Active Users:739 Time:31/05/2026 08:15:54 AM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Re: This seems like another example of what confuses the issue. Dreaded Anomaly Send a noteboard - 30/04/2011 08:56:40 PM
At the bottom of the Wikipedia page is a link to one on RAMBOs, described thus:
In astronomy, a RAMBO or robust association of massive baryonic objects is a dark cluster made of brown dwarfs or white dwarfs.

RAMBOs were proposed by Moore and Silk in 1995. They may have effective radii between 1 and 15 pc, with masses in the range 10–100,000 solar masses.

Dynamics

The dynamics of these objects, if they do exist, must be quite different from that of standard star clusters. With a very narrow mass range (all brown dwarfs or white dwarfs), the evaporation rate of these RAMBOs should be very slow as predicted by the evolution of simulated mono-component cluster models. Theoretically, these very long-lived objects could exist in large numbers. The presence of a clustered thick disk-like component of dark matter in the Galaxy has been suggested by Sanchez-Salcedo (1997, 1999) and Kerins (1997).

So, they're baryonic dark clusters, and the last sentence implies they could account for any dark matter halo around the Milky Way. So now there's yet another new proposal for dark-but-normal matter that could fit the bill without anything more exotic than very distant and/or non-luminous but quite familiar brown and/or white dwarfs.

Meanwhile, I'm not sure how convinced I am by a visual search failing to find extremely faint and distant objects. The theoretical argument is more compelling, but it depends on our current understanding of the Big Bang being correct, and that sems as likely to contain key errors as it is to rule out baryons accounting for all dark matter.

But, yeah, by all means test the theory; you have to, and if it's fully vindicated I'll accept that. Just don't spend so much effort devising more and more tests for a theory that defies proof that you overlook a simpler (and accurate) explanation.


I'm going to link to a discussion that cites much more data to demonstrate that RAMBOs, like MACHOs, can't account for the vast majority of dark matter.

The simpler explanation should be preferred only when it explains the evidence just as well as the more complicated explanation. In this case, it really clearly doesn't.

