Why Dark Matter Probably Exists & What It "Looks" Like!

[@ArvinAsh]

Get an exclusive 15% discount on Saily data plans! Use code ARVINASH at checkout. Download Saily app or go to saily.com/ARVINASH

[@AlphaGatorDCS]

Please do a video on Quantized Inertia. You will understand why Dark Matter is no longer needed! It explains galaxy rotation and SO much more. It is like MOND but WAY better and no adjustable parameters

[@sanjuansteve]

What is your opinion of Dipole Electron Flood Theory by physicist Roger Spurr?

[@PromLesbian]

I wonder if a blackhole would draw in Dark Matter?

[@ericgolightly8450]

Congrats on 1M subs!

[@hanstubben]

Could dark matter be ordinary matter for a parallel universe in the same space as us, where the only interaction is gravity? It could have dark molecules and dark chemistry or even dark life. There could be a whole bunch of parallel universes in the same space with lots of not interacting matters with only gravity as a common effect that can be observed.

[@douglaswilkinson5700]

Most astrophysicists call dark matter an "observable effect for which a cause has not yet been discovered."

[@codyhumble7855]

just like gravity

[@douglaswilkinson5700]

@codyhumble7855 Mass curves 4-dimentional spacetime. This curvature causes an acceleration we experience as gravity. On Earth this acceleration is 32-feet per second per second. Einstein's General Theory of Relativity describes this and has withstood every test and challenge for over 100 years.

[@Velereonics]

Okay, so that's just them saying "it shouldn't even be called this, because we don't know what it is.We just can't explain this one weird quirk with gravity"

[@shamol_sundor339]

@@douglaswilkinson5700 So, according to this statement you wrote, light should bend while passing close to earth surface. I knew such phenomenon occurs near massive stars or other massive astronomical objects such as galaxy centre etc.

[@erikawanner7355]

@@shamol_sundor339and it does bend close to earth…… it’s just so infinitesimally small that we can’t measure it

[@axle.student]

Thanks Arvin. I always appreciate your explanations. Your videos are very well done :) > Three issues that I see in the dark matter problem and one alternative perspective removes the need for DM and Dark Energy. 1. Gravitational latency. Gravity like light is slow to travel distances before it can take effect (it's not in real time). For example (hypothetically) If we remove the sun from our solar system Pluto would continue to rotate around a "Non Existent" star for another ~5.5 hours. Extend/scale that out to galactic and cosmological distances. 2. Just like earth or any other singular object the region of highest gravity is closer to the *external/outside* edge of the body of mass. If you stand at the center of earth you would feel no gravity and experience free fall. 3. Space-time. Space-time does not allow us to directly see/detect all matter in any given moment in time across space. We can only see/detect a very thin spherical shell along the phonon event horizon (past light cone). That is a lot of matter inside and potentially outside that is not accounted for. This also plays into the issue with gravitational latency. > Last (way outside of the box) *the cosmos is contracting or deflating* which removes any need for dark energy (no need for DE for expansion, because there is no expansion) as well as dark matter. (This may be compatible with Penrose CCC) > 8:18 Be careful. The last scattering was not an exact single point in time. It occurred over a ~10'000 year gradient at the end of recombination. So photons where already moving freely, and the photons at the beginning and end of that 10k years will have a different temperature (energy). That being said the last scattering (CMBR) is close enough to a static event in time to understand the true measurement gradients of space and time (or space-time). 8:33 Prior to explained above. > 12:42 I'm not advocating for MOND, but my above description of gravity in large bodies loosely fits into that description. > 12:56 This falls into point 3. as well as my remark about the CMBR. It's quite possible that the time lines between the CMBR and early objects are distorted and do not match. We have separate past light cones, and we can only view a 1D radius line with all objects past an present along that line. > 15:49 This actually makes a small amount of sense with the gravitational latency from point 1. I will have to put some more thought into though. (aka Even though the body of mass has slowed, the gravitational field is still propagating outwards with a bit of time lag.) 16:14

[@EnginAtik]

How come we don’t observe any dark matter in the Solar system? If there was some dark matter component to ordinary objects, accelerating objects would weigh less since dark matter would not be bound to ordinary matter and lag behind. This would also mean that inertial mass and gravitational mass of the objects would be different. We don’t observe any such phenomena.

[@MarsStarcruiser]

Well, there still is the currently unsolved ‘nemesis’. Whatever causing the slight deviation in angular momentum of all the planets, as if very distant/small binary to our sun or hidden Kuiper belt gas giant, has yet to be found. Can’t say it’s specifically dark matter per say… Just something to think about along this line of reasoning🤔

[@renezirkel]

You can not detect dark matter within the solar system (yet). That is because its gravitational effect is very low, if you dont have at least two masses of heavy stars. The dark matter effect to the earth, moon or or any smaler object are not detectable (yet). Especially as it is assumed (right now), that the dark matter is almost equally spread within the solar systems but unequally spread within a galaxy system.

