I like to believe there's some non-baryonic alien civilization looking at these 19 galaxies saying "Weird, there's an abundance of dark matter here that we can't see!"
Aether was an ancient hypothesis that was eventually unambiguously disproved. Dark matter is a placeholder name for a clearly observable astronomical phenomenon that has not been explained yet. At first some scientists thought that gravity worked differently at galactic level and came up with MOND (modified Newtonian dynamics) but it has gone out of favor because observations don’t match the predictions of this “adjusted” model. It’s discoveries like these that have sunk mond.
Discoveries like this cause me to seriousely ask: "If Dark Matter is a thing, could we be watching 19 galaxy spanning civilizations having gobbled up all the Dark Matter as some sort of energy source?
@@34ccsn You claim there is 'no evidence' and then mention the indirect though very substantial evidence for it. You don't understand science. You act like it's somehow wrong to postulate on something we know next to nothing about, when the math suggest there is something there. Let me use an example to show how scientist can postulate something when no direct evidence has been observed. Let's say you have lived underground your whole life and know absolutely nothing about the surface, but you also have an underground swimming pool. You have a hose that is supposed to fill up the swimming pool, from an underground reserve beneath you. Somehow the pool fills up 10 times faster than the hose itself can possibly allow. You have no idea what it could be, but being a presumably 'rational' mind, you would be forced to conclude that water came from somewhere. All you can do is use what little you do know, to postulate the most likely conclusion. You know gravity is a thing, so maybe somehow the water came from 'above' and sank 'downward'. Scientist and Science as a whole don't pretend to know everything about dark matter, the point of it is that it's a place-holder precisely because we don't know what it could be, but what we do know is that something is manipulating phenomena beyond the factors which present equations account for. The ironic thing about your commentary on science, is that you believe that you can understand reality through religious fundamentalist authority, but don't dare to question that religious authority - either the book itself or the people espousing it. Science doesn't read like a holy book that you would revel in which pretends to know everything about reality. The point is to discover reality through the evidence it presents us, especially with the aid of an unbiased tool such as math. If the math suggest something is missing, something is missing. When there is a lack of knowledge on something, The departure between Science and Religious fundamentalism, is that while Science attempts to slowly discover the truth, and is willing to consider multiple plausible answers where none have yet been found, Religion out of its sheer ignorance, decides to ascribe supernatural elements to 'explain' anything where we lack knowledge. I strongly suspect this is the place your commentary comes from, which looks like this: "Oh look at those science enthusiast being confused about Dark Matter, i'm comfortable in the 'knowledge' that my religion has all the answers". Lets not forget that every time fundamental aspects of theology and religion gets proven wrong, it constantly has to retreat into ever smaller gaps of scientific understanding.
I can think of one thing: Consider that many dwarf galaxies that orbit larger galaxies may have had one or more collisions with their larger neighbors (and are connected by that stream of gas & stars). Dwarf galaxies that are, let's say 90-98% dark matter, are the ones that were stripped of many of their stars in previous collisions and those with the 70-something-% dark matter are examples of the few dwarf galaxies that haven't gotten partially eaten yet. In other words, based on the size of the central black holes of these galaxies, a dwarf galaxy with 70% dark matter is normal if left undisturbed; a galaxy with 98% dark matter has lost a huge chunk of it's baryonic matter to larger galaxies but is not yet fully consumed (or integrated) into the larger galaxy yet.
Consider that galaxies aren't actually required to "hold together". Rather, they are generating stars and flinging them out into space. When the central massive sources are expended, they become regular gravitationally bound systems.
@infinite kind The observations have been made, the debate is over what they actually are. The difference is, if zoology was held to the same standard as astrophysics, the existence of plesiosaurs in Scottish lakes would be considered a virtual fact. As it stands, with Zoology, people are told not assume the exotic explanation; it's probably just mis-identification, and problems with measurements because of conditions and distance. In Astrophysics, we can ignore that we're only estimating the mass of galaxies, and that our understanding of gravity is incomplete, and that we're making measurements of things that are thousands or even millions of light years away, we should assume there's some kind of invisible intangible stuff out there exerting buttloads of gravity.
Maybe because"dark matter" doesn't really exist except as an anomaly that's been hand waved into existence? No one can prove it except as a gap in our knowledge as far as my RUclips PhD tells me. By the way great videos keep it up.
Sicko Yoda Ok, so we'll say dark matter doesn't exist. Something is causing this slight heterogeneity in the physical characteristics of galaxies, as described in this video. They seem to be bahaving the way they are due to an excess (or relative deficit) of mass. Now, our radio astronomy doesn't detect enough visible (baryonic) matter to account for the behaviors of these galaxies. Maybe dark matter isn't the final answer but it's at least a working hypothesis. Do you have a better one?
I have a U-tube Nobel, so shut up. Seriously tho' I'm also a bit sceptical about it till someone can show me that it wasn't just summoned into existence to prop up the big bang theory.
Didn't anybody ever teach you not to underestimate the intelligence of others? There's people with a master's degree flipping burgers these days ffs lol
Anton's comment section in particular I notice has a lot of quack basement physicists. XD I attribute it to Anton being so good at explaining these things that a lot of normally stupid and derp people "get it".
@on god maybe my comment isn't directed at people like you? If you believe you know your subject, this comment shouldn't trigger you... There are truely stupid comments and unknowledgeable ones.
It really boils down to this.. . “We”. . . don’t REALLY know how far things are away from us. Let me repeat that. . . cosmic distances are, currently, at best, a guess. The “distance ladder” has some seriously broken rungs. Let’s toss Cepheid Variables, for a start. “Correlation is not Causation”. This seems to be have been missed on the cosmic scale.
Eugene S if they were like a type IV civilization that might make sense. It’s as good a theory as anything I’ve heard Eugene so why not lol? Except on this channel it’s never aliens, ever lol
@@chrisdooley6468 I guess it's hard to claim it's aliens as a scientist, without proof. But there is an interview, where he refers to "I want to believe"
Its very telling that they're all dwarf galaxys, without dark matter star formation itself would be half as common due to the lack of gravity, therefore the gas clouds that formed them must have been massive. It is starting to look like these galaxys were in particularly matter dense regions of the big bang and that the effects being observed are from a lack of dark matter which could still be antimatter as we dont know if it interacts with gravity differently than regular matter or not yet- a few physicists still argue that a negative charge (gravityparticle) could be capable of creating a small pushing force that is opposite of gravity. I feel we could be on the precipice of an amazing discovery.
@@patriautic9308 Hopefully put it in the ground for good😅 There have been experiments to measure the thrust of resonant cavity thrusters that have recorded values much lower than originally predicted that are likely explained by interactions with the Earth's magnetic field, making many of the implied conclusions unfounded, I'm not a fan.
Are you suggesting that dark matter adds to the gravity of normal matter. Interesting! Because if dark matter is everywhere it becomes difficult to understand, with all that extra gravity, why the universe is expanding!
@@KZgun4hire precisely, there is no direct evidence that the extra mass we have detected holding galaxys together is actually in the galaxys it could just as easily be a pushing force inbetween that adds to the observed gravity, acting almost like a sort of thin atmospheric pressure for the universe as in, if there were no atmospheric pressure water wouldn't have the gravity to become a liquid, without the extra pushing force there is less pressure/gravity for stars to form. Interestingly this would push galaxys apart and due to dark matters lack of mass in this scenario form the bubbles of empty we see littered throughout the universe, imagine bubbles of air in water without gravity, the density of the water pushes the repelling air into a sphere and compresses it leaving the water in a web just like the web of matter we see.
How do we KNOW that Dark Matter is actually matter? Is it possible there's some aspect of gravity we don't understand, something that causes it to behave differently under some influence we haven't defined? Or has that been definitively ruled out?
From what I have read, observations of gravity lensing effects show that it is actually 'stuff'. There are many more 'matter' based theories to be explored first. Einstein is still correct. If gravity aspect were the culprit , it would show up in many other observations of other structures. I'm just a science layman but I hope this helps. This stuff is so interesting.
well, thats basically the debate, is dark matter actual stuff we cant see, or is gravity not working how we thought it worked. neither can be conclusively proven, although there appears to be a preponderance of evidence suggesting that DM is stuff we cant see for whatever reason. in fact the only evidence I can think of suggesting that DM isnt actual stuff is circumstantial, ie its that no matter how hard we look we cant seem to find it.
We don't, and yes it is possible. There's a group of theories under the banner of MOND (MOdified Newtonian Dynamics) around, but to my knowledge they've mostly either been disproved or are untested. At the quantum end of the scale, they also expect that some undiscovered types of particles exist for reasons of symmetry, so most of the money is going towards detecting these new types of particles. WIMPs in particular they've been trying to detect for 40 years.