Also, I hope you see that this statement: "Meanwhile, I'm not sure how convinced I am by a visual search failing to find extremely faint and distant objects." launches your preferred explanation right into the realm of unfalsifiability, which is exactly the problem you claim to have with exotic dark matter. Of course, as I pointed out in my reply to the branch above this one, direct detection of exotic dark matter is known to be hard if it's possible; observation of microlensing is not known to be so hard, and the results just didn't show up. That's when it's time to move on.
Is "dark matter" composed of exotic material?
Reply to message
Exciting video about the universe Camilla - 28/04/2011 10:14:55 AM 1436 Views
Cool, and true *NM* Stephen - 28/04/2011 11:46:29 AM 508 Views
I still think dark matter's just non-luminous matter without a convenient light source to reflect. Joel - 28/04/2011 10:34:21 PM 1144 Views
We've just about ruled out the idea that dark matter is just non-luminous "ordinary" matter. Dreaded Anomaly - 28/04/2011 11:44:34 PM 1087 Views
I'm aware of the Bullet Cluster, though admittedly not much more than that. Joel - 29/04/2011 01:52:49 AM 1005 Views
Re: I'm aware of the Bullet Cluster, though admittedly not much more than that. Dreaded Anomaly - 29/04/2011 02:56:32 AM 1114 Views
Re: I'm aware of the Bullet Cluster, though admittedly not much more than that. Joel - 30/04/2011 05:02:49 PM 1061 Views
Re: I'm aware of the Bullet Cluster, though admittedly not much more than that. Dreaded Anomaly - 30/04/2011 08:56:35 PM 994 Views
Re: I'm aware of the Bullet Cluster, though admittedly not much more than that. Joel - 02/05/2011 01:28:30 AM 979 Views
Re: I'm aware of the Bullet Cluster, though admittedly not much more than that. Dreaded Anomaly - 04/05/2011 04:18:18 AM 1072 Views
There's such a thing as knowing when you're licked, and I believe I am. Joel - 07/05/2011 02:04:53 AM 1156 Views
Re: There's such a thing as knowing when you're licked, and I believe I am. Dreaded Anomaly - 09/05/2011 11:28:48 PM 981 Views
Re: There's such a thing as knowing when you're licked, and I believe I am. Joel - 14/05/2011 05:36:45 AM 960 Views
Re: There's such a thing as knowing when you're licked, and I believe I am. Dreaded Anomaly - 17/05/2011 02:09:40 AM 1010 Views
Re: There's such a thing as knowing when you're licked, and I believe I am. Joel - 19/05/2011 04:55:21 AM 950 Views
Re: There's such a thing as knowing when you're licked, and I believe I am. Dreaded Anomaly - 24/05/2011 09:32:27 PM 1023 Views
The Pati-Salam model was the one I had in mind. Joel - 24/05/2011 10:34:04 PM 965 Views
Re: The Pati-Salam model was the one I had in mind. Dreaded Anomaly - 24/05/2011 11:08:01 PM 1219 Views
Re: The Pati-Salam model was the one I had in mind. Joel - 25/05/2011 01:27:10 AM 997 Views
Re: The Pati-Salam model was the one I had in mind. Dreaded Anomaly - 31/05/2011 09:16:18 AM 1073 Views
Apologies for the delay; internet's been spotty and I've been busy lately. Joel - 10/06/2011 12:09:04 AM 1323 Views
Re: Apologies for the delay; internet's been spotty and I've been busy lately. Dreaded Anomaly - 14/06/2011 03:38:18 AM 1317 Views
Also, re: lensing from ordinary matter: Dreaded Anomaly - 29/04/2011 05:18:47 AM 1014 Views
This seems like another example of what confuses the issue. Joel - 30/04/2011 05:25:04 PM 1126 Views
Re: This seems like another example of what confuses the issue. Dreaded Anomaly - 30/04/2011 08:56:40 PM 1092 Views
That discussion seems to reduce to "as little new and exotic physics as possible". Joel - 02/05/2011 01:29:03 AM 1089 Views
Re: That discussion seems to reduce to "as little new and exotic physics as possible". Dreaded Anomaly - 04/05/2011 04:18:24 AM 1034 Views
Re: That discussion seems to reduce to "as little new and exotic physics as possible". Joel - 07/05/2011 02:05:02 AM 1239 Views
Re: That discussion seems to reduce to "as little new and exotic physics as possible". Dreaded Anomaly - 09/05/2011 11:29:36 PM 998 Views
Re: That discussion seems to reduce to "as little new and exotic physics as possible". Joel - 14/05/2011 05:35:56 AM 1298 Views
Re: That discussion seems to reduce to "as little new and exotic physics as possible". Dreaded Anomaly - 17/05/2011 02:09:55 AM 882 Views
Re: That discussion seems to reduce to "as little new and exotic physics as possible". Joel - 19/05/2011 02:47:25 AM 1235 Views
Re: That discussion seems to reduce to "as little new and exotic physics as possible". Dreaded Anomaly - 24/05/2011 09:46:30 PM 1021 Views
Re: That discussion seems to reduce to "as little new and exotic physics as possible". Joel - 25/05/2011 12:20:10 AM 1329 Views
Re: That discussion seems to reduce to "as little new and exotic physics as possible". Dreaded Anomaly - 31/05/2011 09:16:22 AM 1206 Views
Re: That discussion seems to reduce to "as little new and exotic physics as possible". Joel - 10/06/2011 12:04:06 AM 1386 Views
Re: That discussion seems to reduce to "as little new and exotic physics as possible". Dreaded Anomaly - 14/06/2011 03:38:12 AM 1131 Views
Re: I still think... (apparently, there is a 100 character limit on subjects, and yours was 99) Tor - 28/04/2011 11:57:15 PM 1467 Views
Seems to happen to me a lot; sorry. Joel - 29/04/2011 12:56:14 AM 994 Views
None of this reflects on the actual facts of dark matter. Dreaded Anomaly - 29/04/2011 01:32:52 AM 1017 Views
I concede my grasp (or grope) is a somewhat superficial laymans, yes. Joel - 30/04/2011 04:30:28 PM 1135 Views
Re: I concede my grasp (or grope) is a somewhat superficial laymans, yes. Dreaded Anomaly - 30/04/2011 08:56:44 PM 979 Views
Re: I concede my grasp (or grope) is a somewhat superficial laymans, yes. Joel - 02/05/2011 01:28:58 AM 1489 Views
Re: I concede my grasp (or grope) is a somewhat superficial laymans, yes. Dreaded Anomaly - 04/05/2011 04:18:27 AM 970 Views
I don't object to changing my mind, but can take more convincing than I really should. Joel - 07/05/2011 02:05:09 AM 1240 Views
Re: I don't object to changing my mind, but can take more convincing than I really should. Dreaded Anomaly - 09/05/2011 11:32:17 PM 1097 Views
Re: I don't object to changing my mind, but can take more convincing than I really should. Joel - 14/05/2011 05:36:24 AM 1323 Views
Re: I don't object to changing my mind, but can take more convincing than I really should. Dreaded Anomaly - 17/05/2011 02:10:03 AM 1007 Views
Re: I don't object to changing my mind, but can take more convincing than I really should. Joel - 19/05/2011 04:33:06 AM 1290 Views
Re: I don't object to changing my mind, but can take more convincing than I really should. Dreaded Anomaly - 24/05/2011 09:59:38 PM 1007 Views
Re: I don't object to changing my mind, but can take more convincing than I really should. Joel - 24/05/2011 11:19:43 PM 962 Views
Re: I don't object to changing my mind, but can take more convincing than I really should. Dreaded Anomaly - 24/05/2011 11:33:58 PM 930 Views
Re: I don't object to changing my mind, but can take more convincing than I really should. Joel - 25/05/2011 12:55:36 AM 1020 Views
Re: I don't object to changing my mind, but can take more convincing than I really should. Dreaded Anomaly - 31/05/2011 09:16:24 AM 986 Views
Re: I don't object to changing my mind, but can take more convincing than I really should. Joel - 10/06/2011 12:09:13 AM 1155 Views
Re: I don't object to changing my mind, but can take more convincing than I really should. Dreaded Anomaly - 14/06/2011 03:38:05 AM 1143 Views
Might help if you clarified where your skepticism is at Isaac - 29/04/2011 02:32:07 AM 949 Views
Potentially either, or a combination of the two. Joel - 30/04/2011 02:36:50 PM 1018 Views
It's hard to discuss without knowing your objections a bit more clearly Isaac - 30/04/2011 04:58:03 PM 938 Views
My primary objection is that alternatives to dark matter seem to have been ruled out prematurely. Joel - 02/05/2011 01:29:14 AM 1152 Views
Well, they weren't, not really sure how else to put that Isaac - 10/05/2011 03:19:57 AM 1158 Views
Alright then, objection withdrawn (cautious skepticism intact). Joel - 14/05/2011 05:34:17 AM 1287 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes