No Dark Matter = Proof of Dark Matter?

[@joryjones6808]

I gotta say that Dark Matter being used in all these different Sci-fi stories it would be hilarious if it ended up not existing in the first place.

[@kylecaid-loos1483]

So would God in the Bible ;D

[@LecherousLizard]

It's already been proven false. It's just astrophysics professors don't want to ruin their paychecks by having to deny their entire careers and invalidating their PhDs.

[@furrball]

it will happen, Ockham will have his revenge against multiplying entia.

[@stefanalexanderlungu1503]

@@LecherousLizard Where has it been "proven?"

[@joecraven2712]

@@LecherousLizard Yes, where, when and how was it “proven” false?

[@lancetschirhart7676]

I watch space time all the time, I (have to) watch these episodes over and over. This is one of my favorite episodes, not just because of the exciting discovery, but because a dunce like me understood it start to finish. I appreciate material that doesn't leave me thinking, "It seems there's something I don't know, but I don't know what it is. But is there? I don't know."

[@exoplanets]

*New PBS space upload = proof that my day has improved?* *_Yes_*

[@blainem2258]

The Exoplanets Channel I read this as ‘my dad’ and thought it was some kind of meta/ironic joke .

[@xl000]

oh please comment on the content at least.. This kind of shit comment is useless

[@akaiukyo]

@@xl000 Down voting all shit comments is useful. Thumbs down is there for a reason. Use it. Religiously. Fight the cancer.

[@lancetschirhart7676]

Wooooohooo!

[@JrobAlmighty]

Absolutely

[@geefreck]

This is fascinating! I always suspected 2nd theory, that there was a property of gravity we didn't understand to explain all this. But finding galaxies that behave exactly like we expect - with standard gravity understanding - really seems to suggest that there's not something missing from our gravity knowledge. And that other galaxies (most) really do have a lot of _something_ that gives them a lot more gravity (dark matter). What an awesome discovery 👍😮👍

[@otakuribo]

The fact that Sir Roger Penrose has fan-art is just heartwarming

[@LuisSierra42]

Never underestimate the power of the internet

[@jimandaubz]

See. Fritz is an ideal. He just took what he saw, did the math and said what it meant, and I never once got an impression that he gave a darn if people like it or not. More people should be like Fritz

[@vecrodriguez4860]

Like...dead?

[@ifall1719]

Zwicky used to call his colleagues spherical bastards... because no matter what way you look at them they're bastards

[@موسى_7]

@@ifall1719 🤣 ROFL

[@chungisyoung4good]

@Dan Nguyen Yea, looks like something you would find on 4chan to continue the troll with the ok sign.

[@dancrane3807]

Too many people are like Fritz, and don't give a darn about others.

[@badpad96]

the pronunciation of "dunkle materie" really made my day haha

[@jhwheuer]

badpad96 horrible hack, wasn’t it?

[@tobiasactually]

Meine Ohren bluten jetzt noch. My ears are still bleeding.

[@macrozone]

Or Zwicky...

[@aaroncunt4460]

sounds like it could be a name of a scandinavian/french scientist xD

[@fast1nakus]

He tried

[@atishbaboolal6993]

Sometimes I come here just to watch and get my mind blow even though 90% of it is over my head. Great videos 👌🏽

[@Aurinkohirvi]

My respects getting the 10%

[@yosefmacgruber1920]

@Witch House But of course their CGI had to be pixelated, because who would believe that we could get a high-definition image of something so far away? So they add fake-pixelation to make it seem to be more believable, yet it still isn't very believable anyhow. The massive cult-like following of fake-science, is part of the clever art of deceivers and deception of rebellion against God, called sin. Isn't it their same old pattern of the fake-science deceivers? They send us fake-distorted poor-quality black-and-white imagery of their faked manned moon landings, so as to make it seem like transmitted signals are coming from far away. Yet maybe they can't so easily get away with that stuff anymore, as some critics will inevitably pick that stuff apart image frame by image frame on their personal computers which people did not have back in the 1960s, saying stuff like shadows are going in different directions, studio hot spot lighting, fake rocks or boulders got moved around and reused, or it looks kind of Photoshopped. Why else did we humans mysteriously lose the ability to go back to the moon or anywhere beyond orbit around the earth? Too many people are becoming wise to the fakery of the NWO deception magicians.

[@liquidminds]

When it comes to astrophysics, only earth is below you, everything else is literally above your head.

[@atishbaboolal6993]

liquidminds 😂😂 good point

[@yosefmacgruber1920]

@@liquidminds But how can every direction be up? Even "down" is up if you go far enough?

[@YoutubeAdministrator]

You should update this video, they made a mistake with df2 and it appears to have dark matter.

[@gusngregg5127]

Or the effect of it

[@gnarlydewd]

I don't think anyone in the physics community understands what the fabric even is...

[@MichaelFairhurst]

I googled this and it seems like it's controversial but not yet decided. The original mistake with df2 was published before the discovery of df4, and the data behind df4 seemed to support the chance that it wasn't a mistake. And more recently, observations from hubble indicate that a nearby galaxy (df2 and df4 are both close to each other) is stripping them of dark matter through tidal forces. Or something. I'm no expert this is my 5min recap on my 5min of research. And FWIW I am currently more interested in modified gravity than dark matter, that's not any expertise just a potential source of bias in my five minutes of research.

[@brunkonjaa]

Actually, it comes as if they made overall mistake with artificial add-on named dark matter. There is no need for ad-hoc add-on in order to explain rotation of galaxies. It seems astronomy and physics are finally going back to full implementation of scientific method.

[@stefanalexanderlungu1503]

@@brunkonjaa Source?

[@johndjarrell]

You outta update this with a disclaimer that further research shows that the galaxies likely do have dark matter (or whatever the equivalent is) and that the original measurements were wrong.

[@thatsamorais584]

Also, if they have dark matter, does the premise of this video even make sense anymore? Is it the case that somehow this galaxy shows a counter example now?

[@goodgame7474]

Do you have the paper ? Thanks in advance !

[@Celestialeris]

@@goodgame7474 A month late but I tracked it down: academic.oup.com/mnras/article/486/1/1192/5380810 Apparently the distance to the galaxy was what skewed the data (13 megaparsecs vs 20) because they used a method of calibrating distance that pushed the limits of applicability, I think

[@WilliamBoothClibborn]

Spacetime journal club just never end. This is so important for informing a wider audience on the more nuanced bits of cutting edge science.

[@jull1234]

That picture of Zwicky.... amazing.

[@dna7767]

looks like hugh dennis whenever he does his showaddywaddy thingy

[@gabor6259]

The perfect profile picture.