Phenomena like these are evidence for dark matter being matter. A galaxy that has ended up with no dark matter is conceivable. Modified gravity theories would need some other reason for these galaxies to be special.
@@SimonClarkstone I'm on the fence about whether dark matter is an undiscovered type of matter or something else, and at first glance this looked to me like the exception that might prove the rule, but when you consider that the ratio of dark matter to baryonic matter is an order of magnitude lower than normal ONLY in galaxies whose overall mass is also orders of magnitude lower than normal, then I don't think the evidence really tilts the scale in either direction. Still, it's probably a useful piece of the puzzle.
Great video, but I’m still unsure how these galaxies stay together. It’s good that we don’t have a model of how they’re formed because, as you say, more science work is needed, which always helps.👍
I love knowing that there is so much we don't know. I remember so many discoveries, form black holes to dark matter. it's all great. Dark matter is like the ether is it there? Is it not? If we knew everything it would be so booooorrrrriiiinnnnggg.
@@donbruce8234 I think we have become numb with our feelings. The things we are figuring out are mind blowing. Vulnerable humans figuring out things thousands and light years away. It's amazing if you think about it.
@@onehitpick9758 you can theoretically make one using Sat elite TV Dishes and custom LNB's. As for the synchronization, atomic clocks have gotten relatively inexpensive these days. The corelator and data loggers are the only really expensive thing.
@@boggers , who stopped looking, on the contrary, the question should be how God holds things together, he will reveal thoes answers in his own time, but never stop looking at the wonders of his creation
This is a great video! Btw, did anyone hear about the EM mapping NASA just released the other day? I wonder if magnetic fields also have an effect on the speed of the galaxies in question.
So let me get this straight if I can: if a galaxy spins faster than it "should" then it has dark matter, but if it spins slower than it "should" it doesn't. Wait. What?
Yes. If it spins too fast, yet stays together, it's acting almost like a solid. Think of a vinyl record spinning, where the edge has to move faster than the middle to match its speed.
If a galaxy spins rapidly, some *invisible* mass (dark matter) has to be added to the equation with its gravity to keep the faster outside spinning portion of the galaxy from flying off from the slower, inside part of the galaxy
Ramey Zamora It's what our radio astronomy indicates about the bulk of the universe that gives us our standard of how a galaxy "should" typically behave. You've been experiencing sun rises and sets happening at around the same times, from day to day, all your life. This gives you some notion of what a typical day will be marked by (what "should" happen, on a typical day). If the sun doesn't rise tomorrow, I'm guessing you wouldn't consider it to be a typical day. And it would be because something that "should" have happened didn't.
According to Keppler / Newton's laws of gravity, rotation speed "should" fall off towards the edges proportionally to inverse distance squared. But when they started measuring the rotation of galaxies they found it was not the case. They don't know why, so "dark matter" is the label put on the cause behind the observations not lining up with the math. Most of the measured galaxies have roughly the same ratio of normal matter to dark matter, so what they mean by "should" has shifted when they measure new galaxies - because at first they expected zero dark matter, but now they expect to find about 90% dark matter when they measure it. This video is about some tiny galaxies that have been measured to have about 10% the ratio of regular baryonic matter to dark matter compared to normal galaxies.
It's really just a question of wording. Instead of saying faster or slower than it "should", it's more accurate to say: "if it spins faster than can be explained simply by the mass of the stars it contains, dark matter is present." And for these 19 galaxies, "they spin at a rate you would expect to see if it only contains the mass of the stars present. Thus they are different than all other observed galaxies in that way."
If these galaxies are in empty parts of the universe (as you said Anton), then this is a VALIDATION point for the "flace hypothesis" a new grand unifying hypothesis as it would predict such behavior in isolated galaxies.
The thing that fascinates me about "dark matter" is that it seems to behave very like quantum matter, and the total mass of quantum matter and it's entanglements in the universe isn't discussed.
So, Dark Matter was named to explain why some galaxies had more gravity then they should. But, now, when we find galaxies that have as much gravity as they should, we don't know what to do?
Very interesting indeed! And since we don't understand much about these galaxies or dark matter for that matter, ideas are up for grabs! Here's an idea: Maybe it's 19 type III civilizations (or at least the one's from a void), and they've learned how to utilize dark matter as an energy source, thus the lack of dark matter we're measuring. Haha alien hypotheses are always fun, until we figure out something is merely a natural occurrence, we couldn't yet see/understand. Cool video, thx
What is the name of that algoritme needed for making out the direction from where that 21cm signal comes? I listened over and over but I cannot hear that name exactly? (as I enjoyed programming a lot I find it very interesting to learn more by reading what I can find about that way of finding a direction for such a diffuse signal like that hydrogen-line.) Dix anyone hear that name he mentioned for the algoritme used for that?
Maybe high density galaxies contain a stronger network of black holes, which creates a strong binding force, whereas smaller more diffuse galaxies contain fewer black holes, so behave much differently.
Two ideas: 1. Everybody knows dark matter is small and moves rapidly and thus can easily escape from low gravity galaxies. 2. The problem might not be dark matter, but rather an incomplete understanding of gravity. Gravity might behave differently in areas that have a high concentration of mass than in areas that have a low concentration of mass. Also, the effect of gravity at greater distances may be different from what our models show. It is too complicated to explain here, but a better understanding of gravity has the potential to give us a better understanding of the red shift.
@@gravitonthongs1363 maybe another explanation can describe the existing phenomena. We've been searching for dark matter for a long time now and haven't found anything.
Graviton Thongs,which explains nothing, the science can not be settled until the theory can be tested,it has not been observed it can not be replicated and there is growing evidence every day against it, yes there is a phenomenon but all we really have is mathematical gymnastics to describe a cause of the phenomenon, we need to stick to the principles of science before jumping into the world of facts, my sons think it’s a fact and the Big Bang is a certainty, they can’t get their heads around space time but it must be true because it was taught/ preached to them by their professors, who are they to argue.
The more I watch these the more I find it difficult to believe dark matter exists, but instead that our understanding of gravity is incorrect. Further boosted by something I saw recently suggesting gravity IS NOT a fundamental force. I think we’ve got more gravity understanding left to perform which will remove the need for the still as yet undetected dark matter. There’s likely a reason it’s not been physically detected but rather effects of gravity witnessed.
Why do you say that and can you point me to any sources? Only asking because I tend to believe things that can't be definitively explained they chalk it up to dark matter. Example: a galaxy as big as the milkyway couldn't hold together wothout the existence of dark matter.
Lateralus 7L Dark matter is an observed effect not a particle observation yet. The most popular theory is LCDM Model. The bullet cluster is another good source of observational evidence.
Lateralus 7L Mostly correct. The physical evidence(eg: X17) is weak at best, but that is a seperate theory which attempts to explain dark matter. Observation that something is affecting the mass and behaviour of galaxies is practically undeniable, so DM is likely to exist in one form or another, whether it be matter or another factor.
That's interesting. That makes me think dark matter may not be produced by normal stellar processes, and may be a leftover material from early in the universe's history.
Perhaps micro black holes are related with this, perhaps black holes are related with everything, perhaps the entire universe is included in a black hole, black holes into black holes.
Hey Anton, I would consider an alternate proposal. Perhaps dark matter is attracted to larger sums of mass. Thus, if they did go "astronomically near" a large galaxy such as the Milky Way. They would lose their dark matter. Just a guess at least. The alternative to the really fast galaxies could be a LOT of black holes acting like a mixer around the core. Or that the dwarf galaxies are actually expelled remnants from the edge of larger galaxies that got tossed out and captured in the gravity of the dwarf galaxies super core and fell in with a high velocity but not enough to exit the dwarf galaxy.
The assumptions behind dark matter are that gravity is the only force affecting galactic rotation curves, and that there are no undiscovered forces of nature.