[@samuelx5466]

@@renezirkel That's quite convenient that it's unfalsifiable isn't it

[@hankclay1376]

When you say "dark matter" must be the explanation, you are basically saying something is there causing these things. There has been no determination of what this unknown substance is, and still could be that we are missing something else that may be determined to be the cause.

[@mikemondano3624]

Not a "substance" at all.

[@drjimmaine]

I am surprised but some ( not saying you) peoples almost religious rejection of DM. We have known particles that don’t interact via E&M. Clear evidence that something with mass is creating gravity. It is either non-interacting or weakly ( not in weak force sense) interacting with matter or itself, except via gravity. WIMPS & axions are hoped for solutions as they answer other questions. If the answer is only mass, hence only gravity it will be extremely hard to directly detect. I like how AA emphasizes that MOND is without theoretical justification, just change gravity to try to fit data ( doesn’t mean it’s is wrong). Others have pointed out that MOND needs new fields, fields have energy so have gravitational effects, so MOND also requires new matter, with no well defined properties. The answer is more data, more observations, and less of a sports betting scenario. ,

[@erikawanner7355]

Dark matter EXISTS; we just don’t have a good explanation for what it is exactly

[@KingBritish]

Nice clear information as always from Arvin.

[@PaintballVideosNet]

Arvin is my guy.

[@gonpala]

what if we just have gravity wrong?

[@RiteMoEquations]

You have a theory to replace _General_ relativity and _Newtonian_ gravity?

[@douglaswilkinson5700]

Mass curves spacetime. This curvature causes an acceleration we experience as gravity. On the Earth this acceleration is 32-feet per second per second. Whatever dark matter is it also curves spacetime.

[@axle.student]

Gravitational latency. The effect of gravity is not instant and takes time to effect another body of mass. It takes ~5.5 hours before the suns gravity has an effect on Pluto. If we could hypothetically remove the sun, then Pluto would continue to rotate around nothing for 5.5 hours :)

[@RiteMoEquations]

@@axle.student How would the latency contribute to any of the gravitational effects explained by dark matter? The distribution of mass-energy that the outer stars are orbiting has remained essentially static for millions of years.

[@Snowboard420]

@@RiteMoEquations show me evidence of dark matter/energy anywhere in our galaxy or in a lab. You fools believe in time dilation because you don't understand how gravity affects clocks. Time doesn't exist. Nor does spacetime. Most theories or hypotheses from physicists/science/cosmology is and has been wrong. There's so much crap out there to entertain your feeble mind. You still believe the planets orbit around the sun? lmao

[@JungleJargon]

Since we are talking about math. There’s no gravity without massive amounts of matter. There’s also no measurable distance without massive amounts of matter and there is no measurable amount of time without massive amounts matter. (No gravity no distance and no time without the existence of the formation of massive amounts of matter.) Time is accelerated and distance is stretched between all of the supermassive black holes in the universe. Stretched means there is *less* measured distance and *faster* clocks, *both of which* contribute to a faster rate of causation and a faster speed of light compared to where there is more gravity where distance is not as stretched and time runs slower where we are. If you can understand this, you can understand general relativity and you can see why there is no need for dark matter because causation is faster the farther away from the center of the galaxy it is. Dark energy is not needed either because the vacuum of space is from black holes that are growing by absorbing spacetime regardless of the amount of matter is being absorbed. This is the opposite of inflation. So the redshift is known to be from light leaving a galaxy and in a sense the farther away the source of the light is, the more the accumulation gravity it is leaving behind so the more redshifted the light is so that when the light enters the much smaller mass of our galaxy, the light is only slightly blueshifted back to its original spectrum. It’s really not even hard to understand or explain.

[@Velereonics]

What do you mean massive amounts of matter? They showed a gravitational effect between a 2 kg chunk of metal and another much smaller piece of metal.

[@JungleJargon]

@ How much does 2kg of matter slow down time or how much does it contract distance?

[@Velereonics]

@@JungleJargon That's not really the right order to consider things in, and it doesnt really have any bearing on your initial statement. What matters is: does it take a lot of stuff to produce measurable gravitational effects on other stuff and the answer is that it doesnt.

[@JungleJargon]

@@Velereonics I’m talking about the effects of massive gravitational wells on the passing of time and the measure of distance.

[@kirtroguestar471]

YAASSS!

[@aaroncoffman7267]

Arvin, any chance dark matter is related to the Higgs field expected vs. actual mass? I came across this unexplained aspect in the standard model via another video and it stuck me. Could there be a circumstance where areas of the Higgs field become ‘activated’ and take on the expected value of mass for the boson in exchange for some input of energy/something else to not break conservation of mass? Just a random idea.

[@matthewspartan8754]

Awesome ! Thanks Arvin. Will watch it later today and will send you a $10 fan support tip in a little bit

[@michaelpipkin9942]

Can you send 10 if possible? Do you have Zelle, and I'll get you back on Sun. Thanks, brotha.....