[@Dadecorban]

I didn't know he was a white supremacist.

[@otakujhp]

@@Dadecorban I was tempted to make that joke. Figured someone would beat me to it.

[@macrozone]

As a swiss, Fritz Zwicky looks exactly like I would expect a Fritz Zwicky to look like.

[@SolaceEasy]

Thanks for spicing in a few easy episodes from time to time particularly after you stumped us with a very hard one.

[@HAL-cp4mt]

"DUNKLE MATERIE" is a way cooler name, so much wasted potential.

[@yosefmacgruber1920]

Next thing you know, make-it-up-as-you-go mad-scientists are going to have a theory about invisible friends being real. Hmm. Demons maybe?

[@0777coco]

not if you pronounce it like him 😂

[@amadexi]

he said "Dunk-kûl matiree"

[@stefanalexanderlungu1503]

@@yosefmacgruber1920 Thanks, D-bag Chopra. Are atoms and molecules mentioned in the Torah or did we make those up too?

[@yosefmacgruber1920]

@@stefanalexanderlungu1503 Is dark matter seriously supposed to be a "scientific" theory? They posit invisible matter with no scientific valid test to see if it is real. Going against the scientific method much? Do they just expect us to take their word for it? And that is supposed to be "science"? If atoms and molecules are not scientifically valid, then how do we explain the very exact proportions of chemical reactants, and how do we explain Brownian motion? What alternate model should we then use?

[@JosBroder]

This is the most informative KZbin channel on science. Thank you for doing what you do.

[@colleen9493]

These videos are like the perfect duration.

[@colleen9493]

I’ll edit it, thanks

[@Jason-gt2kx]

I have a hypothesis that Dark Matter is not a WIMP, but maybe is a deformation of space-time by which the curvature of space-time ALONE is the cause of the gravitational effect. Gravity is the consequence of the curvature of space-time. It may be possible that the structure of space-time itself could be warped without the presence of mass. Space-time has been shown to react like a fabric by warping, twisting, and propagating independently of mass. These properties have been proven with observations of gravitational lensing, frame dragging, and now gravitational waves. Fabrics can be stretched, pressured, and/or heated to the point of deformation. Such extreme conditions were all present during inflation, so it is plausible that space-time’s elastic nature could have hit its yield point and permanently deformed. Therefore, if gravity is the consequence of the warping of space-time, and fabrics can be permanently deformed, then a deformation could create a gravitational effect independent of mass. DM could be a microscopic imprints or stretch marks like black holes with no mass at the center, but they wouldn't lose their strength via Hawking Radiation because the warped geodesics/fabric is fixed. Prediction: Spacetime's elastic property hits a yield point, so only that part of geodesic's "stretch marks" would remain after inflation stopped. These steep gravitational wells would not follow the inverse square law. They would be steep tiny gravity wells that produce gravitational effects with nothing in them to detect.

[@fuseteam]

@@Jason-gt2kx the problem there's no 'fabric'. the fabric is a visualization and a very bad one at that........... as spacetime does..........things that fabrics don't do

[@fuseteam]

@My face is the antidote spacetime isn't "made out of" anything its just that spacetime it is simply "curved" by energy which is in reality means that it changes the very definition of what is "straight" this can be demonstrated with a globe, a piece of paper and a pen place the paper as "flat as possible" and try to draw two paralel straight line and see what happens

[@Illiteratechimp]

That too is proof of dark matter

[@azdgariarada]

I'm going to try that excuse on my professor. Not having my homework is proof that I actually did my homework.

[@Mary42877]

It's at least proof that you didn't cheat, I guess.

[@GamesFromSpace]

It's proof you were aware of the homework, and that you didn't have some sort of brain damage which makes homework an incomprehensible subject.

[@liquidminds]

I'm Schrödingers Student. There's an equal chance that I did or did not complete the assignment, but you can only know if you look. Then the Wave collapses. How am I to blame for the direction the wave collapses to?

[@azdgariarada]

@@liquidminds My favorite response!

[@ChrisBrengel]

Good one!

[@Vininn126]

Is Matt super looking well lit because there's no DARK matter?

[@anugrahmathewprasad172]

It's the hair I guess

[@TheloniousBosch]

I noticed this too. White balance/exposure/or gamma way off.

[@PattPlays]

@@TheloniousBosch I was gonna make a fun comment about the white balance! BLACK WHITE BLACK, CER!

[@georgplaz]

No. It looks so lit because of the cool shoes it is wearing

[@nibblrrr7124]

DARK MATTER vs LIGHT MATT

[@Baliken100]

I need you guys to know that you do a fantastic job and i have not only learned more about astro physics and quantum theory than i ever thought possible, i have a LOVE and appreciation...and fear (you guys are good at that, it's fun) of our universe and possible multiverse. thank you for what you do, please keep doing it! would totally support you on a paid program and/or television!

[@DarkLunaPath]

Man oh man I love PBS Space Time I count down the days every week waiting dor the next quality content film.

[@PeterB12345]

Plot twist: Dark Matter is actually an extremely viable energy source and those galaxies have been mined dry... BY ALIENS!

[@RedLeader327]

OH SHI-

[@-o-light8863]

They are mining your brain now.👽💥

[@MrMonkeybat]

Maybe using the dark matter annihilation ramjet www.researchgate.net/publication/45866781_Dark_Matter_as_a_Possible_New_Energy_Source_for_Future_Rocket_Technology

[@bonob0123]

its never aliens

[@PeterB12345]

@@bonob0123 Until it's aliens!

[@PaulGaither]

Matt O'Dowd, you are a great host and I see that in the credits that you are also the writer, which means I need to pay you yet another compliment. Your videos have gotten me hooked and subscribed. No disrespect to other hosts, but you are a treasure.

[@Robbya10]

Are you contractually obligated to end every video with space time

[@kylecaid-loos1483]

No, that would make it gay. They just choose to. Its called creativity ;P

[@nakanoyuko]

@@kylecaid-loos1483 how are you certain its not in the contract

[@SjondeJongen]

buying gf

[@llllllllllllllIIlIllIIllIIIIll]

@@nakanoyuko repent and turn to Jesus.

[@nakanoyuko]

@@llllllllllllllIIlIllIIllIIIIll death to all of you

[@hankseda]

Well, this sheds some much needed light on the darkness ...

[@supermarioisacat]

We are the universe trying to understand itself just for the fun of it.

