead to discrepancies in velocity calculations.
This could be explained by Moshe Carmeli's modification to general relativity. This allows a differential rotation due to gravity which would come into play in very heavy objects like galaxies. There has been some evidence collected agreeing with this by John Harnett the inventor of the atomic fountain clock.
What if it’s “dark” because it’s hidden in other spatial dimensions that don’t reflect light?
Also, ahem, darkness waits in darkness, keyblade
What if there's no such thing as "Dark Matter", but instead the effects we observe
in those regions are because of those other dimensions that intertwine with ours
in said regions? 😯
LMAO, I guess that Tetsuya Nomura is the only human being who knows what dark matter is.
@ToldYouSo dimensions do intertwine.. that's what f(0,0,0,0,...) is
@@iagotorres8903 whos that nomura
@@arijitkumarhaldar3197 Nah, they are separated with a comma for a reason.
I never realised that "stuff" was a technical term in physics!
Maybe you're not quite as clever as you thought you were!
Einstein and General Relativity come to the rescue, up next here on Cartoon Network.
Actually, there are three distinct types of 'stuff' that we know of so far.
Dis stuff, dat stuff, and de other stuff.
@Brad Watson we know. Most scientific video say "nothing with matter can travel faster than light".
I rarely saw a video that say light is the fastest
Moles: Hello there
"Dark matter/Dark energy is a hypothesis (not a Theory) that proves a lack of understanding of physics" -unknown author-
Synonyms of hypothesis.... proposition, supposition, theory, thesis via Merriam-Webster
@@SolarizeYourLife if you truly believe that hypothesis and Theory always mean the same thing, then you may need to study the English language a little more before you respond to comments on physics.
Try looking up Theory with a capital T
@@SolarizeYourLife Here you go.
www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=difference+between+hypothesis+and+theory
@@tracewallace23 I get that "hypothesis" is different than "Theory," but Theory isn't the same as fact, right? I mean, a Theory COULD be factual (such as the Theory of evolution) but isn't necessarily so (such as the big bang Theory.) Is that accurate?
Maybe a good synonym for laymen like myself would be "explanation," as in speculation (hypothesis) led to an investigation, which led to an explanation (Theory) ... yes? No? Maybe?
@@RMR1 👍 Well stated
"I wonder if the explanation is even more complex than we imagine at present"
It is.
Guaranteed.
What if it's just matter in a higher dimension only interacting through gravity?
Even if the matter was in a higher dimension we'd still see a 3-Dimensional shadow of it.
@@raknos13 a shadow in space?
@@vaughnlean2951 as opposed to shadows outside of space?
@@vaughnlean2951 Let me rephrase, "2-Dimensional image"
@@raknos13 Exactly. Maybe that's why we only can see the shadow of it
Donald Saari, a mathematician with expertise in mechanics, has argued that the rotation curve velocity discrepancies are essentially the result of astronomers using a continuous mass distribution of matter in a galaxy in their calculations. When you discard that approximation and work with the mechanics of stars locally attracting each other in various configurations, the case for dark matter (at least from the point of view of galactic rotation velocity curves) disappears.
I agree completely with this rationale. I tend toward the incomplete understanding of gravity and how it can appear to manifest itself differently from expectations.
As we see with everything in nature, the manifestations of physics at the quantum scale to the atomic scale to microscopic scale, to the scale of human unaided eyesight, to macro scales, and galactic scales - things appear to work very differently because of cumulative emergence of 'behaviours' that don't necessarily follow expectation. And in such a way to not yet be able to adequately explain with current mathematical formulations that can't yet explain observed behaviour without dark matter/energy. I have always seen dark matter and energy as fudge factors of convenience. Which is fine, because it is natural to begin to explain unknown phenomena with simpler explanations. But I firmly believe that the answer is much more nuanced than saying there is this matter that we just can't see. I don't buy it.
In my opinion, not unlike human conscience - it may not be a 'thing' at all, it is an abstract emergence from synergistic effect and interactions - Gestalt. It forms from atoms being together, from cells being together that are made up of atoms and molecules, and cells form complex organs, evolving into a collective manifestation of what we see as a conscience. I argue a similar manifestation of gravity behaviour at enormous galactic scales are just as nuanced and complex, obviously beyond human comprehension at this point.
I've had interaction with dark matter before and that's the last time I'll ever eat off a taco truck...
@@anabelcamacho6584 Nobody actually believes that the Earth is flat. It's too easy to prove that it's a sphere. Anyone can do it. "Flat earthers" are all trolls .
@@ThatBoomerDude56 So you just say: 'Nobody actually...' so you don't know and there for look up to others? (1 Question )
If it was easy to prove suggested imagination about globe, you would already did that and because you personally have no evidence , you hide by word 'anyone' it means not you.