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks! I appreciate that.

[@debrainwasher]

Interestingly, dark matter fits quit well into an unfinished multidimensional quantum theory, a German physicist started to develop in the early 50's of the last millenium. Unfortunately, I can't write down his name, otherwise my comment would disappear.

[@russellamaru5175]

Thank you, Arvin Ash, for this incredibly clear, concise, and enlightening explanation of dark matter. You have clarified much of the controversy surrounding the existence of dark matter.

[@troylatterell]

is it possible that the calculations are based on a miscalculation of gravitational time dilation? "seeing" slowly moving dense matter at the center of the galaxy to be moving slower than it might actually be in a local timeframe? Or time dilation is in reverse ... ie. with "anti gravity" or different-gravity affecting observations?

[@LendriMujina]

Though I'm a dark matter skeptic, the comment section here that seems downright _proud of their ignorance_ of what the theory _actually says,_ reducing it to fallacies and half-understood pop science, is making my head hurt with secondhand embarrassment. Some people just argue to hear themselves talk.

[@Thomas-gk42]

13:40 I´m quite astonished: One of the authors of the paper that you show and claim it suggests that particle DM is compatible with the JWST data is Pavel Kroupa, one of the sharpest criticizers of the particle DM concept. I will have a look in this paper. All in all this video shows just the good old known established standard paradigm of lambdaCDM, not addressing that 40years research for a DM particle (astrophysical observations, labotary research, particle colliders...) leaded to absolutely nothing! Also the bullet cluster thing is not so clear as you want your audience to believe. Sorry, a bit disappointing.

[@edwardlewis1963]

1. How much dark matter is there in our Solar System? 2. Doesn't the Bullet Cluster observations suggest the presence of 2 black holes?

[@Snowboard420]

1. They have no evidence for dark matter or energy in our galaxy/solar system. lol. 2. Lies are more entertaining for science channels on youtube. Science asylum thinks planets go on the other side of the sun... even though the planets are always behind the sun and never go in front of the sun (based on the sun's direction/motion as it travels through the galaxy). Most experts have around 100 IQ. Content creators on youtube are jokes.

[@brothermine2292]

It's worth discussing the attempts by MOND theorists to explain why MOND isn't falsified by the Bullet Cluster, and the attempts by Dark Matter theorists to explain why Dark Matter isn't falsified by the JWST observations of large early galaxies.

[@sheepwshotguns42]

mond kinda works like epicycles to explain motions of objects tho. the more epicycles (adjustments) you make, the more complicated a picture you can draw. with enough epicycles you can create any shape imaginable. so with enough and/if's, you can make mond say anything.

[@AlphaGatorDCS]

Quantized Inertia is FAR better than MOND. No adjustable parameters. Explains galaxy rotation, bullet cluster, etc.

[@erinm9445]

@@sheepwshotguns42 The problem is that both mond and particle dark matter are kind of in epicycle territory, which is why any good discussion of dark matter should look at the strengths and weaknesses of each, and any available explanations for the weakneses. If the presenter believes the evidence for one is better than the other then they are free to say that, and should support it. But they both address issues that the other has. Which leads me to think that it's either both (there's no reason it can't be), or that it's some 3rd thing no one is talking about. For example, Wolfram has a totally different explanation of dark matter that is pretty interesting, though I can't actually say I truly understand it. But it's worth looking up.

[@sergeynovikov9424]

​@@erinm9445 erik verlinde entropic gravity is also worth mentioning. gr is incomplete theory - why should we rely on its predictions of dm?

[@IndependentPhysics]

@@sheepwshotguns42 How does MOND relate to epicycles? It has a single parameter, no more.

[@syntaxed2]

I am hoping it is dark matter and not some quantized inertia/MOND/ or other alternative models - Because that would mean there is a dark sector to explore!

[@shethtejas104]

So, dark matter matters ! Thanks Arvin for another fantastic vid.

[@IndependentPhysics]

Why doesn't dark matter clump in the cores of galaxies? Because there is no observed mass discrepancy in the cores.

[@OsCc6082]

What a great channel.

[@uriituw]

Indeed.

[@christopherellis2663]

5:37 is it possible that the calculations are based on a misunderstanding of what is involved in the mass of star clusters? Not so much a deviation of the mass as the necessary algorithm to make proper calculations

[@craigtevis1241]

How would that explain the gravitational lensing seen outside the visable matter of the cluster?

[@not_glad]

​@@craigtevis1241if we massively underestimated the normal mass the lensing expectation would be smaller than what we observe. At least that's my understanding.

[@RiteMoEquations]

The time stamp is the video sponsor.

[@craigtevis1241]

@@christopherellis2663 Sixty Symbols has a detailed video on the bullet cluster.