[@upgrade1583]

could be true if you're into biocentrism

[@themarchoftime3691]

@@upgrade1583 he's a bit right if you consider that we are made out of the same stuff

[@aa-to6ws]

We are atoms discovering by themselves

[@steegosaurus]

Tony Toons our brains named themselves

[@totesjokin5354]

It’s more of a compulsion. You know - we eat, we sleep, we face the mysteries of life and the cosmos and rip our hair out trying to understand them.. average human behavior

[@ForboJack]

As a German that's a very funny way to pronounce "Dunkle Materie" :D

[@i.i.iiii.i.i]

*dUhNkL mATiWi*

[@w.s.9742]

Sounded more french than german xD

[@cherrydragon3120]

@@w.s.9742 La Dark materia~ hon hon hon

[@RareAvengedSevenfold]

It was better than how most people would pronounce it. Not too far off, so good job :)

[@georgplaz]

@@RareAvengedSevenfold Not too far off? By what metric? 😂

[@darkhelmedknight]

Are you planning a video of the quantized inertia paper at any point?

[@isodoublet]

For the love of god, no. Matt shouldn't be discussing pseudoscience in this channel. It's bad enough that he made an almost-neutral sounding video about the emdrive.

[@infidel1993]

Ten bucks says that Fritz is also missing something else which is common in most galaxies we’ve observed: a supermassive black hole.

[@Enourmousletters]

If it does have a central black hole I imagine it would not be supermassive as the galaxy lacks the required mass to form it. It would just be a massive one.

[@Aurinkohirvi]

Come on, stop boasting with your fancy job!

[@infidel1993]

EnourmousLetters astronomers have found less massive galaxies with SMBH’s at their center (M60-UHD1 for example). The suggestion I was trying to make is that there may be a correlation between galaxies having supermassive black holes and dark matter. There’s also evidence to suggest that older, less active elliptical galaxies (which are the result of galaxy collisions between two or more spirals), regardless of mass, have substantially less dark matter than they should.

[@sp00nesis]

yeah, like a new unknown threshold that when reached modifies the effect of gravity on a massive scale, but not locally... kinda like the issue with the quantum scale and the Newtonian scale.... maybe? They talk about visualizing the effects of gravity as a kinda fabric bowl, now what if existence of a SMBH created a different kinda of bowl, an inverse bowl that holds the other bowl tighter but who's edges push away from other galaxies? Fun to think about for sure.

[@infidel1993]

Lance Kiarsis I think it would have more to do with structure actually. All the empirical evidence we seem to hear about the existence of dark matter revolves around the effect it has on spiral galaxies. Elliptical galaxies seem to follow a different set of rules apparently, at least insofar as we can tell. Whereas spirals are believed to be made up of as much as 95% dark matter, some ellipticals have been calculated to possess substantially less than that (I recall reading a light to mass ratio of about 1.8 in one instance, meaning roughly 40% dark matter versus 60% normal matter). If true, the implications of this are likely profound in the grand scheme of things because the structure of spiral galaxies is proven to be a temporary stage in their evolution. All galaxies that are gravitationally bound to one another are expected to eventually merge into one massive, elliptical “super galaxy” over time.

[@intendedviewer922]

This is a great episode!

[@damn_right_man8606]

Good point on quantized inertia. I would like to know, for how serious do You take McCulloch.

[@isodoublet]

McCulloch is not serious at all. I suspect Matt is unfamiliar with it and just mentioned it because it showed up in a quick google search. QI is pure pseudoscience.

[@Dadecorban]

That CERTAINLY was not a soldier of Gondor in the background. Looks more like Dale/Esgaroth. Nerd credibility is in jeopardy.

[@charlesjmouse]

Another excellent video, thank you. ...and this subject is, at least for me, an illustration of how one's preconceptions can be misleading: I really, really, don't like the idea of 'dark matter'. For me it's always been an unsatisfactory explanation along the lines of Ptolemy's epicycles to fix the geocentric view of the cosmos. I'd prefer to believe 'we' are currently waiting for a Copernicus to come along with a better model of the cosmos that doesn't require a fudge like epicycles to make our model work that we call dark matter... ...but science and nature don't care about about my personal preferences: -Whether I like it or not this kind of evidence is proof that 'dark matter' really does exist -No matter how rational we think we are we should always be willing to accept our personal biases may lead to an error in understanding I still don't 'like' the idea of dark matter but the evidence for it is overwhelming. I look forward to some kind of explanation as to what it actually is so I can feel a bit happier about that.

[@LecherousLizard]

"This kind of evidence"? WHAT KIND OF EVIDENCE? They are literally arguing that the lack of evidence makes the defendant guilty. It's a complete parody of science.

[@J117-t2g]

@@LecherousLizard watch the video next time before believing you are smarter than the world’s entire scientific community😂😂😂

[@romeomargot-picquendar1281]

Do we know whether the two galaxies "without Dark matter" have a SMBH at their center? If not, might there be a correlation with the extreme curvature these objects introduce that we don't completely understand and the observation of the effects of dark matter? Another idea I've been thinking about is whether there could be an insanely massive black hole at the center of the universe (the great attractor?).

[@Nestoras_Zogopoulos]

Its probably aliens

[@romeomargot-picquendar1281]

@@Nestoras_Zogopoulos So that's the solution to the Fermi paradox! The Aliens sucked out all the Dark matter of their home galaxy in order to cloak themselves from us. Neat.

[@Nestoras_Zogopoulos]

@@romeomargot-picquendar1281 a tin foil hat to you sir ; and you and you ... 😂

[@upgrade1583]

dark matter is compressed time if no life is observing it.

[@romeomargot-picquendar1281]

@@Nestoras_Zogopoulos Based on the premise that Tin foil hats go to conspiracy theorists, in these circumstances the tin foil hat would go to you sir. You're the one trolling with your conspiracy theory "It(')s probably aliens". I was merely being sarcastic in response to your Troll comment.

[@astraeanova4280]

Your videos are always so much fun, I'm so glad I dropped by

[@flutterwind7686]

12:22 "Tony Face, Consider a career switch!", this one has potential!!

[@francoislacombe9071]

If I'm not mistaken, there are also galaxies with far more dark matter than one would expect based on the mass of their stars.

[@cherrydragon3120]

Okay... but how did we still not find anything of this dark matter if the mass of it is so damn big?? I would imagine that large masses would attract due to gravity. Just like everything else in the universe. Or at least act LIKE a black hole in some way and suck up matter. Wich we SHOULD be able to analyze... or am i being stupid now...

[@uuuu260]

Dark matter is actually a bunch of John Cenas that’s why we can’t see

[@sphinxrising1129]

I get it, "You can't see me", John Cena, lol.

