I love China but this is a waste of money. Dark matter isn't a particle, it's probably not even MOND or quantum gravity. It's just GR 1 2, and the astrophysics community hasn't accepted it yet because it's not new and exciting. 'Evidence' for dark matter always assumes Newton gravity as the null hypothesis.

[–] WithoutFurtherBelay@hexbear.net 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Maybe not the most efficient use of money but empirically testing things is better than masturbating about it mathematically for the rest of time. Otherwise it’s about as credible as quantum immortality or God. And I don’t think these papers answer even close to the majority of things dark matter is “needed” for

[–] Llituro@hexbear.net 4 points 2 years ago

haven't heard about this before, very interesting

[–] Owl@hexbear.net 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Bullet cluster.

I don't know why people are so resistant to the concept of dark matter. "There are particles that interact via gravity and no other forces" is not that outlandish of a hypothesis, and it fits a whole bunch of observed phenomena.

[–] puff@hexbear.net 1 points 2 years ago

There have been papers explaining bullet cluster effects without invoking new particles.