So lets say we have an understanding of gravity that works so well within our solar system that we can explain all previous known anomalies, and predict some entirely unknown objects (with some success) based on the gravitational dance of dozens of objects hundreds of millions of miles away. Let's say this theory of gravitation has yet to be falsified despite almost a hundred years and that a good portion of all the astrophysics experiments and astronomical measurement are effectively tests of this theory. It accurately predicted the operation of time in low gravity before space travel, and inherently predicted the existence of black holes and neutron stars before they were ever detected. Let's say it's basically the most well tested mathematical description of the universe in the whole of science. Let's say there is nothing inherent to the theory that precludes it's operation at cosmological distances. Let's we then notice that each galaxy we number crunch (including our own) is rotating faster than it should be based on our mass calculations. So we recalculate the mass, with every conceivable variation that still resembles the galaxy we observe. We try many hundreds of variations of likely errors or sources of unaccounted for mass. For decades we fail to come up with anything other than our mass calculations being accurate, and our speed calculations being accurate (and anomalous). The obvious is answer is that there is something difficult to detect which is providing extra mass not that the inverse square law governing/describing gravitational field strength quits working a few light years outside our solar system. One is an explanation that exists within the body of our understanding of physics and known anomalous behaviors and the other tries to describe this mass/speed discrepancy by deleting Relativity. Even then many scientists try to develop a theory that does overturn Relativity (and Newton for that matter) that matches the observable universe, that describes the anomalous galactic speeds. (including MOND; Modified Newtonian Dynamics) Nothing fits the data well enough to be a contender. The least wrong answer to the majority of the scientific community appears to be a new type of matter which is difficult to observe (interacts weakly with the EM field) and consists of relatively massive particles which congregates in galaxy halos. Along the way these various missing mass theories and postulations become known as Dark Matter. Let's say we later discover that out of the thousands of galaxies that we have crunched numbers on that 19 (plus a few previous ones) are rotating exactly as fast as we originally expected galaxies to rotate; as a function of their observable baryonic mass. Now at this point....what is the most likely course? To suddenly declare that because a few galaxies are operating as if they don't have missing mass, and all the rest are acting as if they do, that we should conclude that the missing mass doesn't exist? If that is the case, then one would have to accept that the mass calculations for those 19 galaxies were accurate. If the mass calculations for those 19 galaxies is accurate than it must be considered generally accurate for the thousands of other galaxies, confirming that a missing mass problem does exist. If the missing mass problem does still exist, then the path of least resistance is to envision a universe where some galaxies don't have dark matter (whether it's WIMPs, or Machos, or something else) due to the complex and ever unfolding nature of cosmological interactions and chance and that Dark Matter (whatever it is) is the norm in galaxies. The plot thickens as we get better and larger data sets. It would be quite silly to simply throw out these decades of work trying to narrow down the source of the anomalous speeds because you PraetorGames is personally uncomfortable and lack confidence in the capacity of our astrophysics community to infer the existence of missing mass and called it literally the most humble name possible "Dark Matter; heavy shit we can't see) You then see a video about a study that has found 19 galaxies that don't have missing mass and feel this is confirmation of your pre-existing doubts. However if the mass calculations of those 19 galaxies is correct, which it must be to be used for confirmation bias, then the mass calculations of the other thousands of galaxies is highly likely to be correct as they are based on the same assumptions, and the same laws of physics and the missing mass still exists and astrophysicists are still going to call it Dark Matter until they figure out what it is.
Dark matter/dark energy is the effect of negative mass particles interacting gravitationally with positive mass . Negative mass particles are the Time force carriers .
If you cant find dark matter and cant locate or observe it then how can you find galaxies lacking that which you cant see or observe. It's the black hole scenario all over
Lucifer Beezelbub Mephistophilies the Apocrypha You look at gravitational effects (e.g., the velocities of stars further from the center of the galaxy being inexplicably similar to the velocities of stars closer to the center, gravitational lensing, etc.). If you can give a better account of these effects, I implore you to write a paper.
The speed in which these galaxies are spinning is impossible without a force they proposed was dark matter. He's saying if these forces do exist in these other galaxies- it doesn't exist in the ones he showcased.
It has become evident that there is another feild of particle energy that hasn't been discovered yet. Invisible matter is not logical. Given the state of particle formation through the feilds of energy from photon to electron to neutron to solid matter, would it not be logical that there would be a feild for particle decay, or a feild of entropy? That it may be this unseen invisible particle is in a state of decomposition and in doing so also creating a positive/negative state of equilibrium for the other feilds?
would be interesting to see if those galaxies have supermassive black holes at the center and their age. maybe those heavy (possibly supersymmetrical) dark matter particles are produced around black holes and shot out along the jet stream but ending up in orbit around the galaxy due to their mass.
What makes a diffuse galaxy different than a large (in volume rather than mass) globular cluster of stars? Regardless. If they’re so diffuse and have little dark matter, why don’t they fly apart?
Nice video with lots of context for better understanding. My amateur take: Both methods you mention could measure the speed of density waves instead of stars. Arms and density clusters travel at different speeds from the average star. Even more important: There seems to be a relation between galaxy structure and 'dark matter' content. The more pronounced the arms, for instance, the more 'dark matter'. From the video, it seems only the distance from the center of the galaxy is factored in, seeing the stars as an even cloud or maybe the galaxy center as a gravity point source. But as gravity decreases over distance, the gravity in a density wave like a spiral arm far exceeds the gravity from a center. Such star concentrations act like a big string, pulling the stars towards the center with far more force than the center itself.
@OriginalTharios bro dark matter is just the name we give to the explanation for the observations we have. When we actually find the answer the name will probably change.
@OriginalTharios no one has even said it's a particle. you've just assumed that. it could be a magical space unicorn for all we know, and scientists are trying to find out what it actually is. why don't you find the solution then? imagine judging the 'scientific community' on a youtube comment. go back to m'flat earth theory
I am very moron fighter, but even moron like me see even more moron fighters like you Fancy thinkers fight hard to prove other fancy thinker words to be fake and take victory. But moron like you not see bravery of fancy thinker and this mean moron is also coward You not champion fancy thinker This mean you thoughts weak and insane with shitsmell
@@SoulSeekerDR There is no current problem of greater importance to cosmology than that of dark matter. Dark matter is composed of particles that do not absorb, reflect, or emit light, so they cannot be detected by observing electromagnetic radiation. Dark matter is material that cannot be seen directly. We know that dark matter exists because of the effect it has on objects that we can observe directly. Scientists study dark matter by looking at the effects it has on visible objects. Scientists believe that dark matter may account for the unexplained motions of stars within galaxies. Computers play an important role in the search for dark matter data. They allow scientists to create models which predict galaxy behavior. Satellites are also being used to gather dark matter data. In 1997, a Hubble Space Telescope image (seen on the right) revealed light from a distant galaxy cluster being bent by another cluster in the foreground of the image. Based on the way the light was bent, scientists estimated the mass of the foreground cluster to be 250 times greater than the visible matter in the cluster. Scientists believe that dark matter in the cluster accounts for the unexplained mass.  Gravitational Lens Created by Galaxy Cluster Reveals Presence of Dark Matter Scientists have produced many theories about what exactly dark matter may be. Some believe that it may be normal objects such as cold gasses, dark galaxies, or massive compact halo objects (called MACHOs, they would include black holes and brown dwarfs). Other scientists believe that dark matter may be composed of strange particles which were created in the very early universe. Such particles may include axions, weakly interacting massive particles (called WIMPs), or neutrinos. Understanding dark matter is important to understanding the size, shape and future of the universe. The amount of dark matter in the universe will determine if the universe is open (continues to expand), closed (expands to a point and then collapses) or flat (expands and then stops when it reaches equilibrium). Understanding dark matter will also aid in definitively explaining the formation and evolution of galaxies and clusters. As a galaxy spins it should be torn apart. This does not happen, so something is holding the galaxy together. The something is gravity; the amount of gravity required to do this, however, is enormous and could not be generated by the visible matter in the galaxy.
A cosmic plasma filament not being as strongly pronounced, causes the galactic rotation curves to follow normal keplerian/newtonian mechanics, thus it appears they lack any "Dark Matter" -Electric Universe.
You can't explain dark matter, you can't even make sure if that exist at all. Saying that it lack's something that no one really know if that is true is a error. Trying to explain it using dark matter is also a error.
What is the possibility that dark matter doesn't exist? Is it possible that the effects are actually an electromagnetic effect from filaments and the motion of solar systems and galaxies? Not to mention, planets, moons asteroids and other things in motion throughout the universe. There must be enormous plasma charges flowing between the galaxies along the paths of the filaments.
Dawarf galaxies moving slowly have less energy tied up with momentum. Galaxies With faster rotation have more energy tied up with rotation and orbits as momentum. This energy manifests itself as mass that would be dark. All momentum in the universe is the result of gravity. Which is a huge store of energy. Which relates to mass
4 года назад+3
"We"? I can explain it. Dark matter is silly and it doesn't exist.
I am very moron fighter, but even moron like me see even more moron fighters like you Fancy thinkers fight hard to prove other fancy thinker words to be fake and take victory. But moron like you not see bravery of fancy thinker and this mean moron is also coward You not champion fancy thinker This mean you thoughts weak and insane with shitsmell
You got the velocity vs observed angle backwards. If you're looking at a galaxy from the top (along the spin axis) you will not be able to measure any velocity except for the things which are not orbiting with the principal rotation. IF you look at a galaxy from the side (edge-on) this is where you will be most effective for Doppler measurements. GAIA can observe trajectories even without Doppler shift. We should be using this for such experiments, instead of line-shifts which depend strongly on galactic spin orientation relative to us.