[@wesc6755]

That picture of Fritz Zwicky is almost as awesome as his name.

[@willypataponk]

Fascinating video! Thanks a lot PBS!

[@filipvidinovski7960]

Excellent episode.

[@SciHeartJourney]

The update to this story is that the galaxies probably have Dark Matter after all.

[@sacr3]

I have a question, at this time they claim "events" occur without them occurring in a Black hole, basically, if you throw someone in from our perspective they would freeze on the edge for eternity (we can't see them, but hypothetically speaking), but from their perspective they enter. So this event occurs, but it doesn't. Could this be incorrect? As you enter the black hole the time dialation effect from your perspective would be the Universe Exponentially aging, so if black holes do "decay" over time, then from your perspective you would never reach the black hole, you would just get accelerated to the speed of light and during that acceleration the black hole would shrink from you at the same rate, or faster, because its aging with the universe as you approach. So wouldn't you just get accelerated to near light speed and collide with whatever was accelerated on the other side towards you? Or you would just get accelerated to the speed of light into the end explosion of the black hole, either way no information is lost because the information is held in a time lock until the black hole decays than is released as high energy fast moving particles, of course thats from our perspective outside. But from inside you just fall, get accelerated and explode.. and surprise the universe aged 40 quintillion years. Or, if black holes don't decay, you would just get accelerated to the end of the universe. Assuming the universe ends of course. Locked in that time dilation for infinity till space and time itself disappear or change, but I would assume the black hole decays so that there is no information loss. So in this scenario, ALL matter taken in from the black hole just freezes in time on the outer edge like a shell, so now the intense gravity of this black hole is no longer at a center point, its a thin sheet of time locked matter surrounding the black hole like a shell that constantly grows the more its fed. Basically nothing ever "falls in", it just falls forever (from outside perspective) till what its falling toward fades and then its released at light speeds in a massive explosion. Its virtually a Time bomb, The gravity becomes so intense it locks everything - even the original core of the star - into a locked state in time, its still there, matter, but locked in time from our perspective, from its perspective everything lasts a fraction of a second and it explodes.. and everything that has collided with it throughout those trillions of years are thrown out. So it'll see the universe get sucked into it - everything around it in an instant, SUCK BOOM, but from our perspective it freezes because everything is so time dilated it crawls at near infinite slow speeds. So there is no "hidden" singularity, its just the original matter stuck in time.. bah who knows Could this change the way gravity affects space/time? The edge of the black hole on one side would be producing enough gravity to hold a galaxy, as well as the one on the left side, so both are producing an immense gravitational field at different points, in a sphere, could this change anything? I would assume not, since its still all in one concentrated area. But could our calculations be a bit off because we're calculating one solid mass, as opposed to a sphere like shell? Just food for thought, i'm just a layman, but its fun having discussions

[@Trias805]

"because its aging with the universe as your approach" No, it's not. It ages according to its own time. Although this poses a question: shouldn't the Hawking radiation be "frozen" on the event horizon as well?

[@sacr3]

@@Trias805 Well if they claim it decays and only lives for "10000000000" years, then that would mean it does die, so when you get toss in the universe will pass "1000000000" years in an instant as you reach the very edges of that massive time dilation, so the black hole would "pop" die out before you reach it, no? It has its own time, but its time would be picoseconds compared to the Universes age itself due to the time dilation, you could almost say its just a 1 picsecond supernova that was slowed down 1000000000 years because of the massive gravitational effect. You don't enter a new "time zone" and experience a million years when you reach those speeds of "c", you just slow down to near nothing till enough time passes by and the event can occur.

[@Itachi21x]

At least you tried to pronounce "Dunkle Materie" :D

[@timonerhart2615]

you just explain thinks so well and easy to understand!

[@matchrocket1702]

As always, fascinating.

[@WhitefirePL]

I have to admit that I kind of prefer the 'unknown physics' approach, but this is definitely a convincing step towards proving otherwise. I hope they find more of these dark matter-less galaxies and figure out what differs them from 'normal' galaxies. It seems to be one of the best hopes for solving the dm mystery.

[@LecherousLizard]

Scientists magically found dark matter in those dark mater-less galaxies. Turns out figuring out why they don't have any dark matter in them was harder than adjusting data.

[@JPanyon]

By any chance, has a survey of baryonic element masses (where dark matter is 'missing') been reported? It would be very curious if one (or more) of the baryonic elements is also missing or under-represented.

[@tomc.5704]

Not for this galaxy (it's too soon), though that is a good thought. I'm sure scientists would love to try to pin that down as an idea, but I'm worried it would be impossible because 1.) We probably don't have the capability to tell one type of baryon from another at those distances. 2.) We actually have a very good understanding of baryons. They are constructs made from quarks: Protons, neutrons, and other exotic baryons that are much more short lived. Could "dark matter" be some mysterious extra gravity from some exotic baryon? Maybe; I can't begin to imagine how we'd measure the gravity of these short lived baryons to disprove such a theory---but that's a _huge_ stretch. 3.) All of that baryonic matter (which is really just normal matter) is going to behave similar to all other baryonic matter any such scenario. Seriously good question though. Almost certainly beyond our capabilities to test, and the answer we would get if we could test us shouldn't surprise us (because our understanding of the standard model particles is actually really strong/LHC is a beast of a scientific tool), but you never know! Find some more data points to flesh out such a theory and there might be something there.

[@L3K1P]

Is there very little contrast in the a-roll or is it just me?

[@Zarcondeegrissom]

the lack of saturation/color-depth was due to a reduction in dark matter on the set, lol.

[@Belodri]

You saying Zwicky is now my phone's notification sound, I love it! Greetings from Austria.

[@wesleyrm76]

Thank you! I've been hoping you'd do a video on this galaxy as soon as I heard about it.

[@NewMessage]

12:43 Just be glad he's wearing pants in this one.

[@zoopdterdoobdter5743]

I...was not. 😐

[@fireburner81]

Is there a particular reason you added a fluctuating ~15 Hz sound in the background? It's particularly distracting with headphones.

[@d.l.918]

Thanks

[@recipoldinasty]

fireburner81 its perfect

[@drtyslzy]

fireburner81 couldn’t just say synth?

[@tiny_toilet]

Is there a particular reason you are even able to hear 15 Hz? Are you a ferret perchance?

[@drtyslzy]

@@tiny_toilet lmao

[@AspLode]

Wait, so in our current most popular model for how dark matter behaves, how do we imagine it interacts with black holes? Since black holes are a purely gravitational phenomenon isn't it plausible that we can have dark matter densities high enough to create a black hole without any kind of stellar precursor?

