A recent study from the University of Melbourne proposes a new theory for the origin of dark matter, helping experimentalists in Australia and abroad in the search for the mysterious new matter.
The work has been published in Physical Review Letters and describes how expanding bubbles in the early universe may be the key to understanding dark matter.
“Our proposed mechanism suggests that the dark matter abundance may have been determined in a cosmological phase transition,” said Dr. Michael Baker, a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the University of Melbourne and one of the authors.
“These phase transitions are expected to have taken place in the early universe and can be similar to bubbles of gas forming in boiling water. We show that it is natural to expect dark matter particles to find it very difficult enter these bubbles, which gives a new explanation for the amount of dark matter observed in the universe.”
Although many experiments have searched for particle dark matter, none have yet been successful. Most experiments have searched primarily for Weakly Interacting Massive Particles, which has been the favored dark matter candidate for decades. However, these experiments have not yet seen anything, which really motivates theorists to think outside the box.
“We know dark matter is out there, but we don’t know much else,” said Dr. Baker. “If it’s a new particle then there’s a good chance that we could actually detect it in a laboratory. We could then pin down its properties, like its mass and interactions, and learn something new and deep about the universe.”
The research, which was done in collaboration with Assistant Professor Andrew Long from Rice University, Texas, and Professor Joachim Kopp from CERN and the University of Mainz, points the way for new experimental strategies for searching for dark matter.
“One exciting aspect about the idea is that it works for dark matter particles that are much heavier than most other candidates, such as the famous `Weakly Interacting Massive Particles’, on which most experimental searches in the past were focused,” said Professor Kopp. “Our work, therefore, motivates the extension of dark matter searches towards heavier masses.”
The findings could be especially important for the future of experimental dark matter searches in Australia.
The Stawell Underground Physics Laboratory, which is currently under construction in regional Victoria, one kilometer beneath the ground in a disused gold mine, will be the first underground particle physics laboratory in the Southern Hemisphere, and will house several dark matter search experiments in the years to come.
New theoretical proposals will help drive design experiments that can test the widest range of dark matter candidates, giving scientists the best chance of uncovering the mystery of dark matter.
Reference: “Filtered Dark Matter at a First Order Phase Transition” by Michael J. Baker, Joachim Kopp and Andrew J. Long, 9 October 2020, Physical Review Letters.
The best candidate for dark energy and dark matter is the only fundamental particle in the universe, the electron.
The naturally aligned electrons repell each other exponentally into expansion field that collide. The opposing electrons collide and entangle due to the Paulie Exclusion Principle to form Higgs fields of conserved energy. These electron/positron pairs can entangle with a positron up quark or electron down quark to form neucli that entangle throughharmonic resonance (strong foce) to create neucli of atoms.
The best candidate for dark energy and dark matter is the only fundamental particle in the universe, the electron.
The naturally aligned electrons repell each other exponentally into expansion field that collide. The opposing electrons collide and entangle due to the Paulie Exclusion Principle to form Higgs fields of conserved energy. These electron/positron pairs can entangle with a positron up quark or electron down quark to form neucli that entangle through harmonic resonance (strong foce) to create the neucli of atoms.
Another possibility, from a view of String Theory, is that Dark Matter appears to us as an effect of string/anti-string annihilations. As you may know, quantum mechanics requires that strings must be formed as pairs in the quantum foam – a string and an anti-string – that immediately annihilate each other. Quantum mechanics also requires both the string and anti-string to be surrounded by “jitters” that reduce their monstrous vibrating energies. What if this jitter remains for a fraction of an instant after their string/anti-string annihilations? This temporary jitter would be seen by us as matter for that instant before it too returns to the foam. That’s why we never see it – the “mass” lasts only for that instant but is repeated over and over and over, all over. Specifics on this can be found in my YouTube at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N84yISQvGCk
If helium 3 and 4 can escape most gravitational fields – why couldn’t the composition of dark matter in the universe be helium 3 or 4 gravity particles ?
If this is the case the universe is much older than 60 Billion years .
If you can verify that dark matter is helium 3 or 4 gravity then maybe you’ll win a prize.