[@Mentaculus42]

15:24 “In addition it (DM) doesn’t interact with itself AT LEAST NOT SIGNIFICANTLY!” I like that you added that quantification of NOT SIGNIFICANTLY vs what some say is “NOT AT ALL” with regard to self interaction of Dark Matter. In the past you have alluded to the possibility of “Super-dimensional Branes or Membranes”, maybe between “Branes” that are only “gravitationally coupled”. This then opens up the possibility of a variation on what the “Big Bang” actually was to something more along the lines of cyclic interaction between these Branes (where the Dark Matter Brane “existed” prior to the FORMATION of the “Orthodox Big Bang Universe”). This also implies an explanation of what Dark Energy is and how it is “Increasing via space expansion and where it comes from”. Also if an “established” Brane of DM “existed” at the “orthodox big bang episode” then its “energy / mass density variability” would massively increase the RATE of formation of galaxies and black holes, something that appears to be observed by James Webb Space Telescope. But this is all just “Crackpot” conjectures.

[@TheJadeFist]

There could also be a whole variety of types of dark matter, that may or may not interact, interact weakly or interact strongly to other different types. If dark matter exists, I don't think we can assume there is only 1 kind, if it's really so much mass of the universe that is dark matter, it could be a whole cosmology, physics, "chemistry"(for lack of a word) we can't directly observe.

[@afriedrich1452]

Thanks for calling me a Crackpot. I appreciate it.

[@Mentaculus42]

@@afriedrich1452 Just to be extra clear, I was calling myself a crackpot to suggest something so nonorthodox.

[@afriedrich1452]

@@Mentaculus42 I don't appreciate you calling yourself a crackpot.

[@dronegirl7539]

I think dark matter is locked up within spacetime itself. Not just in spacetime but a fundamental part of it. If you could create gravitational waves with enough energy I think dark matter would radiate out of the vacuum the way photons radiate out of electromagnetism. It might be a way to make gravitons reveal themselves. And perhaps other particles of space and time such as, and this is totally speculation on my part: chronotons and spacialtons.

[@Velereonics]

Yeah, this is the correct interpretation sort of. But when you say that what you're really saying is that there is no dark matter, there's just space time, and we just don't fully understand it, and einstein would agree with that, because he also said that his theory was incomplete

[@LA_Viking]

Your relatives must be quite proud of you. You're one of the best content creators on RubeTube.

[@dasistdiewahrheit9585]

0:31 I have a question. Does the left model take into account that a galaxy is not a point mass?

[@axle.student]

Second that question.

[@bigboicreme]

Excuse me sir

[@thedarkdiamond1207]

Great video! Although I did find it to be a bit fast-paced but I can always slow down the video, but maybe go a bit slower with things as this video was very fast-paced. Thanks for providing the knowledge nonetheless and keep making good content!

[@fpostgate]

If Dark mater doesn't interact with us then how does it affect a galaxy?

[@ArvinAsh]

Because it interacts via gravity. Most thing that interact with us, that we "feel" or see, interact electromagnetically. Dark matter does not appear to do that latter. But because it interacts gravitationally, it affects large structures that have immense gravity.

[@zemm9003]

​​​@@ArvinAsh it makes a LOT of sense that there is matter that doesn't have any interactions via the forces we know. Because the forces depend on the constitution of the matter itself and it is perfectly conceivable that there are particles that interact only through forces we do not know about because our own matter is invisible to them. However since gravity is the curvature of spacetime then EVERYTHING has to experience gravitational effects regardless of their essence (actually this would be the only way we could ever detect it).

[@drjimmaine]

Excellent!

[@crowbringer]

I like how our universe has a safeguard mode switched on. No matter how hard it tries to annihilate itself it always finds a way to somehow stay stable, often bordering on the edge of our comprehension but usually just going totally insaneo style. But not like it had ever stop us from poking at it and trying to expand our understanding and the consciousness by extension. Ahh yesss... who would have thought these monkes in suits will ever make it so personal. Gotta love them for that❤❤

[@tkrisnadas]

So in the smallest scale, we cant find gravity and in the largest scale we cant find whats causing gravity? Interesting!

[@Suryanshu-z6r]

very good explanation loved it

[@haraldriegler6000]

Great video, thanks! Fascinating to see so much science at work during our times.

[@cebas7]

this was a great explanation! thanks!

[@gwentchamp8720]

Despite looking for this Dark matter particle for decades now, no trace of it has been found. Is it just very elusive or are we not looking in the right place or have we not looked long enough?

[@SciHeartJourney]

I would ❤ to see how they came up with that value of 380,000 years. 🤔

[@jorgen7180]

Dark Matter doesn't exist. Dark matter is more of a quick fix than a real solution. It’s like we’ve slapped a label on something we don’t understand and called it a day, tweaking equations to make the math work instead of looking deeper. Personally, I think there’s a better answer, maybe the forces we attribute to dark matter are actually coming from another dimension, something we haven’t fully explored yet. It’s frustrating to see physics stuck clinging to an idea with no direct proof, instead of challenging old assumptions and pushing for real progress.