[@Mernom]

The problem is that Dark Matter can't collapse. Since it doesn't interact electromagnetically, it can't lose energy and reduce it's orbit size.

[@Valansch]

Dark matter can't form black holes because it only interacts gravitationally. Now that may sound counter intuitive because gravitiy is a pulling force after all, but gravity is in fact a very very weak force. So it is hard to get a lot of dark matter into one place by only using gravity. To form black holes you need a lot of matter in a tiny space. Which is hard to do with dark matter, because the particles simply wiz by each other without interacting much, they can't rely on the weak force or the electromagnatic force to stick together and form bigger clumps of mass. Hope that was at least half conherent.

[@Valansch]

To quote someone who said it better than me: "I think the problem with matter that only interacts gravitationally is that it's hard to get it all to stay in one place. Nebula slowly form stars and planets in part because of collisions between particles lead to larger particles, which tend to attract further particles. But particles that just wizz right through each-other can't coalesce without violating conservation of angular momentum. That's not to say that it's impossible, however. Just that the dynamics are different." from: physics.stackexchange.com/questions/90908/could-dark-matter-form-black-hole

[@danieljensen2626]

He actually talked about this a couple episodes ago, but in order for matter to fall into a black hole it has to slow down, otherwise it will stay in orbit forever. Normal matter slows down through collisions (mediated by the electromagnetic force), but dark matter doesn't interact with E&M, therefore it can't collide, therefore it can't really slow down. So it would just stay in orbit forever instead of falling in to any black hole.

[@mage3690]

@@danieljensen2626 wait a minute, wouldn't any orbit below an event horizon be faster than the speed of light?

[@georgehugh3455]

Nice explanation.

[@rDnhey]

Great video

[@TimLF]

From Dark Forest Theory we can infer that it is a whole lot of type 2 civilizations ;P

[@JeremyWS]

That's awesome. This is why I like astronomy. Dark Matter appears to matter. lol

[@richiegurdler2793]

Ha! nice..

[@canyadigit6274]

Please do a video on how to solve the dirac equation!

[@bryanpeterson7410]

I think they did

[@canyadigit6274]

@@bryanpeterson7410 they made a video about the dirac equation but they did not make a video on how to SOLVE it

[@canyadigit6274]

Well now I actually know how to solve it lol

[@pimnelson4955]

wow this is an awesome episode

[@YotamCohen_]

Neat papers! :)

[@worldwarwitt2760]

your curiosity stream ad segment has an audio clipping problem, and the host is super base boosted for some reason

[@32rq]

Do an episode on Quantized Inertia, comparing the Ultraviolet Catastrophe!

[@michaelmorris4515]

I doubt they will touch the leading anti-dark matter theory. Not after this display of dogmatic thinking.

[@calebmauer1751]

@@michaelmorris4515 How is this dogmatic? They cite their source. And I'm 100% certain that if a paper comes out tomorrow that proves the experiment in this episode is invalid due to flawed methodology or data, then Spacetime will cover that paper as well at some point. They aren't afraid to be wrong. Dogmatic is "inclined to lay down principles that are incontrovertibly true". If they are willing to say that they are wrong tomorrow, then it isn't incontrovertible. It's all very controvertible.

[@michaelmorris4515]

@@calebmauer1751 There are already two studies which put the lie to dark matter, at least in the form of "evenly distributed halo around most galaxies to make their orbits work" Wide Binaries and globular cluster behavior within galaxies. Yet this data is swept under the rug by dark matter dogmatists because it is a fatal blow to their theory.

[@michaelmorris4515]

@Mike Doonsebury So, three then.

[@isodoublet]

"I doubt they will touch the leading anti-dark matter theory. " Pseudoscientific horseshit like QI is not a theory of anything, let alone a leading one.

[@8Maik]

can you make a video explaining in details how the measurements of galaxies were being done in the past and today? Like how do you measure rotation speed of a galaxy in the 70s?

[@SiqueScarface]

With the doppler effect, as it is done today (but with much better resolution): You look at a special line in the spectrum of the light coming from that galaxy (mostly, it's the 21-cm-line of Hydrogenium), and then you look how far the actual measurement of that line is off from 21 cm, which gives you the relative speed of the object compared to you. And then you determine the speed of the stars in the galaxy at different sides and distances to the galactic center. The speed should be different right and left of the center, as the stars are circling around the center, meaning that on one side, the stars move to us and have a lower speed relatively to us than on the other side where they move away from us. This gives you a lower limit to the speed of the stars in that galaxy in their orbit around the galactic center, and because the orbits are stable (otherwise the galaxy would lose their stars very soon), you can determine how much mass has to be inside that orbit to create enough gravitational pull to keep the stars on their respective orbits.

[@Gunner77269]

Same way you do it today. The only difference is that now we have better telescopes( which just means better resolution) but the math has been the same for about 100 years

[@8Maik]

@@SiqueScarface i also wonder how much gravitational lensing and other relativistic effects are accounted for, cause those all affect the photons coming from the galaxy

[@SiqueScarface]

@@8Maik If we look at galaxies in our neighborhood (Andromea Galaxy, M32, M33, M87 etc.pp.) we don't have to account for gravitational lensing as we can see them directly. And there are many other galaxies we can see directly, which are not hidden behind other heavy objects causing gravitational lensing. On the other hand: Since the last two decades, we have sophisticated ways to reconstruct the original picture from a picture distorted by gravitational lensing.

[@pete1972]

Just watched the whole current playlist and made sure I was following the whole way. Incredibly fascinating, thanks. I'm left wondering: So, where does "dark" matter/energy come from? Found it helpful to just replace "dark" energy with "vacuum" energy in the earlier episodes. Looking forward to the next installment. Cheers

[@krakykrake8162]

Omg he murdered "Dunkle Materie".. that was soo wrong :D

[@matyourin]

I'm a sceptic of dark matter, but this is really something that'll be hard to explain with alternative gravitational theories...

[@thatsamorais584]

Until scientists correct the data and disprove this entire episode, right? ...that did happen.

[@matyourin]

@@thatsamorais584 it did? Do you have a source?

[@NeroThacher]

MORE DARK MATTER! I'm basing my thesis off dark matter

[@raetvnetwork]

Wish I could read. I’m obsessed with learning about dark matter

[@catdisc5304]

You look extremely pale... Are you missing some dark matter in this video?

[@damonedwards1544]

Somebody should turn up the contrast.