The whole reason dark matter came about was because some galaxies were noted rotating in ways that suggested they had more matter than what was visible. This theoretical extra unseen matter was called dark matter. But now we're finding all these galaxies rotating in ways that's consistent with all the matter that is visible and accounted for. In my opinion, this is probably because we're getting better at detecting matter. Dark matter was always just normal matter from the very beginning (IMO). Its just the matter that's hard to detect from billions of light years away like dull brown dwarf stars. And as time goes by and technology gets better, we're probably going to keep finding galaxies with no dark matter because we're better at seeing matter and don't need to make assumptions about the matter that we can't see
I say what I'm about to say as an actual Statistician. For this to be true, basically entire galaxies without 'dark matter', then the probabilistic chances of Dark Matter being 'small' particles is basically zero. If we, humans, already know of 19 galaxies without this stuff, then this is like saying we are able to observe all around us 19 huge samples of people who were able to flip millions of heads in a row without flipping a tail on a coin. Should we mathematically expect this sometimes - absolutely. Should this be common from our tiny infinitesimally small view of the known universe if Dark Matter makes up 25% of the mass of the universe? - can't possibly be true. Dark Matter, that doesn't interact with Baryonic Matter, has decided to exit the building of 19 random galaxies completely - makes me think that the story of Black Holes is only going to grow.
You assume a random process, which you have no reason to assume, thus your argument is much weaker than you make it sound by claiming zero chance etc. These types of galaxies could be a result of some unknown process, leaving them with the characteristic properties that they have. It is more like observing 19 really strange looking people in a city because they have some common genetic flaw. No need to invoke billions of coin-flips here.
@@urinveisinfeksjon It is nothing like observing 19 strange looking people in a city - unless by genetic flaw you mean 19 green 3 foot aliens. Please don't tell me I'm assuming something when 'm making a statistical observation on 'apparent' factual data. Galaxies are not single particles - they are made up of trillions and trillions and trillions of baryonic particles - and 'apparently' far more Dark Matter 'particles' IF these Dark Matter particles are 'small'. If they are 'small' for them all of a sudden ALL not to be there, this is a statistical impossibility given they are 'apparently' everywhere else uniformly. It wasn't but a few weeks ago that we were 'certain' the Universe was Flat - now, maybe not so and it has positive curvature (oops) - and maybe now the universe is 18 billion years old (oops), or not, and maybe we just lost half the Dark Energy (oops). Let's agree that if we just discovered that the end of the universe is right behind us, and we now know of 19 Galaxies without Dark Matter, (that means there are millions more), then maybe, we have no idea WTF we are talking about currently.
@@wallstreetoneil You're right, "we" have no idea what we're talking about! Which is why it is improper to draw conclusions from a skinny statistical argument... (It is only a statistical impossibility if you assume it happens by pure chance, which, yes, you are definitely assuming it seems!)
The discovery of multiple galaxies that lack dark matter seems to reinforce the idea that dark matter is real. Be interesting to see how this plays out.
Can we measure if the speed of light is different in such places? Do we believe the existence of and density of dark matter has an impact on the speed of light passing through it? Thx
Awesome question. The question is directly about the structure of space-time. The answer by general relativity is NO. But general relativity isn't the end of knowledge. I think you can study GM on your own. A year of dedicated study will get you there.
If every ultra-diffuse galaxy is lacking in dark matter, this would be a strong contributing factor for the possibility of the correctness of some version of MOND.
Wayne Shirey because fancy thinkers can see effect of lightless small stuff but not lightless small stuff itself I am think good comparison is how I am smell shitsmell air when other fighter make shitsmell air but I am not see shitsmell air
If there is a galaxy with no dark matter it would mean that there is something in there that can absorb it, they should go mine those galaxies for new matter to built new measurement tools with.
These diffuse galaxies are split-offs resulting from galaxy collisions in the distant pass. The dark matter is concentrated in the center of the larger galaxies and remains largely with the resulting mass of the collision resulting galaxy and not the splinters that are expelled by the collision.
Hello wonderful.. Anton! I need to ask you a favor I am having problems with my computer, and sense you are in there right now... could you take a break from your video and see if you can fix it? Just wondering cause you're so wonder-ful ;)
Fermi Bubbles are dark matter. They are much more massive & energetic than their luminosity indicates, they bind galaxies & superclusters together, & they act as a gamma boundary layer to prevent gravitational collapse. Thus, Fermi Bubbles are also the solution to the final parsec problem. Ad Astra
exceptions to the rules are the best way to find out more about the rules. let's just hope we didn't get anything wrong about how the hydrogen line works. because then we'd have to recall the voyager probes, and that would be a pain.
![Eminem - Temporary (feat. Skylar Grey) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZaK9Wi5ho0o/mqdefault.jpg)
I like to believe there's some non-baryonic alien civilization looking at these 19 galaxies saying "Weird, there's an abundance of dark matter here that we can't see!"
Your videos make me happy. Going thru what I feel are the darkest days of my life and your videos get me thru my days man. You're a wonderful person.
Clearly the alien cultures have come to an understanding on how to farm it.
Sir ChucklenutsTM
exactly!
Yeah lol like a community of aliens.
*A lot more mystery to uncover!*
That's what makes Space so interesting!
space isn't real. it's a lie made up by nasa to hide the truth about religion.. or something
@@StayFractalesque lol, so we are looking at LEDs in the sky and the sun and moon are some fancy Ikea lamps???
@@change8606 yeah, lol, science installed a whole bunch of efficient energy star rated LEDs so they can conspiracy on a budget
@@change8606 bro we live on a LEGO planet why are you surprised
@National Socialist Squad *woosh*
Anton Petrov, YOU are a wonderful person 👍
Don't forget cute, too. That's basically the only reason I come and watch his videos, lol
Easily my favorite channel on RUclips right now. Thanks for the amazing content!
Discoveries like this cause me to seriously ask: "Is dark matter our generation's aether?"
Check out the Electric Universe Theory, I'm not saying it's the answer to all but it seems like there is something there.
Aether was an ancient hypothesis that was eventually unambiguously disproved. Dark matter is a placeholder name for a clearly observable astronomical phenomenon that has not been explained yet. At first some scientists thought that gravity worked differently at galactic level and came up with MOND (modified Newtonian dynamics) but it has gone out of favor because observations don’t match the predictions of this “adjusted” model. It’s discoveries like these that have sunk mond.
Discoveries like this cause me to seriousely ask: "If Dark Matter is a thing, could we be watching 19 galaxy spanning civilizations having gobbled up all the Dark Matter as some sort of energy source?
@@pansepot1490 dark matter is made up fantasy with no evidence except that without it the equations don't match observation. That is not science.
@@34ccsn You claim there is 'no evidence' and then mention the indirect though very substantial evidence for it. You don't understand science. You act like it's somehow wrong to postulate on something we know next to nothing about, when the math suggest there is something there.
Let me use an example to show how scientist can postulate something when no direct evidence has been observed. Let's say you have lived underground your whole life and know absolutely nothing about the surface, but you also have an underground swimming pool. You have a hose that is supposed to fill up the swimming pool, from an underground reserve beneath you. Somehow the pool fills up 10 times faster than the hose itself can possibly allow. You have no idea what it could be, but being a presumably 'rational' mind, you would be forced to conclude that water came from somewhere. All you can do is use what little you do know, to postulate the most likely conclusion. You know gravity is a thing, so maybe somehow the water came from 'above' and sank 'downward'.
Scientist and Science as a whole don't pretend to know everything about dark matter, the point of it is that it's a place-holder precisely because we don't know what it could be, but what we do know is that something is manipulating phenomena beyond the factors which present equations account for. The ironic thing about your commentary on science, is that you believe that you can understand reality through religious fundamentalist authority, but don't dare to question that religious authority - either the book itself or the people espousing it. Science doesn't read like a holy book that you would revel in which pretends to know everything about reality. The point is to discover reality through the evidence it presents us, especially with the aid of an unbiased tool such as math. If the math suggest something is missing, something is missing.
When there is a lack of knowledge on something, The departure between Science and Religious fundamentalism, is that while Science attempts to slowly discover the truth, and is willing to consider multiple plausible answers where none have yet been found, Religion out of its sheer ignorance, decides to ascribe supernatural elements to 'explain' anything where we lack knowledge. I strongly suspect this is the place your commentary comes from, which looks like this: "Oh look at those science enthusiast being confused about Dark Matter, i'm comfortable in the 'knowledge' that my religion has all the answers". Lets not forget that every time fundamental aspects of theology and religion gets proven wrong, it constantly has to retreat into ever smaller gaps of scientific understanding.
I can think of one thing:
Consider that many dwarf galaxies that orbit larger galaxies may have had one or more collisions with their larger neighbors (and are connected by that stream of gas & stars). Dwarf galaxies that are, let's say 90-98% dark matter, are the ones that were stripped of many of their stars in previous collisions and those with the 70-something-% dark matter are examples of the few dwarf galaxies that haven't gotten partially eaten yet.
In other words, based on the size of the central black holes of these galaxies, a dwarf galaxy with 70% dark matter is normal if left undisturbed; a galaxy with 98% dark matter has lost a huge chunk of it's baryonic matter to larger galaxies but is not yet fully consumed (or integrated) into the larger galaxy yet.
Consider that galaxies aren't actually required to "hold together". Rather, they are generating stars and flinging them out into space. When the central massive sources are expended, they become regular gravitationally bound systems.
Those galaxies probably lack unicorns, yetis, and honest politicians, also.
Ken Hallaron
The observation has been made so it obviously exists. The debate is over what the cause is.
@infinite kind The observations have been made, the debate is over what they actually are. The difference is, if zoology was held to the same standard as astrophysics, the existence of plesiosaurs in Scottish lakes would be considered a virtual fact.
As it stands, with Zoology, people are told not assume the exotic explanation; it's probably just mis-identification, and problems with measurements because of conditions and distance. In Astrophysics, we can ignore that we're only estimating the mass of galaxies, and that our understanding of gravity is incomplete, and that we're making measurements of things that are thousands or even millions of light years away, we should assume there's some kind of invisible intangible stuff out there exerting buttloads of gravity.
Anton's videos are as always... The very best! I cannot think of anyone I'd rather watch!
i love your videos :) they’re so informative
That's really interesting. I wonder about a central blackhole, since they seem to be related.
Like matter chewed and digested and expelled from a black hole?
@@michellejewell9859 No. Looks like there's a relation between the amount of dark matter of a galaxy and the size of the central blackhole.
Maybe because"dark matter" doesn't really exist except as an anomaly that's been hand waved into existence? No one can prove it except as a gap in our knowledge as far as my RUclips PhD tells me. By the way great videos keep it up.
Dark matter has enough evidence to be classified as verifiable theory
Sicko Yoda Ok, so we'll say dark matter doesn't exist. Something is causing this slight heterogeneity in the physical characteristics of galaxies, as described in this video. They seem to be bahaving the way they are due to an excess (or relative deficit) of mass. Now, our radio astronomy doesn't detect enough visible (baryonic) matter to account for the behaviors of these galaxies.
Maybe dark matter isn't the final answer but it's at least a working hypothesis. Do you have a better one?
@@jw7196 well said
I have a U-tube Nobel, so shut up. Seriously tho' I'm also a bit sceptical about it till someone can show me that it wasn't just summoned into existence to prop up the big bang theory.
Jason Meyer Well, please point me to the best presentation of your theories.
So many nobel prize contestants in the comment section.
Didn't anybody ever teach you not to underestimate the intelligence of others? There's people with a master's degree flipping burgers these days ffs lol
Anton's comment section in particular I notice has a lot of quack basement physicists. XD
I attribute it to Anton being so good at explaining these things that a lot of normally stupid and derp people "get it".
@on god maybe my comment isn't directed at people like you? If you believe you know your subject, this comment shouldn't trigger you...
There are truely stupid comments and unknowledgeable ones.
It really boils down to this.. . “We”. . . don’t REALLY know how far things are away from us. Let me repeat that. . . cosmic distances are, currently, at best, a guess. The “distance ladder” has some seriously broken rungs. Let’s toss Cepheid Variables, for a start. “Correlation is not Causation”. This seems to be have been missed on the cosmic scale.
Aliens figuring out how to use dark matter for energy and using it all up?
Eugene S if they were like a type IV civilization that might make sense. It’s as good a theory as anything I’ve heard Eugene so why not lol? Except on this channel it’s never aliens, ever lol
@@chrisdooley6468 I guess it's hard to claim it's aliens as a scientist, without proof. But there is an interview, where he refers to "I want to believe"
Uhm yes, agreed.
No way, almost certain no race will ever reach light speed, even if they did space is too big imo.
Ofc could be wrong
shit! i just posted the same thing, we are both geniuses! Aliens!
Its very telling that they're all dwarf galaxys, without dark matter star formation itself would be half as common due to the lack of gravity, therefore the gas clouds that formed them must have been massive.
It is starting to look like these galaxys were in particularly matter dense regions of the big bang and that the effects being observed are from a lack of dark matter which could still be antimatter as we dont know if it interacts with gravity differently than regular matter or not yet- a few physicists still argue that a negative charge (gravityparticle) could be capable of creating a small pushing force that is opposite of gravity.
I feel we could be on the precipice of an amazing discovery.
Grumpy Australian I wonder how this discovery will impact the theory of Quantized Inertia?
@@patriautic9308
Hopefully put it in the ground for good😅
There have been experiments to measure the thrust of resonant cavity thrusters that have recorded values much lower than originally predicted that are likely explained by interactions with the Earth's magnetic field, making many of the implied conclusions unfounded, I'm not a fan.
Are you suggesting that dark matter adds to the gravity of normal matter. Interesting! Because if dark matter is everywhere it becomes difficult to understand, with all that extra gravity, why the universe is expanding!
@@KZgun4hire precisely, there is no direct evidence that the extra mass we have detected holding galaxys together is actually in the galaxys it could just as easily be a pushing force inbetween that adds to the observed gravity, acting almost like a sort of thin atmospheric pressure for the universe as in, if there were no atmospheric pressure water wouldn't have the gravity to become a liquid, without the extra pushing force there is less pressure/gravity for stars to form.
Interestingly this would push galaxys apart and due to dark matters lack of mass in this scenario form the bubbles of empty we see littered throughout the universe, imagine bubbles of air in water without gravity, the density of the water pushes the repelling air into a sphere and compresses it leaving the water in a web just like the web of matter we see.
Walter ZAMBOTTI its not expanding
How do we KNOW that Dark Matter is actually matter? Is it possible there's some aspect of gravity we don't understand, something that causes it to behave differently under some influence we haven't defined? Or has that been definitively ruled out?
From what I have read, observations of gravity lensing effects show that it is actually 'stuff'. There are many more 'matter' based theories to be explored first. Einstein is still correct. If gravity aspect were the culprit , it would show up in many other observations of other structures. I'm just a science layman but I hope this helps. This stuff is so interesting.
well, thats basically the debate, is dark matter actual stuff we cant see, or is gravity not working how we thought it worked. neither can be conclusively proven, although there appears to be a preponderance of evidence suggesting that DM is stuff we cant see for whatever reason. in fact the only evidence I can think of suggesting that DM isnt actual stuff is circumstantial, ie its that no matter how hard we look we cant seem to find it.
We don't, and yes it is possible. There's a group of theories under the banner of MOND (MOdified Newtonian Dynamics) around, but to my knowledge they've mostly either been disproved or are untested. At the quantum end of the scale, they also expect that some undiscovered types of particles exist for reasons of symmetry, so most of the money is going towards detecting these new types of particles. WIMPs in particular they've been trying to detect for 40 years.
Phenomena like these are evidence for dark matter being matter. A galaxy that has ended up with no dark matter is conceivable. Modified gravity theories would need some other reason for these galaxies to be special.
@@SimonClarkstone I'm on the fence about whether dark matter is an undiscovered type of matter or something else, and at first glance this looked to me like the exception that might prove the rule, but when you consider that the ratio of dark matter to baryonic matter is an order of magnitude lower than normal ONLY in galaxies whose overall mass is also orders of magnitude lower than normal, then I don't think the evidence really tilts the scale in either direction. Still, it's probably a useful piece of the puzzle.
When someone says "no pun intended" just to draw attention to the pun they made.
Great video, but I’m still unsure how these galaxies stay together. It’s good that we don’t have a model of how they’re formed because, as you say, more science work is needed, which always helps.👍
I love knowing that there is so much we don't know. I remember so many discoveries, form black holes to dark matter. it's all great. Dark matter is like the ether is it there? Is it not? If we knew everything it would be so booooorrrrriiiinnnnggg.
Don Bruce but u wont know everything, it doesnt matter if its fun or boring. U cant choose in this case
@@twiinpk3r Yes but even the most boring discovery is magic to someone.
@@donbruce8234 I think we have become numb with our feelings. The things we are figuring out are mind blowing. Vulnerable humans figuring out things thousands and light years away. It's amazing if you think about it.
Hi thank you very much.
Now time for Anton to make a synthetic aperture Radio Telescope
I like this idea, although this takes many resources and capability in synchronization and coherent processing.