There is no such a thing as 'flat earthers' usually it is CIA agents playing a clowns controlled opposition .
Would you like to know the truth? (2 Question)
@@anabelcamacho6584 I have no need to "hide." And yes, I've measured the circumference of the Earth. As I said, it's easy.
@@anabelcamacho6584 ok jy is net een van hulle n dom naai
If I’m following along correctly - of that 4.9% which is ‘regular matter’, maybe 99.9% is plasma.
Meaning that only 0.049% of the universe is solid, liquid or gas.
Then there is the minuscule percentage of that which is considered to be ‘embodied’ in a life form.
Any guesses what that percentage is ?
We are SO anomalous!
We need longer videos. I'm always at the edge of my seat and then they end.
You should Google for stuff. Go to astrophysics websites. It's much faster to read stuff. And you can go far more in-depth.
٠ح
So you want videos that make you fall off your seat? That's quite painful 😅
What I always find myself thinking, is that how can you detect rogue planets? I mean my theory is that there is A LOT more rogue planets. I think the most mass in the whole universe is rogue planets. Planets that were NOT formed around the star, but around packs of dust and gasses in the "empty space", for example after supernova explosions, and some just general large nebulae. I bet most of the stuff escaped the star and clumped up in small objects that never returned, but instead flee randomly all over the universe. It would make sense that only small part of the mass actually stays near star to form planets that go around the star. Specially when supernovas can happen many times for just one star. If always a lot of the dust escapes, it would make sense that there is a lot of that extra stuff going in empty space. But those objects are so small in universal scale that their existance and gravity is practically impossible to even detect from such large distances. There can be large nebulae that never even gathered in one single point and made a star, but instead created tons of dwarf planets and rocks.
This is why I came to the comments. We've only observed a few thousand planets in total. I can imagine a solar system with thousands of planets orbiting, perhaps chaotically, or in huge orbits (larger star, larger range to hold more planets) or just plain rogue. Once we put a few 100 million observed planets under our belt, I think we'll have a better idea of what's actually out there regarding planet mass.
Exactly. We may find that clumps of matter actually coming together in big enough quantities to make a star only occur one out of every 20 times ... I mean when it does happen, the resulting stars are trillions of miles apart, right? i bet there's a lot of dense clumps of stuff in-between that is still small enough and spread out enough to be "invisible" to our current observational capabilities.
I don't know if planets can form without the gravity of a star but there have been probably billions that have been ejected from solar systems.
To my understanding a planet is rogue when it is knocked off of its original place by another massive object. Asteroid. Comet. Meteor. The mass of the planet will only weigh what it weighs. Force of gravity. it gets hit and loses mass and becomes lighter and moves away or combines with during impact and gets closer to the sun or star. The drifting lighter planet will continue to drift endlessly in space as it will find its own rotation around the star. The weigh is either too heavy to go against the gravitational pull and fall in or is too light and bounces away. It will either continue to fall into the star or orbit the star when it has reached its distance based on the weight of the planet and the force of gravitational pull. Now mind you when it comes to rotation and speed of any one planet. It can also have another in the same system further away traveling at a comparative speed to the sister planet in the same system and we will not see the second planet ever.
What if dark matter isn't really mass, but an effect?
Like what if spinning mass increases the gravity field very slighting, so on galaxy wide scale of rotating matter, the effect is huge?
Perhaps the spinning or rotating matter amplifies the gravitational field by interacting with other fields that permeate the universe (like the Higgs Field).
Alternatively what if things we define as mass-less (like photons, x-rays and microwaves) do have mass, but it is so tiny we cannot detect it (much like people thought electrons didn't have mass but they do).
There is so much electromagnetic radiation out there that, it is the dark energy or matter?
malenotyalc the massless matter, such as photon, is only massless when stationary. All matter have mass when in motion.
As she says in the video, that would mean you would find "dark matter" everywhere. Some galaxies don't have it though, so it can't be an effect like that or those galaxies would also have "dark matter".
David Enrique, what about some black holes having such a deep gravity well that they punch through space time to form a wormhole to another universe (not all galaxies would have this). And the gravitational field from matter on the other side of the wormhole, be it another universe or just another location in this universe pass through the even horizon, unlike electromagnetic energy?
I'd rather underline that plasmas can be contained and accelerated by EM fields. I agree with your point; as gravity is not necessarily the only force acting on these systems, it doesn't follow that dark matter needs to be proposed. We also see dust hiding light (= mass) as well as hiding current within itself (= magnetic fields). I think the first step is to make sure we actually quantify what's taking place using the forces we know, not only 1 and barring the rest.