[@rudirestless]

tan is overrated = doesn't matter that much

[@YaBoiKeith]

This was probably filmed in winter

[@RossoCarne]

Needs more LUT

[@luig1987]

Hi PBS Space Time: Thanks for making science videos and making astronomy easy to understand for everyone! I was reading an article that the ICA from Canaries make a correction over the distances and in fact, that Galaxy was closer that first reported (It was reported that the galaxy was 64 millions light years away but in fact was at at leas 42 millions light years away). When they did those changes the Dark Matter started to appear. Are you guys planning to make a follow up video to review this? Again, thanks for your awesome videos!

[@moraleja39]

A couple of resources related to this: www.iac.es/divulgacion.php?op1=16&id=1572&lang=en academic.oup.com/mnras/article-abstract/486/1/1192/5380810?redirectedFrom=fulltext

[@trucid2]

None of these observations rule out dark matter and there are tons of problems with the measurements of mass of the bullet cluster using gravitational lensing.

[@johannesschroter8984]

1:08 „dunkle Materie“ Nice pronunciation and greetings from Germany!

[@hallfiry]

Don't spread false information. The pronounciation was totally wrecked. "Dunkla Materiah" would have been a lot closer.

[@Azzinoth224]

@@hallfiry I think that was sarcasm...

[@hallfiry]

@@Azzinoth224 I really hope so.

[@georgplaz]

@@hallfiry And even it wasn't, its not a big deal 😅

[@frbo9002]

"Obviously more work is needed" Every time in my essay conclusion :D

[@Egregius]

Not a bad way to end, as it seems 98% of all scientific articles end that way.

[@garethdean6382]

'Science knows it doesn't know everything. If it did, it'd stop.' ~Dara OBrien

[@thescottyjam8906]

Wouldn't such collisions also produce dark matter only galaxies?

[@themultigamer5682]

There's no reason to say it's impossible.

[@JonnyRobbie]

I have a question for you, Matt. What is your personal research specialization? What was your thhesis(es) about and what does your physics research focuses on outside of this show?

[@virajscience]

Apologies for a long comment. Some thoughts on dark matter detection. 1. If dark matter is a special kind of unknown matter, it has to be somewhere. So when we see the stars rotate faster than they should can we not just observe stars at different radial distances from the center of the galaxy to pinpoint where the dark matter in any particular galaxy is located. 2. Assuming dark matter constitutes majority of the galaxies's matter at this point, wouldn’t it be more probable that it clumps up and forms “dark matter black holes” that would naturally bend space-time just like regular black holes. And couple of follow up questions: Combining 1 and 2 theoretically shouldn’t it be very easy (If we can call it that) to locate dark matter just by its gravitational effects. So, shouldn’t detecting regular black holes as hard as detecting than dark matter? Why do we need it to interact with light anyways? Also, given all that wouldn’t it be more probable, that instead of dark matter as an explanation for faster rotation speeds of galaxies, just black holes (that also do not interact with light other than gravitationally) are the culprit, doesn’t that make more reasonable sense? Additionally, how would "dark matter black holes" be different from "regular matter black holes" (both do not directly interact with radiation anyways except for the gravitational effects), it seems much more likely that we got it wrong in estimating the number of black holes in the galaxies. Here I am assuming the gravity of dark matter bends space-time identical to the gravity of regular baryonic matter unless I am wrong. This also explains simply that galaxies with no dark matter might be galaxies with fewer black holes.

[@cloudpoint0]

Your questions are good and deserve answers. I will try to answer. _1. If dark matter is a special kind of unknown matter, it has to be somewhere. So when we see the stars rotate faster than they should can we not just observe stars at different radial distances from the center of the galaxy to pinpoint where the dark matter in any particular galaxy is located._ We can only determine that the dark matter must be inside the orbit of a too fast orbiting star. Since it is inside the orbit of every too fast orbiting star all the way out to the edge of the galaxy, it must be spread evenly through the entire galaxy (but sometimes unevenly). _2. Assuming dark matter constitutes majority of the galaxies's matter at this point, wouldn’t it be more probable that it clumps up and forms “dark matter black holes” that would naturally bend space-time just like regular black holes._ Dark matter is around 80% of our galaxy’s mass. Its nature, to the best we understand it, is it cannot clump up, or we’d see it. It does not interact with electromagnetic field (hence it is invisible). This interaction is necessary to allow composite objects like atoms, molecules, gas clumps, and stars to form and then black holes to form when stars collapse. So no “dark matter black holes”, just regular black holes that include a bit of dark matter if they have been around for a while. _Combining 1 and 2 theoretically shouldn’t it be very easy (If we can call it that) to locate dark matter just by its gravitational effects. So, shouldn’t detecting regular black holes as hard as detecting than dark matter? Why do we need it to interact with light anyways?_ We can locate dark matter by its gravitational effects where it is very concentrated. But is very spread out and it is always accompanied by ordinary matter. Regular black holes have very focused gravitational effects making them easy to locate to a specific place. Light interaction would make the whole problem go away, this special matter would not be dark. _Also, given all that wouldn’t it be more probable, that instead of dark matter as an explanation for faster rotation speeds of galaxies, just black holes (that also do not interact with light other than gravitationally) are the culprit, doesn’t that make more reasonable sense?_ Scientists have done very detailed inventories of galaxies. They are fairly certain that all the black holes account for under 1% of a galaxy’s mass. That’s a long way from 80%, even if they were wrong by an order of magnitude. They can estimate by counting the number of large visible stars that could become black holes. There are not many. _Additionally, how would "dark matter black holes" be different from "regular matter black holes" (both do not directly interact with radiation anyways except for the gravitational effects), it seems much more likely that we got it wrong in estimating the number of black holes in the galaxies._ Black holes are all the same on the outside regardless of what went in. So no difference, if they existed. _Here I am assuming the gravity of dark matter bends space-time identical to the gravity of regular baryonic matter unless I am wrong._ You are correct. Mass is mass. _This also explains simply that galaxies with no dark matter might be galaxies with fewer black holes._ There might be a correlation. But maybe just because no dark matter means a small dwarf galaxy that is less likely to have as many big stars that can become black holes. But this isn’t certain. We only have a sample of two so far.

[@virajscience]

@@cloudpoint0 Thanks for the reply. But as in all things science this adds few more questions to my list: Doesn't all matter/dark matter naturally clump up? I thought this was because gravity creates a "pit" in space time eventually making the world lines for every single object move "into" that pit. Note: Since dark matter is primarily observed within galaxies and not outside (I hope I am right on this) it already shows evidence of clumping up (at least on the galactic scale) so what makes it different at sub-galactic scale. Also, if dark matter when present is uniformly distributed wouldn't there be a 4 times's sun's gravity acting on earth etc. Let's say our solar system is an exception. How about within other solar systems that we spent so many years observing. To me, it seem more plausible that there is something about gravity we do not understand or that our ability to detect black holes is severely lacking. Because otherwise we require dark matter to be an exception not just in its interactions with light but also with its interaction with Space Time. Or. maybe it is a proof that higher dimensions exist and dark matter is THE influence of "4+d matter" on us. :).