@@onehitpick9758 you can theoretically make one using Sat elite TV Dishes and custom LNB's. As for the synchronization, atomic clocks have gotten relatively inexpensive these days. The corelator and data loggers are the only really expensive thing.
I have been intrigued by the Dragonfly Telescope Array for years. A major telescope built with mostly off the shelf parts and Canon telephoto lenses.
Hello wonderful Anton! I get your notification and I run over here to see what's new every time!
I can explain why Anton, God says in Hebrews 1:3 that he holds all things together, love your channel.. 😇
All that really explains is why you stopped looking for why things happen.
I wish my brain was that simple... no I don't.
@@boggers , who stopped looking, on the contrary, the question should be how God holds things together, he will reveal thoes answers in his own time, but never stop looking at the wonders of his creation
It's all fun and games until you find 19 more galaxies that lack dark matter and can't explain why
Everybody gangsta until they find galaxies without enough dark matter
This is a great video! Btw, did anyone hear about the EM mapping NASA just released the other day? I wonder if magnetic fields also have an effect on the speed of the galaxies in question.
Perhaps, dark matter just doesn't exist...
So true. They refuse to acknowledge that they are looking at PLASMA, which moves according to magnetohydrodynamics, not gravity.
It's clearly Aliens that figured out how to harvest dark matter and sucked it all up.
So let me get this straight if I can: if a galaxy spins faster than it "should" then it has dark matter, but if it spins slower than it "should" it doesn't. Wait. What?
Yes. If it spins too fast, yet stays together, it's acting almost like a solid. Think of a vinyl record spinning, where the edge has to move faster than the middle to match its speed.
If a galaxy spins rapidly, some *invisible* mass (dark matter) has to be added to the equation with its gravity to keep the faster outside spinning portion of the galaxy from flying off from the slower, inside part of the galaxy
Ramey Zamora It's what our radio astronomy indicates about the bulk of the universe that gives us our standard of how a galaxy "should" typically behave. You've been experiencing sun rises and sets happening at around the same times, from day to day, all your life. This gives you some notion of what a typical day will be marked by (what "should" happen, on a typical day). If the sun doesn't rise tomorrow, I'm guessing you wouldn't consider it to be a typical day. And it would be because something that "should" have happened didn't.
According to Keppler / Newton's laws of gravity, rotation speed "should" fall off towards the edges proportionally to inverse distance squared. But when they started measuring the rotation of galaxies they found it was not the case. They don't know why, so "dark matter" is the label put on the cause behind the observations not lining up with the math. Most of the measured galaxies have roughly the same ratio of normal matter to dark matter, so what they mean by "should" has shifted when they measure new galaxies - because at first they expected zero dark matter, but now they expect to find about 90% dark matter when they measure it. This video is about some tiny galaxies that have been measured to have about 10% the ratio of regular baryonic matter to dark matter compared to normal galaxies.
It's really just a question of wording. Instead of saying faster or slower than it "should", it's more accurate to say: "if it spins faster than can be explained simply by the mass of the stars it contains, dark matter is present." And for these 19 galaxies, "they spin at a rate you would expect to see if it only contains the mass of the stars present. Thus they are different than all other observed galaxies in that way."
ECCLESIASTES 3:11
If these galaxies are in empty parts of the universe (as you said Anton), then this is a VALIDATION point for the "flace hypothesis" a new grand unifying hypothesis as it would predict such behavior in isolated galaxies.
Because the dark matter theory has some serious flaws in it.
The thing that fascinates me about "dark matter" is that it seems to behave very like quantum matter, and the total mass of quantum matter and it's entanglements in the universe isn't discussed.
When your world seed comes without a key resource! :(
So, Dark Matter was named to explain why some galaxies had more gravity then they should. But, now, when we find galaxies that have as much gravity as they should, we don't know what to do?
I feel a great disturbance in the force... I mean, in the dark matter...
Very interesting indeed! And since we don't understand much about these galaxies or dark matter for that matter, ideas are up for grabs! Here's an idea: Maybe it's 19 type III civilizations (or at least the one's from a void), and they've learned how to utilize dark matter as an energy source, thus the lack of dark matter we're measuring. Haha alien hypotheses are always fun, until we figure out something is merely a natural occurrence, we couldn't yet see/understand. Cool video, thx
What is the name of that algoritme needed for making out the direction from where that 21cm signal comes? I listened over and over but I cannot hear that name exactly? (as I enjoyed programming a lot I find it very interesting to learn more by reading what I can find about that way of finding a direction for such a diffuse signal like that hydrogen-line.)
Dix anyone hear that name he mentioned for the algoritme used for that?
The zoom in on that picture is just insane
Some of the best content to get high to💨⛽
Maybe high density galaxies contain a stronger network of black holes, which creates a strong binding force, whereas smaller more diffuse galaxies contain fewer black holes, so behave much differently.
Anton, what happened to your intro music, i miss it man!
Every video you watch, there is some douche bag complaining about the music in the comments.
I keep asking Anton TO turn it up , but no reaction !! IT was really loud way back , then he turned it down too much !!
Music has ruined far more RUclips videos than it has enhanced.
Two ideas: 1. Everybody knows dark matter is small and moves rapidly and thus can easily escape from low gravity galaxies. 2. The problem might not be dark matter, but rather an incomplete understanding of gravity. Gravity might behave differently in areas that have a high concentration of mass than in areas that have a low concentration of mass. Also, the effect of gravity at greater distances may be different from what our models show. It is too complicated to explain here, but a better understanding of gravity has the potential to give us a better understanding of the red shift.
**hand gesture**
A L I E N S
Youre a wonderful person Anton.
Electric Universe.
You talk about dark matter like it really exists. It is a theory that we have wasted billions of dollars trying to prove.
wasted billions instead of considering GR has some issues... how humble from scientists.
and they suddenly forgot about okham razor that would point out at that simpler eventuality that GR is wrong somewhere.
Didn't Anton make another video on why dark matter probably doesn't exist?
You sound like one of those flat earthers, or Donald Trump.
thank you so much for the explianation i really appriciated it
I strongly believe these things can’t be explained because we are on the wrong path.
With such distant galaxies it's hard to tell what's the matter.
WELL IT doesn't Matter to me !!
@@TOMAS-lh4er I've never really understood the matter!
@@RaysDad As a matter of fact, your right !
Well for starters dark matter is a mathematical construct
scott mills
Which describes an existing phenomena
@@gravitonthongs1363 maybe another explanation can describe the existing phenomena. We've been searching for dark matter for a long time now and haven't found anything.
Graviton Thongs,which explains nothing, the science can not be settled until the theory can be tested,it has not been observed it can not be replicated and there is growing evidence every day against it, yes there is a phenomenon but all we really have is mathematical gymnastics to describe a cause of the phenomenon, we need to stick to the principles of science before jumping into the world of facts, my sons think it’s a fact and the Big Bang is a certainty, they can’t get their heads around space time but it must be true because it was taught/ preached to them by their professors, who are they to argue.
Hector Nonayurbusiness , yes there must be another answer, we’ve wasted enough time and money barking up this tree.
scott mills
The effects are observed and there is no competing theory.
The evidence for The Big Bang is overwhelming.
The more I watch these the more I find it difficult to believe dark matter exists, but instead that our understanding of gravity is incorrect. Further boosted by something I saw recently suggesting gravity IS NOT a fundamental force. I think we’ve got more gravity understanding left to perform which will remove the need for the still as yet undetected dark matter. There’s likely a reason it’s not been physically detected but rather effects of gravity witnessed.
heard of the Safire project?
Every galaxy lacks dark matter it doesn’t exist.
The observation had been made so it obviously exists. The debate is over what the cause is
Why do you say that and can you point me to any sources? Only asking because I tend to believe things that can't be definitively explained they chalk it up to dark matter. Example: a galaxy as big as the milkyway couldn't hold together wothout the existence of dark matter.
Lateralus 7L
Dark matter is an observed effect not a particle observation yet. The most popular theory is LCDM Model. The bullet cluster is another good source of observational evidence.
@@gravitonthongs1363 So no physical evidence but somethings there?
Lateralus 7L
Mostly correct. The physical evidence(eg: X17) is weak at best, but that is a seperate theory which attempts to explain dark matter. Observation that something is affecting the mass and behaviour of galaxies is practically undeniable, so DM is likely to exist in one form or another, whether it be matter or another factor.
That's interesting. That makes me think dark matter may not be produced by normal stellar processes, and may be a leftover material from early in the universe's history.
What if dark matter would has something in relation with strong interaction in nuclear subject, I mean, it kind of has the same property?
JOBBY MATTER SHIELDS DARK MATTER FROM BEING DETECTED.
In my opinion Dark Matter is not a substance but an unknown force related with quantum mechanics.
Perhaps micro black holes are related with this, perhaps black holes are related with everything, perhaps the entire universe is included in a black hole, black holes into black holes.
Hey Anton, I would consider an alternate proposal. Perhaps dark matter is attracted to larger sums of mass. Thus, if they did go "astronomically near" a large galaxy such as the Milky Way. They would lose their dark matter. Just a guess at least. The alternative to the really fast galaxies could be a LOT of black holes acting like a mixer around the core. Or that the dwarf galaxies are actually expelled remnants from the edge of larger galaxies that got tossed out and captured in the gravity of the dwarf galaxies super core and fell in with a high velocity but not enough to exit the dwarf galaxy.
Science cant explain lots of thing but that doesn't stop it from claiming to know everything.
The assumptions behind dark matter are that gravity is the only force affecting galactic rotation curves, and that there are no undiscovered forces of nature.
>Dark matter
>Supposedly more common than hydrogen
>Supposedly almost completely absent from 19 entire galaxies
Yeah that's a no from me dawg.
So lets say we have an understanding of gravity that works so well within our solar system that we can explain all previous known anomalies, and predict some entirely unknown objects (with some success) based on the gravitational dance of dozens of objects hundreds of millions of miles away. Let's say this theory of gravitation has yet to be falsified despite almost a hundred years and that a good portion of all the astrophysics experiments and astronomical measurement are effectively tests of this theory. It accurately predicted the operation of time in low gravity before space travel, and inherently predicted the existence of black holes and neutron stars before they were ever detected. Let's say it's basically the most well tested mathematical description of the universe in the whole of science. Let's say there is nothing inherent to the theory that precludes it's operation at cosmological distances. Let's we then notice that each galaxy we number crunch (including our own) is rotating faster than it should be based on our mass calculations. So we recalculate the mass, with every conceivable variation that still resembles the galaxy we observe. We try many hundreds of variations of likely errors or sources of unaccounted for mass. For decades we fail to come up with anything other than our mass calculations being accurate, and our speed calculations being accurate (and anomalous). The obvious is answer is that there is something difficult to detect which is providing extra mass not that the inverse square law governing/describing gravitational field strength quits working a few light years outside our solar system. One is an explanation that exists within the body of our understanding of physics and known anomalous behaviors and the other tries to describe this mass/speed discrepancy by deleting Relativity. Even then many scientists try to develop a theory that does overturn Relativity (and Newton for that matter) that matches the observable universe, that describes the anomalous galactic speeds. (including MOND; Modified Newtonian Dynamics) Nothing fits the data well enough to be a contender. The least wrong answer to the majority of the scientific community appears to be a new type of matter which is difficult to observe (interacts weakly with the EM field) and consists of relatively massive particles which congregates in galaxy halos. Along the way these various missing mass theories and postulations become known as Dark Matter. Let's say we later discover that out of the thousands of galaxies that we have crunched numbers on that 19 (plus a few previous ones) are rotating exactly as fast as we originally expected galaxies to rotate; as a function of their observable baryonic mass. Now at this point....what is the most likely course? To suddenly declare that because a few galaxies are operating as if they don't have missing mass, and all the rest are acting as if they do, that we should conclude that the missing mass doesn't exist? If that is the case, then one would have to accept that the mass calculations for those 19 galaxies were accurate. If the mass calculations for those 19 galaxies is accurate than it must be considered generally accurate for the thousands of other galaxies, confirming that a missing mass problem does exist. If the missing mass problem does still exist, then the path of least resistance is to envision a universe where some galaxies don't have dark matter (whether it's WIMPs, or Machos, or something else) due to the complex and ever unfolding nature of cosmological interactions and chance and that Dark Matter (whatever it is) is the norm in galaxies.
The plot thickens as we get better and larger data sets. It would be quite silly to simply throw out these decades of work trying to narrow down the source of the anomalous speeds because you PraetorGames is personally uncomfortable and lack confidence in the capacity of our astrophysics community to infer the existence of missing mass and called it literally the most humble name possible "Dark Matter; heavy shit we can't see) You then see a video about a study that has found 19 galaxies that don't have missing mass and feel this is confirmation of your pre-existing doubts. However if the mass calculations of those 19 galaxies is correct, which it must be to be used for confirmation bias, then the mass calculations of the other thousands of galaxies is highly likely to be correct as they are based on the same assumptions, and the same laws of physics and the missing mass still exists and astrophysicists are still going to call it Dark Matter until they figure out what it is.
Dark matter/dark energy is the effect of negative mass particles interacting gravitationally with positive mass . Negative mass particles are the Time force carriers .
If you cant find dark matter and cant locate or observe it then how can you find galaxies lacking that which you cant see or observe. It's the black hole scenario all over
Lucifer Beezelbub Mephistophilies the Apocrypha You look at gravitational effects (e.g., the velocities of stars further from the center of the galaxy being inexplicably similar to the velocities of stars closer to the center, gravitational lensing, etc.). If you can give a better account of these effects, I implore you to write a paper.
They can't explain something that doesn't exist .
He's done videos on this already. See the Bullet Cluster as an example.
The speed in which these galaxies are spinning is impossible without a force they proposed was dark matter. He's saying if these forces do exist in these other galaxies- it doesn't exist in the ones he showcased.
It has become evident that there is another feild of particle energy that hasn't been discovered yet. Invisible matter is not logical. Given the state of particle formation through the feilds of energy from photon to electron to neutron to solid matter, would it not be logical that there would be a feild for particle decay, or a feild of entropy? That it may be this unseen invisible particle is in a state of decomposition and in doing so also creating a positive/negative state of equilibrium for the other feilds?
would be interesting to see if those galaxies have supermassive black holes at the center and their age.
maybe those heavy (possibly supersymmetrical) dark matter particles are produced around black holes and shot out along the jet stream but ending up in orbit around the galaxy due to their mass.
The title should be, 'We don't understand why there isn't any of the stuff that we don't understand'
What makes a diffuse galaxy different than
a large (in volume rather than mass) globular cluster of stars?
Regardless. If they’re so diffuse and have little dark matter, why don’t they fly apart?
I captured this dark matter with my I-phone 6
Nice video with lots of context for better understanding. My amateur take: Both methods you mention could measure the speed of density waves instead of stars. Arms and density clusters travel at different speeds from the average star. Even more important: There seems to be a relation between galaxy structure and 'dark matter' content. The more pronounced the arms, for instance, the more 'dark matter'. From the video, it seems only the distance from the center of the galaxy is factored in, seeing the stars as an even cloud or maybe the galaxy center as a gravity point source. But as gravity decreases over distance, the gravity in a density wave like a spiral arm far exceeds the gravity from a center. Such star concentrations act like a big string, pulling the stars towards the center with far more force than the center itself.
I'm going to guess this is a measurement error thing
19 times?
OriginalTharios
There is no competing theory that explains the observed phenomena
@OriginalTharios bro dark matter is just the name we give to the explanation for the observations we have. When we actually find the answer the name will probably change.
OriginalTharios
LCDM MODEL is a recognised verifiable theory. It has sufficient evidence despite your personal knowledge or opinion.
@OriginalTharios no one has even said it's a particle. you've just assumed that. it could be a magical space unicorn for all we know, and scientists are trying to find out what it actually is. why don't you find the solution then? imagine judging the 'scientific community' on a youtube comment. go back to m'flat earth theory
I enjoy this very much. Thank you!
Because dark matter doesn’t exist.
Time is a tricky girl👍
I am very moron fighter, but even moron like me see even more moron fighters like you
Fancy thinkers fight hard to prove other fancy thinker words to be fake and take victory. But moron like you not see bravery of fancy thinker and this mean moron is also coward
You not champion fancy thinker
This mean you thoughts weak and insane with shitsmell
@@rokibeeskiroodroki9018 ?????????LOL?????????????? WHAT? HAHAHAHA
I agree with you 100%, it is really amazing how so many so called scientists worship at the foot of guess work with zero proof.
@@SoulSeekerDR There is no current problem of greater importance to cosmology than that of dark matter. Dark matter is composed of particles that do not absorb, reflect, or emit light, so they cannot be detected by observing electromagnetic radiation. Dark matter is material that cannot be seen directly. We know that dark matter exists because of the effect it has on objects that we can observe directly.
Scientists study dark matter by looking at the effects it has on visible objects. Scientists believe that dark matter may account for the unexplained motions of stars within galaxies. Computers play an important role in the search for dark matter data. They allow scientists to create models which predict galaxy behavior. Satellites are also being used to gather dark matter data. In 1997, a Hubble Space Telescope image (seen on the right) revealed light from a distant galaxy cluster being bent by another cluster in the foreground of the image. Based on the way the light was bent, scientists estimated the mass of the foreground cluster to be 250 times greater than the visible matter in the cluster. Scientists believe that dark matter in the cluster accounts for the unexplained mass.