[@calvingrondahl1011]

Vera Rubin ❤👍

[@charliemiller3884]

Perhaps DM was not created by the Big Bang but was pre-existing. That is, the Big Bang occurred inside a cloud of DM in a manner similar to a supernova explosion inside a nebula.

[@Anzuo]

There was no “space” before the Big Bang, and the Big Bang did not occur at any particular location in the universe. It would make more sense to say it occurred everywhere, so I don’t think anything within could have existed before

[@dziban303]

brainlet take

[@mikemondano3624]

The Big Bang did not occur "inside" anything. It was not an explosion in space, but an explosion *of* space. There were no other places existing. Nothing else had ubiety.

[@RisitasKEKW]

Human beings are so smart and can do anything when we work together

[@Italianjedi7]

Dark matter probably exists. Dark energy though? I’m not sure

[@powerzx]

None of them exist. Just replace them with a bigger amount of Black Holes and you have simple and better explanation.

[@sutionojoyodiningrat3610]

Arvin, please make dark energy debunk video that scientists are working on right now

[@manipulativer]

do a video about Mike McCulloch and his fix to dark matter

[@JungleJargon]

Things happen faster away from galaxies and things happen slower near a gravitational well. There’s no gravity without massive amounts of matter. There’s also no measurable distance without massive amounts of matter and there is no measurable amount of time without massive amounts matter. (No gravity no distance and no time without the existence of the formation of massive amounts of matter.) Time is accelerated and distance is stretched between all of the supermassive black holes in the universe. Stretched means there is *less* measured distance and *faster* clocks, *both of which* contribute to a faster rate of causation and a faster speed of light compared to where there is more gravity where distance is not as stretched and time runs slower where we are. If you can understand this, you can understand general relativity and you can see why there is no need for dark matter because causation is faster the farther away from the center of the galaxy it is. Dark energy is not needed either because the vacuum of space is from black holes that are growing by absorbing spacetime regardless of the amount of matter is being absorbed. This is the opposite of inflation. So the redshift is known to be from light leaving a galaxy and in a sense the farther away the source of the light is, the more the accumulation gravity it is leaving behind so the more redshifted the light is so that when the light enters the much smaller mass of our galaxy, the light is only slightly blueshifted back to its original spectrum. It’s really not even hard to understand or explain.

[@rightfootlefthand]

"You should know that there would be no basis to modify Newton's equations, other than to force-fit "new math" to the observed data." Ahem...you mean like inventing new particles that we can't observe nor detect to account for the "gravity offset", and call it "Dark" matter, and waste everyone's time for a number of decades??

[@user-jm4nj7nz6t]

I'm no astronomist, but I kind of like the theory that dark matter may be microscopic primordial black holes, too small to see, but with sufficient gravity to account for interaction. Can anyone update me on this theory?

[@rowerrn]

Not that i am a MOND supporter, but why is it surprising to think that the rules change on the galactic scale, just like the rules change on the subatomic scale?

[@tabasdezh]

Thanks, it was a Great video to clear things out. Baryon acoustic oscillations could be a good video topic 🙂

[@dray7579]

But on a more serious note, Arvin what does relativity say? Not the light bending, but the extra mass.

[@ianlaughlin85]

We shouldn't change the equations just to match the measurements? That's kinda where the equations come from, right? How is it better to invent invisible matter that we can not directly see, touch, or measure?

[@elijahfluw4347]

I asked my granny and she says it doesn't matter.

[@jensphiliphohmann1876]

About 12:00 _... that gravity is weaker at the edges of galaxies ..._ Stronger. Otherwise they would fly apart even faster than in non-modified Newtonian dynamics.

[@rogerman65]

Dark matter is this century's Ether theory.

[@rogerman65]

"Dark matter is there, I say!" never explaining how it came to be there in the first place. Well, what is it and how did it form in these outer layers of galaxies? Shouldn't it gather in the center of galaxies over time? If that is all the evidence you've got for Dark matter, the Bullet cluster, then you haven't got much to show.

[@ArvinAsh]

Maybe you didn't see the part about how it shows up in the CMB, and most galaxy clusters? The bullet cluster is just unique because it is in the midst of a collision and allows us to see how dark matter behaves when it collides with regular matter. How is this "not much to show"?

[@rogerman65]

@@ArvinAsh Isaac Newton's first law states that if a body is at rest or moving at a constant speed in a straight line, it will remain at rest or keep moving in a straight line at constant speed unless it is acted upon by a force. A refutation of Isaac Newton’s first law: a) If a body is in orbital motion with a given sufficient apogee and perigee it will stay in orbit in an energy-conserving state if there aren’t any adequate amounts of accurately directed energy to it. b) Thermal energy [or electro-magnetism] is required direct to make matter move in straight or otherwise non-orbital trajectories. I know one thing, energy conservation i.e., the path of least resistance is the one law that can never be rationalized away. It governs the galaxies. This part alone can explain away the existence of Dark matter and explain how it is that spiral galaxies hold together and why they are not throwing stars out into the surrounding space.