[@cloudpoint0]

@@virajscience First we need to distinguish between cluster and clump. Cluster means to be in close proximity but not in physical contact. Clump means to be in contact and electromagnetically bonded. All matter with mass (ordinary and dark) clusters into gravitational wells ("pit"s in space time). Only ordinary matter eventually clumps when it is able to slow down sufficiently and touch. I’m speaking of particles here. Anything larger than a particle is by definition already clumped, and must be ordinary matter. Dark matter does not interact with electromagnetism so it cannot clump. Btw, a galaxy is a large broad shallow gravitational well. Detectable (indirectly) dark matter clusters within and around galaxies, extending outwards a good distance out from the edge of the galaxy. It is much denser in the center of a galaxy, perhaps like a fluid, and less dense among the stars, like a gas, and slowly thinning outside the stars. It is close to uniform but not exactly, and there can be local irregularities because the dark matter gets tugged around and redistributed by the gravity of orbiting stars. Dark matter particles may be just floating around or orbiting at some velocity, generally not at a high velocity. A little bit of dark matter is everywhere in space but it’s much thinner far beyond the galaxies, and is not detectable at all. See the next link. images.theconversation.com/files/28199/original/5y658njw-1374929067.jpg Dark matter does not have any measurable effect on the gravity between the Sun and Earth. The distance is small and the cumulative mass of all the dark matter inside a sphere fixed to Earth’s orbit is effectively zero. Maybe a 100-light-year sphere of cumulative dark matter mass is needed to start getting a measureable effect. Dark matter particles are very light, like all particles, probably a bit heavier than a proton, and particles generally are not very close to each other, as atomic scales go (~3 cm apart in the solar system). Dark matter is a simple solution, a little here and a little there, or none at all, and it can reflect any pattern observed. Black holes can’t comprise 80% of the galaxy’s mass, the entire galaxy would collapse into an ultramassive black hole. Changing the laws of gravity is very rigid and often breaks something else that is working fine now. Dark matter isn’t too unusual either among particles. We have neutrinos. They were invented to complete the energy conservation laws of subatomic decay and other interactions. They have never been directly observed either. Neutrinos don’t interact with electromagnetism either, so they are also invisible. And they barely interact with gravity and the weak force. Neutrinos and dark matter particles both pass right through everything (you, Earth, Sun). Neutrinos are deservedly called ghost particles. Dark matter is rather similar in many ways to neutrinos. In fact, one of the candidate particles for dark matter is the sterile neutrinos (a very heavy particle). It’s probably the leading candidate but far from certain. And there are at least 4 independent lines of evidence that all converge on the existence of dark matter particles of some kind. One of them, the CMB anisotropy, is almost ‘smoking gun’ evidence for dark matter. Plus standard cosmology is totally broken if dark matter particles don’t exist. Dark matter is needed to allow galaxies to form. If there is anything peculiar about dark matter, it is just that it is likely a non-baryonic (like neutrinos and electrons), usually rather low mass particles, but a heavy particle is expected. Fortunately, dark matter is not thought to be five dimensional. :) The existence of dark matter is generally accepted by the scientific community. The consensus it that it is a subatomic particle, or possibly more than one particle. There are still details that need to be worked out. Dark matter is an idea that has been around since 1922 with a notable credibility boost in 1933 by Zwicky. The search for the particle has been seriously underway since 1995 (note: the Higgs boson took 50 years to find).

[@virajscience]

@@cloudpoint0 Thanks for the reply. Makes somethings clearer. I always assumed gravity made things collapse and electromagnetism made things go apart (mostly), thats why most regular matter dos not collapse into a black hole without heating up and igniting. In any case, something to study further for me.

[@aladaris]

If there are darkmater-less galaxies, is the 80% mass of the Universe figure (that you mention right at the end) still correct?

[@fuseteam]

yes just.......differently distributed

[@LuisAldamiz]

A few oddball dim galaxies are not going to substantively alter the figures. Most of the dark matter is not even in galaxies even per the models, but in large filaments that structure the matter of the universe like a spiderweb of sorts.

[@siljamickeify]

It seems plausible to me that gravity could be a perhaps nonlinear function of not only mass and distance, but also a mass per volume ratio. Denser galaxies equals more gravity than diffuse clusters. Could you elaborate on why this does not hold?

[@Boogaboioringale]

Exactly. Diffuse clusters like Fritz and the gas of the bullet cluster have no dark matter. More dense regions have more space curvature in close proximity. This produces a sort of cascading affect giving the illusion of dark matter.

[@Tonyface666]

If I understand the content correctly, there are other diffuse clusters which have the same stellar density as Fritz but with higher overall density thanks to their dark matter. The reason this is such an important result is that the only global difference between Fritz and these other diffuse clusters is their overall mass, despite them having the same stellar mass.

[@garethdean6382]

There's a few problems. On as Tonyface has noted is that there are 'regular' diffuse galaxies, in fact one such galaxy holds the record for dark matter composition, being more than 99.9% (www.space.com/33850-weird-galaxy-is-mostly-dark-matter.html ) Another is that galaxies are more or less dense and we've found no relationship between that density and dark matter effects. (Instead heavy galaxies like our own seem to have an 'average' amount of DM while smaller ones get a more random amount.)

[@benmooney280]

UPDATE: The galaxies seen to have no dark matter was a mistake. They have normal amounts of dark matter...

[@PoochieCollins]

Your citation is very convincing.

[@benmooney280]

@@PoochieCollins Google it

[@PoochieCollins]

@@benmooney280 : my previous Googling found articles backing up the video about little-to-no dark matter being found in some galaxies.

[@benmooney280]

Poochie Collins www.livescience.com/62981-dark-matter-free-galaxy-debate.html I believe this is the article I seen. I thought the space time dude had said something in the review portion of a video following this one as well. I remember him talking about how it may have normal amounts of dark matter after all when referring to a topic in a previous video (being this video he was referring to or at least I believe that’s the case) So it would be hard to find which video it’s in since they don’t detail the discussions they have at the end of the video in the descriptions. But I do believe he is talking about the article I posted here for you. Unfortunately at the time I believe the article hasn’t been peer reviewed. I can’t find the original paper but the link is an article about the paper. By now it should of been peer reviewed so who knows at this point if it’s true or false.