Gravitational Lens Created by Galaxy Cluster Reveals Presence of Dark Matter
Scientists have produced many theories about what exactly dark matter may be. Some believe that it may be normal objects such as cold gasses, dark galaxies, or massive compact halo objects (called MACHOs, they would include black holes and brown dwarfs). Other scientists believe that dark matter may be composed of strange particles which were created in the very early universe. Such particles may include axions, weakly interacting massive particles (called WIMPs), or neutrinos.
Understanding dark matter is important to understanding the size, shape and future of the universe. The amount of dark matter in the universe will determine if the universe is open (continues to expand), closed (expands to a point and then collapses) or flat (expands and then stops when it reaches equilibrium). Understanding dark matter will also aid in definitively explaining the formation and evolution of galaxies and clusters. As a galaxy spins it should be torn apart. This does not happen, so something is holding the galaxy together. The something is gravity; the amount of gravity required to do this, however, is enormous and could not be generated by the visible matter in the galaxy.
@@rokibeeskiroodroki9018 me fart. Sniff fart. Only me enjoy.
It would be nice to make a dark matter engine that throws out nothing and produces thrust
i am not sure if it is sarcasm, but if it is its fucking hilariously spot on.
Semantics what it means is the theories concerning dark matter and dark energy don’t seem to fit the observably facts
A cosmic plasma filament not being as strongly pronounced, causes the galactic rotation curves to follow normal keplerian/newtonian mechanics, thus it appears they lack any "Dark Matter" -Electric Universe.
Probably because the dark matter thing was invented because someone's grant was running out.
So now we need 'an equivalent to Hubble telescope' Anton says. Well guess im out of luck with that!
You can't explain dark matter, you can't even make sure if that exist at all.
Saying that it lack's something that no one really know if that is true is a error.
Trying to explain it using dark matter is also a error.
What is the possibility that dark matter doesn't exist? Is it possible that the effects are actually an electromagnetic effect from filaments and the motion of solar systems and galaxies? Not to mention, planets, moons asteroids and other things in motion throughout the universe. There must be enormous plasma charges flowing between the galaxies along the paths of the filaments.
Maybe its because *dArk MaTTer DoEsn'T EXIST*
Dawarf galaxies moving slowly have less energy tied up with momentum.
Galaxies With faster rotation have more energy tied up with rotation and orbits as momentum.
This energy manifests itself as mass that would be dark.
All momentum in the universe is the result of gravity.
Which is a huge store of energy.
Which relates to mass
"We"? I can explain it. Dark matter is silly and it doesn't exist.
I am very moron fighter, but even moron like me see even more moron fighters like you
Fancy thinkers fight hard to prove other fancy thinker words to be fake and take victory. But moron like you not see bravery of fancy thinker and this mean moron is also coward
You not champion fancy thinker
This mean you thoughts weak and insane with shitsmell
We don’t know nearly enough about gravity. Dark matter is just a different way of saying that.
i think its more arrogant and hypocritical than that. GR has flaws, time to admit it and fix it.
You got the velocity vs observed angle backwards. If you're looking at a galaxy from the top (along the spin axis) you will not be able to measure any velocity except for the things which are not orbiting with the principal rotation. IF you look at a galaxy from the side (edge-on) this is where you will be most effective for Doppler measurements. GAIA can observe trajectories even without Doppler shift. We should be using this for such experiments, instead of line-shifts which depend strongly on galactic spin orientation relative to us.
The whole reason dark matter came about was because some galaxies were noted rotating in ways that suggested they had more matter than what was visible. This theoretical extra unseen matter was called dark matter. But now we're finding all these galaxies rotating in ways that's consistent with all the matter that is visible and accounted for.
In my opinion, this is probably because we're getting better at detecting matter. Dark matter was always just normal matter from the very beginning (IMO). Its just the matter that's hard to detect from billions of light years away like dull brown dwarf stars. And as time goes by and technology gets better, we're probably going to keep finding galaxies with no dark matter because we're better at seeing matter and don't need to make assumptions about the matter that we can't see
I say what I'm about to say as an actual Statistician. For this to be true, basically entire galaxies without 'dark matter', then the probabilistic chances of Dark Matter being 'small' particles is basically zero. If we, humans, already know of 19 galaxies without this stuff, then this is like saying we are able to observe all around us 19 huge samples of people who were able to flip millions of heads in a row without flipping a tail on a coin. Should we mathematically expect this sometimes - absolutely. Should this be common from our tiny infinitesimally small view of the known universe if Dark Matter makes up 25% of the mass of the universe? - can't possibly be true. Dark Matter, that doesn't interact with Baryonic Matter, has decided to exit the building of 19 random galaxies completely - makes me think that the story of Black Holes is only going to grow.
You assume a random process, which you have no reason to assume, thus your argument is much weaker than you make it sound by claiming zero chance etc. These types of galaxies could be a result of some unknown process, leaving them with the characteristic properties that they have. It is more like observing 19 really strange looking people in a city because they have some common genetic flaw. No need to invoke billions of coin-flips here.
@@urinveisinfeksjon It is nothing like observing 19 strange looking people in a city - unless by genetic flaw you mean 19 green 3 foot aliens. Please don't tell me I'm assuming something when 'm making a statistical observation on 'apparent' factual data. Galaxies are not single particles - they are made up of trillions and trillions and trillions of baryonic particles - and 'apparently' far more Dark Matter 'particles' IF these Dark Matter particles are 'small'. If they are 'small' for them all of a sudden ALL not to be there, this is a statistical impossibility given they are 'apparently' everywhere else uniformly. It wasn't but a few weeks ago that we were 'certain' the Universe was Flat - now, maybe not so and it has positive curvature (oops) - and maybe now the universe is 18 billion years old (oops), or not, and maybe we just lost half the Dark Energy (oops). Let's agree that if we just discovered that the end of the universe is right behind us, and we now know of 19 Galaxies without Dark Matter, (that means there are millions more), then maybe, we have no idea WTF we are talking about currently.
@@wallstreetoneil You're right, "we" have no idea what we're talking about! Which is why it is improper to draw conclusions from a skinny statistical argument... (It is only a statistical impossibility if you assume it happens by pure chance, which, yes, you are definitely assuming it seems!)
The discovery of multiple galaxies that lack dark matter seems to reinforce the idea that dark matter is real. Be interesting to see how this plays out.
Can we measure if the speed of light is different in such places? Do we believe the existence of and density of dark matter has an impact on the speed of light passing through it? Thx
Awesome question. The question is directly about the structure of space-time. The answer by general relativity is NO. But general relativity isn't the end of knowledge. I think you can study GM on your own. A year of dedicated study will get you there.
Okay, joking side, now.
Isn't this the Dark Energy that Odin had to use to transport Thor to Earth?
If every ultra-diffuse galaxy is lacking in dark matter, this would be a strong contributing factor for the possibility of the correctness of some version of MOND.
Wouldn’t it be because there is no super massive hole to orbit around therefore their is no central point to orbit?
It's ironic that we have no idea what dark matter is, but we can say with authority how much a galaxy "should" have.
Wayne Shirey because fancy thinkers can see effect of lightless small stuff but not lightless small stuff itself
I am think good comparison is how I am smell shitsmell air when other fighter make shitsmell air but I am not see shitsmell air
@@rokibeeskiroodroki9018 😝
If there is a galaxy with no dark matter it would mean that there is something in there that can absorb it, they should go mine those galaxies for new matter to built new measurement tools with.
One possibility is galaxy collisions, but then you said they're not near other galaxies so I'm stumped.
Yea! I was feeling big today. Thanks allot! 😆 love you guys.
Very interesting
These diffuse galaxies are split-offs resulting from galaxy collisions in the distant pass. The dark matter is concentrated in the center of the larger galaxies and remains largely with the resulting mass of the collision resulting galaxy and not the splinters that are expelled by the collision.
Hello wonderful.. Anton!
I need to ask you a favor
I am having problems with my computer, and sense you are in there right now... could you take a break from your video and see if you can fix it?
Just wondering cause you're so wonder-ful ;)
Dark matter? Space grease? Space Lube?
The Photino Birds haven't invaded those systems yet, the Xeelee still prevail.
Fermi Bubbles are dark matter. They are much more massive & energetic than their luminosity indicates, they bind galaxies & superclusters together, & they act as a gamma boundary layer to prevent gravitational collapse. Thus, Fermi Bubbles are also the solution to the final parsec problem.
Ad Astra
exceptions to the rules are the best way to find out more about the rules.
let's just hope we didn't get anything wrong about how the hydrogen line works. because then we'd have to recall the voyager probes, and that would be a pain.