NOVAscienceNOW | Dark Matter Mystery | PBS

We can't see dark matter, and some skeptics doubt its existence, but many scientists think it makes up 20-some percent of our universe. Astronomer Doug Clowe explains how the Bullet Cluster, a group of galaxies billions of light years away, may shed some light on this mysterious stuff.
Don't miss NOVAscienceNOW, airing every Wednesday night during the summer of 2008 on PBS. Watch past episodes of the program, try out interactives, and more on our Web site: http://www.pbs.org/nova/sciencenow
Video podcast produced by Melissa Salpietra and Susan K. Lewis. Edited and narrated by Melissa Salpietra. Original footage and interviews produced by Julia Cort. NOVA is produced by WGBH in Boston. Funding for NOVA is provided by The DOW Chemical Company, David H. Koch, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and public television viewers.

Uploaded by: PBS
Tags for this video: nova science dark matter bullet cluster neil degrasse tyson pbs

Find more videos in the "Howto" category

Related Videos

Comments for this video: Show || Hide

Comments for this video on YouTube

@puncheex I think I ... ( 1 year ago by nikolayzou)

@puncheex I think I said before, dark energy and dark mater are the same thing. Anyway, you will see a big comeback in the aether theory.
I have a question for you. If the universe just comprised of ping pong balls all having the same amount of energy, what would you have?

@puncheex It's like ... ( 1 year ago by CACBCCCU)

@puncheex It's like I can tell Changra's square CCD array is rotated 45 degrees from the image frame. A small differential-image reorientation of chandra combined with a software fix would cancel it out, I suppose. It's as if light is reflecting back and forth between the CCD and something else inside Chandra. Wild guess: it's probably an x-ray freq translator assy similar to a focused gieger counter mesh. I'll read up on it more, to verify.

After looking over ... ( 1 year ago by CACBCCCU)

After looking over some of the specs a bit, it seems Chandra's signal processor has an event filter that triggers when an entire 3"x3" "island" of square CCD hits a threshold, to reject a presumably-associated error-inducing event. Seems the entire island is not participating in the x-ray imaging flare effects that, to me anyway, seem to be evident in this video, thus the trigger condition apparently needs to be redefined in spatial terms to be less than the entire island. JMO.

Chandra's homepage ... ( 1 year ago by CACBCCCU)

Chandra's homepage has a much better image of this cluster pair in the slideshow "Chandra's 'Greatest Hits'". I guess they've figured out whatever was wrong with the image used here and there's no need to concern myself further with that aspect. Still seems to me the two clusters are most likely orbiting each other, and antimatter from both clusters is being pushed toward the center, which seems to make some sense if antimatter has negative mass.

FWIW, seems the ... ( 1 year ago by CACBCCCU)

FWIW, seems the antimatter flow hypothesis I've outlined below calls for the hypothetically-orbiting clusters to produce a spinning "Dirac sea" having an anticentrifugal effect upon antimatter, extracting it from the clusters.

The "spinning sea" ... ( 1 year ago by CACBCCCU)

The "spinning sea" space aspect of the picture I gave, as it seems to be interpretable to me, is problematic, because it's as if the "sea" is acting as an aether. The centifugal gradient is small compared to earth's gravity on land, we use a heliocentric gravitational reference whenever it fits the application, and the galaxies and stars in each cluster are carried along embedded in their orbit's correponding rotational "etheric" flows. One can't put one arm in-flow and another outside it.

Still, the etheric ... ( 1 year ago by CACBCCCU)

Still, the etheric part of the anticentrifugal antimatter idea I'm entertaining seems like a problem. Maybe instead there is a static-type wave property on the inter-cluster scale, and/or maybe about the same amount of antimatter is emitted to the outside but is swept away, and thus the relative accumulation of antimatter at the center.

Don't know if this ... ( 1 year ago by CACBCCCU)

Don't know if this is the vid for me to be talking about aether, but I brought it up before, so... the laws of physics do not change when the system isn't accelerating, and below I've suggested an etheric-seeming circular flow that galaxies and their stars is embedded within. Seems like the same rules apply, each galaxy is its own system, with stars as passengers. A cluster's etheric flow may rotate, but only with the pull and push of gravity, and it takes almost forever to make a rotation.