[@LecherousLizard]

Looks like somebody released the data, before peer-reviewing it for consistency with the scientific consensus. After all they can't have their PhDs invalidated by truth.

[@anon-o4e]

my favourite professor

[@zooblestyx]

Matt's new catch phrase: "It's the Gas!"

[@asattar2007]

The more you know, the more you know that you don’t know. Great!

[@joecraven2712]

Yep, although with religious people it’s (usually) the less they know, the more they think they know.

[@TheMartian11]

I mean apart all of that, When he said 'ZWICKY' AND THEN ' *DUNKLE MATERIE* '

[@signalsoldier]

"The absence of evidence isn't the evidence of absence" - Gin Rummy

[@sankhyohalder97]

Sorry, but strictly speaking it *is* evidence of absence, however it's not *proof* of absence.

[@danieljensen2626]

This is the opposite though. We aren't just lacking evidence that dark matter is there, we specifically have evidence that it isn't.

[@gabrielkamkar2110]

I don't think Boondocks and this show have a lot of common viewers.

[@signalsoldier]

For those who didn't get it. Watch /wh8BWGSEzYM

[@bottlekruiser]

Just imagine what it would be like for your civilization to start in a diffuse darkmatterless galaxy like that

[@alexkorocencev7689]

2:25 "knock knock knock"

[@quahntasy]

Why is Matt super lit? Beacuase there is no dark matter And these videos are of perfect duration

[@momqabt]

People have a hard time finding dark matter or modifying gravity... And thaaaaan we have flat earthers

[@JoelMurphy77]

I want the Fritz galaxy to officially receive that name.

[@necro5000]

@PBS Space Time Could Dark Matter be standard matter that is stored in higher spacial dimensions and therefore be hidden from our three-dimensional spacial perception except for the gravitational effects that transcend these dimensions but are weakened by this transcendation? This would explain why most galaxies seem to have more mass than is visible, while also accounting for galaxies that lack this discrepancy in mass (there is just no matter stored in higher dimensions)... This explanation wouldn't need exotic particles as an extension for our standard model of particles nor would it contradict General Relativity... Instead we would have to approximate how gravity works in more than three spacial dimensions... I've never heard/read about this theory before... just curious if it could work as a possible solution for this decade old problem?

[@lunkel8108]

I'd suggest you take a look at this channel's video "How to detect higher dimensions"

[@necro5000]

​@@lunkel8108 I already have, but it does not answer my question, since the negative conclusion about higher spacial dimensions given in that video is approximated from a hypothetical universe, which is based on the assumption, that only gravity exists in the hypothetical 4th spacial dimension and therefore does not account for any sources of gravity in higher spacial dimensions...

[@DangerRoom666]

Is it possible fusion is creating the dark matter? EG neutrinos? If a diffuse galaxy with so much lower star density directly correlates to lower dark matter ratios, perhaps there is a link of dark matter to star function. Could dark matter density be tested near a blue super giant to find higher concentrations of dark matter effects?

[@ferdinandkraft857]

Dark Matter predates star formation since its effects are visible in the Cosmic Microwave Background.

[@DangerRoom666]

Good point, but I think that assumes there's a single source of a specific epoch only. That could make sense for primordial black holes (for example), but not for neutrinos (again, for example).

[@bg674dh7rd]

Looking at your image in the video, you seem to be lacking a bit of dark yourself. I shall assume that's an intentional jest.

[@xl000]

yeah.. looks like a bad chroma key .. His edge is really bad. That's weird because it's usually good enough for me not to notice

[@whatthefunction9140]

I had dark fluid once. Took a lot of antibiotics to clear up.

[@velocity_raptor]

The proof of having somewhere no dark matter is practicly the best proof for dark matter. (I understood your video.....YAY!)

[@carlrs15]

"dark matter" is merely the shape my toilet bowl is in after yet another night of chocolate milk and oreos for dinner

[@aurelienb3984]

I know it's off topic but why no video about M87* ? You've done a really great job with all those videos about black holes (and all the others of course ;), I'm really surprised you did not cover this great discovery. The discovery of gravitational waves was the topic of a full episode if I have good memory ?

[@garethdean6382]

Good episodes take time to write, especially if you don't just want to say what others have. Be patient friend and we may see it yet.

[@Zepha21]

The German language doesn't have a silent "e", so you pronounce the "e" at the end of "Dunkle" and in this case also at the end of "Materie" because it's a word of Latin origins (and the "i" is pronounced quickly). If you know French, it's pronounced similarly to the French "é". You're welcome :)

[@xl000]

whatever

[@bourbonwarrior1618]

FYI. Spell is how you write a word. Pronounce is how you say it.

[@Zepha21]

@@bourbonwarrior1618 Oke :D

[@t.j.payeur5331]

No one cares how smart you think you are. Fuck off, don't do me any favors. Asswipes like you are the reason I don't go to Mensa meetings anymore, the insecure shitheads, like you, were always trying to virtue-signal their alleged intelligence.

[@AbbeyRoadkill1]

Sounds like our theory of dark matter is on the Fritz.

[@stevetosak7207]

Summary of this video: Yes is yes no is no no proves that no is yes

[@kibbledd1]

Yes is yes. No is no. The absence of a yes is a no. (The absence of the possibility of a yes to Modified Gravity in any instance means that it's less likely to exist. This leads us back to Dark Matter being the stronger explanation for the weirdness of how galaxies behave--or, at the very least, points towards an entirely different answer than Dark Matter or Modified Gravity. Perhaps a superfluid that offers no interference in our ability to observe the universe--that perhaps even light could not touch? Imagine a universe that both holds something light cannot escape from, and something light could not touch. Makes me wonder how much is beyond our universe--beyond our current ability to perceive?).

[@KittyBoom360]

@@kibbledd1 Instead of inventing dark matter or modified gravity or a new superfluid, why don't we just note that everything we see in the cosmos is in the plasma state and is thus governed by the electromagnetic force first and gravity second, given that the EM force is way stronger that gravity. I seriously think many cosmologists should go back to school and study classical electrical engineering paired with lectures on new plasma science. Their focus on gravity just hasn't prepared them.

[@yoshida.azumi.]

Gotta love this channel. Sometimes I understand half of what is being said, yet by the end of the video I feel like I just graduated out of college with a masters degree in Astronomy & Physics. Massive kudos, chaps. ;)

[@IgorDz]

I wonder if setting shadows too high or being slightly out of focus or wrong green screen threshold are honest screw-ups or it is some well-thought easter eggs..