You asked the question whether dark matter does not exist and we simply have a limited understanding of gravity at a very large scale. I have wondered this myself, but your explanation early in this video of why the existence of dark matter seems more likely was very good. I've listened to a lot of people talking about the subject, but this is the first time I have felt half-convinced.
One solution to negate dark matter:
Gravity is a bipole.
iow: Without matter, gravity reverses.
So ... outside galaxies, the matter is pushed together by the big nothing outside it.
Well .. that could be an explanation.
I would urge to think of alternatives like this way of thinking,
since we have been looking for it for decades and found nothing.
I would suggest that our physics and basic ideas of gravity, is wrong.
By the way ...
The notion that gravity could be a bipole (like everything is),
would also explain dark energy.
Galaxies are pushed away from each other by gravity.
Or more accurately:
Spactime is bent the other way in the absence of matter.
I was thinking something similar... gravity is a bit of a mystery.
@@Michael-vp4zt I made a video abou it.
Not as good as I wanted, but makes the point.
ruclips.net/video/Zgi6DNYeEao/видео.html
That effing Einstein two kids😡😡😡😡😡😂
#TWONK...... not two kids🤣
"Is it possible that we just don't understand gravity?"
*Flat earthers have joined the chat*
Gnorts Mr Alien lol
Flat Earthers live around the globe!
I dont think you'd find them here to many facts
You all need to stop believing everything ALL the governments keep telling you, they are just trying to control you by making you think the world is round. Its FLAT, plain and simple. I know people around the globe that can prove me right.😜😜🤣 FYI the International Space Station is just hologram projected from earth, that's why you can see it on a telescope. I saw that on a youtube video so that's proof its true.
we don t understand gravity , being able to calculate it , measure it does not tell us what is the mechanism behind it
Dianna is made of charm quarks
XD
So whatever you do, don't touch her you might unravel the universe. That's a down side.
PERVERT!!
I'll give this comment an up quark
@@dhf335434 LOL
dhf336 ok bud get off this app you’re too yiung
I finally understand the spinning thing thanks to the two demonstrators spinning each other! Thanks for your channel!
You make physics-ing interesting, thanks for that. One of the best channels on RUclips.
The universe is like a balloon expanding with dots all over it. “Spheres” seem to be the shape of the universe so why wouldn’t the universe itself be spherical shaped. All the dark matter is in the center of the galaxy that we don’t see. Also, why can the fabric of space not be the dark matter just no way to “measure” it at our current understanding
That is what I think as well. We have no idea what 'it' is. We observe some effect we were not expecting. We only know that with our current understanding of physics, the math doesn't add up. It is all theoretical physics at this point. It is not our fault for not understanding (yet). The tools we have now are too limited for the scope of the universe.
You are brilliant at this - You make science fun - and easy to learn and watch :) - Also if history has taught us anything its that when it comes to science the explanation is always way more complicated than we first thought - and usually the solution isn't even the thing we imagined at first - fun times ahead if the LHC finds anything :)
When at 4:53 circa you say x% of matter and energy of the universe... do you mean of the observable universe, or of the whole universe?
Two possibilities:
1.) There some magical 'dark matter' that makes up most of the mass of the universe, but we can't find it.
or
2.) Our understanding of gravity is flawed.
She said it best at 3:02 "We find that galaxies are spinning way faster than they should be able to _according to our laws of physics."_
So between _magic_ or _an incomplete understanding,_ I have to go with option 2.
What if we are just drastically under estimating the amount of normal matter that is there, we just can't see it, because space is huge and dark?
That is the same question I am asking. Instead of inventing new matter. Maybe question your current assumptions?
Congrats, that's almost basically what dark matter is. They know it has to be something, hence the "matter" in the name. But it's totally different from normal matter, because it does not follow the same accepted theories and models that we have for normal matter and does not even interact with the EM spectrum, hence the "dark" in the name.
@@johncox9868 They did not "invent" new matter. It's been one hundred years since scientists found evidence for dark matter, you don't think questioning assumptions is the first thing they did? Pretty sure many scientists are still questioning it right now, but no progress on that end either. You're not smarter than them.
@@astablemultivibbrator8538 Inventing new matter is exactly what they did. The math doesn't line up with current assumptions, so their answer is that there must be some new undiscovered substance to balance the equation. They may be right, but I find it more likely that one of their current assumptions is wrong.
Crazy question: We only know the visible universe. If outside the visible universe there exists an infinite amount of matter then it must exert gravitational forces on our visible universe and in a asymmetric manner. Stars at the outer spiral of a galaxy would be pulled out making them move faster. Could gradational forces outside our visible universe be interacting with our visible universe?
Your videos are sooo complicated! I love it.