[@rogerman65]

The physical laws here on Earth are that, when we spin around holding two weights, and we drop those weights while spinning they continue outwards away from us. This applies at the small scales since our bodies don’t have much gravitational pull and the weights are unproportionally massive. But at galaxy scale the gravitational pull is considerate and each individual star is but a grain of dust clinging to the cluster of stars in the galaxy.

[@icarusrose137]

I think dark matter could be matter in parallel universes with adjacent arrows of time, while dark energy is the result of matter in parallel universes with relatively inverse arrows of time.

[@uriituw]

But does the evidence support that?

[@icarusrose137]

@@uriituw I don't think there's evidence for or against it

[@icarusrose137]

@@uriituw It's just my intuition. I think black holes pierce through the fabric of spacetime to pair with white holes in parallel universes with differing arrows of time. I think the Big Bang was a white hole, too, and that time is somewhat cyclical yet also branching.

[@uriituw]

@ But there is evidence that supports it.

[@uriituw]

@ Think what you want. Intuition is valueless in science. Science is based on reason and evidence. If intuition and evidence conflict, evidence wins out.

[@TyzinianFinian-f1i]

We need more scientific instruments for spacetime, astronomy, and cosmology.

[@xyhilwastaken]

Easily one of your best videos; didn't push misconceptions too heavily, brought up an alternative hypothesis to discredit it, good mood and flow of concepts from one to another, sorted for the viewer's navigation, and the language is laymen friendly. You need to make you future videos with this approach; I know most of your videos are similar but this one is truely something else, a better execution of your usual style if you will.

[@MrJPI]

Thanks for a well done and informative video! One picture in this video, and most similar videos, is quite funny I would say. Namely the picture of a galaxy cluster bending light from a more distant object: What makes the light rays initially bend outward from straight lines before bending inward because of the cluster's gravity? Well, nothing! Furthermore, the Webb finds cited concern our understanding of galaxy formation and not the validity of Lambda Cold Dark Matter cosmology.

[@richardchapman1592]

Not staying quiet on dark energy, only saying that orthoganal straight axes only give us approximate answers at large hardly measurable distance. Looking classically at relative happenings produces in visual diagrams a repeating in depth attempt at getting precision which, even as a classical model permits, is uncertainty at Planck lengths due to the limitations of complete orthogonality to descibe. Infinity and the infinitesimal are examples of where flatness requires bending to avoid infinities and bendy maths on bendy maths doesnt seem to do more than invent unexplainable singularities. I'm trying a different angle on calculus to use saw functions instead of circlular ones to describe derivatives and integration as a basis of integer numbers of independant dimensions. Mathematicians found non integral powers of integers. Can they find non integer numbers of dimensions.

[@3zdayz]

The opposite case could be true - though the inside and outside rotate at the same rate - maybe the outside is right, and the inside is slower than it should be.

[@bendybruce]

All that said, there is some exciting news about a model called Timescape, which may be well on the way to proving dark energy does not exist.

[@robertcatuara5118]

Have you made a QI or MOND video?

[@richardchapman1592]

My opinion is that dark matter is a result of the imprecision of calculating exact values of what we consider as constants for the physical laws. The spinoff of that is that all other measurement and their values in our asumed equations take us so far from reality that a catchall term like dark matter becomes relevant. In the case of MOND, we only need the rate of change of average mass distribution from the centre of the galaxy and its speed of change to be the basis of a function for the power of distance in the divisor of mass attraction at distance affecting the velocity of rotation of stars around a galaxy centre. If the inverse square law for light intensity at distance can be similarly ajusted we ma rewrite all our assumptions concerning redshift being a measure of distance that predicts ridiculou expansion.

[@michaelbreed7255]

Even with the mass of dark matter factored in, shouldn't the stars closer to galactic bulge in the center still orbit at least a little faster than the ones that are further out?

[@dustinswatsons9150]

3:40 could one say there was another Galaxy further away from what is being observed here time stamp.. could it be that a Galaxy further away from that one has a cyclonic effect... Giving the illusion of some mysterious dark matter.. like an invisible vortex from 1 point to another.. I suppose in terms of relative mass

[@dustinswatsons9150]

Gravitational vortices turbulence... Lol weather

[@Regalert]

This Sh... is the virtual particles that came to be in enough time exerting gravity before disappear.