Relativity was ... ( 1 year ago by CACBCCCU)

Relativity was tested on earth with interferometers 1/2 year apart, I guess to see if there's an aether drift for the sun and earth, and no drift for either one was seen. So I'll avoid etheric models, but I'd still apply an antimatter-antigravitational flow approach to this cluster as an orbiting set of galaxies, also I'd apply quantum gravity rules incorporating a galaxy-scaled balanced wave property and a form of graviton scattering-based effect involving self-centering corner-reflection.

Something seems to ... ( 11 months ago by CACBCCCU)

Something seems to be up with the reply settings on this video, now.

There's an article ... ( 9 months ago by CACBCCCU)

There's an article titled "Antigravity Could Replace Dark Energy as Cause of Universe's Expansion" with artwork titled "Illustration of Antimatter/Matter Annihilation. (NASA/CXC/M. Weiss)" looking a lot like the Bullet Cluster. I disagree with the article's CPT symmetry concept because time reversal's redundant with charge reversal and spin reversal, CP=T; and, if including gravity reversal, it's CPG=T. So, there's no "time charge" and CP violation somehow holds CPG symmetry, not CPT symmetry.

@spase667 I agree. ... ( 7 months ago by anphelps27)

@spase667 I agree. The big bang theory is just that, A THEORY, not a proven fact. Many astronomers and astrophysists come to the conclusion that our universe was the work of intelligent design.

@spase667 I agree. ... ( 7 months ago by anphelps27)

@spase667 I agree. The big bang theory is just that, A THEORY, not a proven fact. Many astronomers and astrophysicists come to the conclusion that our universe was the work of intelligent design.

@anphelps27 Which ... ( 7 months ago by skinned66)

@anphelps27 Which is a complete cop-out. Why INTELLIGENT design? How do you know we're not just snot from some greater being's nose?
Because you're coloured by belief in what makes you comfortable, just as they are.

@skinned66 Dude, I ... ( 7 months ago by anphelps27)

@skinned66 Dude, I am not comfortable believing in what I believe. Being an atheist would be much more comfortable. That way I would have no consequence for anything I do as long as I get away with it.

@anphelps27 There ... ( 7 months ago by skinned66)

@anphelps27 There are plenty of far more mundane and worldy consequences for your actions to encourage you to have a conscience and be good to others. But if attrition is what keeps you from being a sociopath, then by all means keep reaching for the sky.

@skinned66 Shut up ... ( 7 months ago by anphelps27)

@skinned66 Shut up dude, and you can stop with the wanna be intellectual condescending speech. You are a hypocrit!! I believe something cause its comfortable to me? Would you say that that goes for every human being on the planet? Never did I say I wanted to be a sociopath, but simply that we have consequences for our actions. Meaning, things that I might think are wrong you might not, but because of my belief I try not to do them. Cont....

@skinned66 People ... ( 7 months ago by anphelps27)

@skinned66 People like you are so quick to tell a Christian or someone of any religion for that matter that they judge others cause others do not think like us, but by your comment about me reaching for the sky, would you say that to someone that thinks like you? Wake up dude. Stop being a hypocrite!!! Just cause someone does not think like you does not make them less intelligent. And before you spout off at the mouth again, I have my degree in physics. What is you area of expertise?

@anphelps27 Wannabe ... ( 7 months ago by skinned66)

@anphelps27 Wannabe intellectual? How amusing - remember where you are talking about intelligent design in a comment section about dark matter. I understand the context so you don't need to explain it - but talk about an unproven theory with even less evidence than the big bang.
I'm not a hypocrite; I dare say you are. So that's where this exchange ends; go back to your bottle of warm milk. But by all means continue, maybe someone else will be interested in the rest of what you have to say.

@anphelps27 ...dude ... ( 7 months ago by skinned66)

@anphelps27 ...dude.

@skinned66 Never ... ( 7 months ago by anphelps27)

@skinned66 Never once did I say anything about your belief structure. You said something about mine. I know about dark. It to is more or less a theory. And I never made any claim here. All I said is that there are a lot of astronomers and astrophysicists that conclude intelligent design. Dark matter could have been part of that design. And I dont even like milk. Educate yourself a little more and get back to me.

@anphelps27 "...and ... ( 2 months ago by Tubebenji)

@anphelps27 "...and another thing, Einstein (what does that do?), you can be a Christian and still appreciate science.
Not if my theory makes creationism a cosmic joke among jokes.