[@mykofreder1682]

The collision is the best evidence it is not matter, because the elephant in the room is the visible, by the bending of space, matter around the clusters. The much lighter visible matter should not be running this show, the rings would be and large quantities of that matter would end up in those rings after several collisions. The same would be true for colliding galaxies, the rings would do the colliding while the visible matter would be a toy those rings play with. You can make the argument with a virgin galaxy that dark matter came in later and stayed outside because it does not interact like matter. But once that ring or egg is formed, that noninteraction would keep it intact. The biggest thing a virgin galaxy would have is the sweeping up any matter it hits, it would be a very strong gravitational force field that would make it near impossible for visible matter to reach the galaxy. The dark matter quickly would become quite visible with garbage it collected, and after a collision, it might be more obvious with strings of visible matter than the central. The only way such a lens galaxy or cluster shell does not collect a lot of garbage and allow matter to pass undisturbed through it is it is some type of wave formed in gravitation because of characteristics of the external and internal background gravitation meeting and equalizing like any fluid. It is a visible characteristic of space time that has little effect on matter.

[@usopenplayer]

I understand MOND is a major revision to Newtonian physics and doesnt have a well established theoritcal basis, but what theortical basis is there for a new particles? From my point of view, either way there's new physics at hand here. I think all the contending Dark Matter theories are in the same boat at this point. And of course there's precedence for both kinds of additions physics's past. I thought all the dark matter proposals that relied on the standard model (baryonic and non-baryonic) had been ruled out.

[@kirkbennett3927]

I like the new theory. They think it's time dilation and our measurements not dark matter.

[@philochristos]

How do the MOND people explain the bullet cluster?

[@HigherStatusCBDs]

Besides the possible energy generation systems that can be made when discovering dark matter particles, what else is all the fuss about when we can even deal and master the light matter?

[@UncleZopity]

How do we know that Andromeda wasn't a recent galaxy merger, and the stars on the outside aren't actually flying away? Wouldn't that play out over a time period much longer than we've been watching? I'm going to have to head there myself to have a better look using this rocket ship (_)_):::::::::::::::D~~~

[@PauloNeto99]

Why scientific comunity doesnt call it by the real name it should have : INVISIBLE or EXTRA-DIMENSIONAL mater ??? Dark mater is coal , petroleum and tires…

[@KevD_]

It should be called dark gravity or dark gravitation.

[@Ningishzidd4]

Maybe it's time for the generation of physicists that are holding on this mysterious dark matter to retire. Looks like a dead end to me.

[@thokling361]

Didnt Webb disprove dark matter/energy? Cosmologists appear to be (slowly) adopting and adapting MoND to replace these particular magic sky faeries.

[@NeonVisual]

This seems like a knee jerk reaction video to Timescape theory. What, is it heresy against doctrine to find a solution that doesn't align with magic matter that isn't really there?

[@ArvinAsh]

Just because we can't see it doesn't mean it's not there. We couldn't see black holes for a long time, but it was there according to theory and from the behavior of other bodies. And then we were able to photograph it eventually.

[@TheTimeweaver]

@@ArvinAsh Ah, yes, the classic "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" defense, conveniently applied to anything that suits a narrative. The argument that we can’t see dark matter, so it must exist just like black holes were unseen but proven true, is a delightful exercise in intellectual gymnastics. Sure, we eventually photographed a black hole, but that was after decades of groundbreaking research, observational data, and advancements in technology and not just wishful thinking. Dark matter, on the other hand, remains a convenient placeholder for things we can't yet explain, not because we've observed its behavior in a concrete way, but because we’ve concocted theories that desperately need it. To claim its existence based solely on gaps in our understanding is not science; it’s faith dressed in the robes of physics. If we continue down this road, perhaps next we'll argue that unicorns exist because, after all, we can't prove they don’t.

[@KevD_]

We have observed its behaviour in a concrete way. Did you skip watching the video. 🙄

[@TheTimeweaver]

@@KevD_ Let’s dissect that, shall we? Behavior is not evidence, at least not in the scientific sense of directly proving the existence of something. What you’re really saying is that we’ve observed anomalies, deviations in gravitational effects or cosmic structures that we can’t explain with other models, so we slap a “dark matter” label on them as a tidy placeholder. That’s not observing behavior; that’s observing a mystery and naming it without direct evidence. Real observation requires more than inference from gaps; it demands direct detection or interaction. Until you’ve caught dark matter “in the act,” your so-called “observed it's behavior” is just cosmic speculation dressed up as certainty.

[@michaelbyrne9246]

@@TheTimeweaver People like you just get caught up in the fact that we named something we can't explain, instead of the fact that we've observed something with clear characteristics. Dark matter describes observations... who cares what we call it. Modern cosmology isn't saying we know what it is. Everyone who is anti Lambda CDM is saying they know. That's the twisted part. You all are claiming to represent some kind of free thinking wave against the "scientific consensus" when you all are the actual know it alls. What arrogance.

[@TheOtherSteel]

Okay. You and Sabine in an MMA cage discussing this issue. Video posted on both channels.

[@ArvinAsh]

She made a video about MOND. So did I. It does not mean that she believes MOND to be correct over Dark Matter, just like I don't.

[@TheOtherSteel]

@ArvinAsh I thought I was being funny, but I see I left no clues. I need to be more careful. Clue: 😝.

[@baltazarcortez7328]

What you’re really saying is that if you go to the beach and grab a fistful of sand that you should have 5 times the amount of dark matter-oh wait it’s just sand and no dark matter.

[@knighteen11]

@ArvinAsh...soooo, hear me out. Imagine you did not already have a reason to dismiss the idea that magnetism and not Dark Matter is the reason we see galaxies and the universe behave they way they do. It is not uncommon to find emergent properties in nature and though magnetic fields may be an easy thing to rule out, do to the relatively low field strength by comparison, imagine if at galactic scales magnetism, as it is linked with light, energy and wave properties, has an emergent property that affects space-time thereby creating fields that cause matter to congregate along the "magnetic lines". If magnetism does have an emergent property at galactic scales, it could cause matter to act like ferro-fluids under magnetic fields, but at unimaginably huge and complex scales. Is there a way to model this and see if the resulting galactic structures behave the way we see our universe behaving? Just an idea, but I would love to hear your thoughts.

[@salemk.3098]

could rogue planets be responsible for some of the “invisible” mass since we can’t see them?

[@chrisprescott2273]

We can't see dark matter, but can we touch it? Is it solid? Gas? Is it extra-dimensional?

[@Nightscape_]

I'm going with glueballs being dark matter.

[@rutuparnakampa4109]

Is graviton the actual dark matter? Correct me if I'm wrong.

[@paulheinrich7645]

Is it likely that discovering what dark matter is will resolve the issues with quantum gravity?

[@milanpintar]

we need a MARD not a MOND .. general Relativistic modification is needed or just applying it and i know it’s low speed but it’s mass related

[@malamut2]

Would be nice to know how dark matter is distributed inside the Milky Way, or even better, within our own solar system. Any hints on that?

[@axle.student]

Not a solution but a thought for you to consider. What I have dubbed gravitational latency (A bit like the humble photon). . It takes ~ 5.5 hours for gravity to propagate out to Pluto and have an effect that keeps it (Pluto) in orbit. If we hypothetically removed the Sun, Pluto would continue to rotate (orbit) around a non-existent Sun for another 5.5 hours. Is Pluto orbiting around Dark Matter for 5.5 Hrs? . Simple thought but it become a lot more involved over longer time periods and larger scales such as a galaxy.

[@StanTheObserver-lo8rx]

Is dark matter a wave or particle?

[@misterlau5246]

Dark matter ... Controversial name.. . It's just there's more gravity than observable matter would produce. Something we haven't detected so far. I read a comment from someone who just dismissed it. Some kind of matter which accounts for the extra gravity is as good as the gravity model goes. When you put up a video about dark energy I guess someone's going to just dismiss it too

[@powerzx]

15:58 Those could be Black Holes (many of them), not Dark Matter.

[@bigboicreme]

Oh ok

[@luch5910]

what about timescapes ?

[@M31Galaxy1]

Like to see you and Sabina debate this!

[@ArvinAsh]

I made a video about MOND as well. Both of us present both sides of the issue. It doesn't mean that we strongly favor one over the other.

[@Thomas-gk42]

@@ArvinAsh Sabine is not a MOND protagonist, but she tries to inform about both unbiased.

[@jacksonvile12345678]

We should pay attention to galactic magnetic fields as they’re proven to factually exist and would explain why the outside portions of galaxies speed nearly match the center. Also, it shows that galaxies align with one another inside galactic plasma Birkeland currents. It’s absurd that we keep chasing these fantasies of things that can’t be proven for over 100 years now, and then we add in this magical dark energy and it’s very embarrassing Modern cosmology has failed. It’s time to look in a different direction.

[@GuyGamerz]

Thumbnail looks like a borg cube fighting species 8472

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

farther out in galaxy, could the reduction in gravity pull be made up for by an increase in dark energy push? only at a great enough distance from supermassive black hole at center of galaxy is the dark energy push enough to overcome pull of gravity?

[@stevenbragg85]

Could dark matter just be the shape of space, such as the surface of the ocean. Regular matter could be riding the waves of space or conjugate at the bottom of a wave.

[@simonramos485]

why leprechauns probably exist... why tooth fairies probably exist... why bigfoot probably exists... 😭😈😆

[@uriituw]

Irrelevant.

3:30 according to Newtonian physics... Please help me understand. Newtonian physics shouldn't be used here, should it? That is, the idea is that there is a significant time dilation near the center of the galaxy, slowing down the rotation in relation to the outer arms.

[@BeyondEcstasy]

Maybe we should call it dummy gravity.

[@explanitorium6462]

Sometimes I doubt that grey matter really exists

[@subhadipsau363]

Can you please make a video on Moffat's SCALAR-TENSOR-VECTOR theory of gravity? It is an alternative thekry of dark sector.