Why is 23% of the Helium in the universe unexplained?
23% of the Helium in the universe being unexplained…Helium 4 …as I stated Helium 3 and 4 can not freeze even at the alleged absolute ZERO Kelvin if that was even possible.
” All elements other than hydrogen and helium today account for only 2% of the mass of atomic matter in the universe. Helium-4, by contrast, makes up about 23% of the universe’s ordinary matter—nearly all the ordinary matter that is not hydrogen. ”
Helium – Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org › wiki › Helium
I hope this clarifies the 23% of the helium in the universe story I read…it is helium 4 that accounts for 23% of the helium in the universe and its formation is not explained as of yet ?
If this is true that 23% of the Helium in the universe is unexplained , there is a little known fact that Helium 3 and 4 can not freeze even at an alleged 0 Kelvin temperature.
As I have been trying to understand how and when and where motion first started in the universe to me it is apparent that this 23% of the unexplained helium in the universe is left over from a past cycle of expanding and decay of galaxies , leaving helium 3 and 4 and gravity …meaning the universe is much older than 13.8 Billion years ( my guess is the universe is in its forth cycle of decay and is about 4 x 13.8 billion yo or about 60 billion yo ) and that motion has been existence in the universe even before that, because if everything decayed to absolute ZERO Kelvin there would be no motion – but the universe allegedly cant go back to a motionless state now, because Helium 4 can not freeze this saving the day of a motionless static universe in the future.
source of Helium information ;
Neutroid Steady State Galaxy Theory
RUFUS’S GALAXY WEB PAGE
” Basic Operation of Galaxies
( this theory in error ? claims galaxies do not decay but are recycled through process )
” At the center of each galaxy is a neutroid which acts to constantly recycle all the matter and energy in the galaxy. This neutroid is similar to a neutron star but is very much larger and has reached a size where the pressure and temperature at its surface are great enough to generate a nuclear fusion process. In the areas of the neutroid’s magnetic poles, the products of fusion are trapped by the magnetic field and are pushed out along the magnetic field by the pressure of the nuclear fusion process going on below. This results in a column of material composed of hydrogen, helium and other light elements being ejected at each of the neutroid’s two magnetic poles. This material moves out from the neutroid at essentially constant velocity until it reaches a point where the magnetic field is no longer strong enough to control it. Once free of the magnetic field the material then continues under it’s own momentum to travel to the outer edge of the galaxy before starting to fall back toward the neutroid. …..
A fourth arguement which has been used to support the Big Bang theory is that it would account for the abundance of helium we find in the universe. The amount of helium present (24%) cannot be accounted for by star production and according to Gamow it was generated by the Big Bang.
Under the Steady State Galaxy theory, the nuclear fusion process which is expelling the material from the neutroid would generate large amounts of helium as well as other light elements and is the source of the excess helium found in the universe.”
If helium 4 can escape most gravitational fields – why couldn’t the composition of dark matter in the universe be helium 4 gravity particles? If this is the case the universe is much older than 60 Billion years .
If you can verify that dark matter is helium 3 or 4 gravity then you may win a prize.
The suggested phase transition is first order with discontinuous domain walls, instead of the lower temperature continuous second order phase transition of normal matter. So while it may work, and it would give freedom of higher particle masses, I don’t see the appeal.
However, my interest is the suggested Griest Kamionkowski (GK) bound on thermal produced annihilating particles (since dark matter presumably has to have dark anti-matter symmetry like all other matter). I did not know that relativistic energies of such interacting particles sat such a low bound as ~ 100 Tev ( <= 240 TeV for Dirac particles – not being its own antiparticle – like all particles we have seen so far). That universal limit explains why the thermal WIMP searches were adamant on that limit in the LHC and it puts a more reasonable perspective on the relative low masses of normal matter particles (< ~ 0.1 TeV)!
@Al Garnier: “The best candidate for dark energy and dark matter is the only fundamental particle in the universe, the electron.”
@Daniel Izzo: “… why couldn’t the composition of dark matter in the universe be helium 3 or 4 gravity particles ?”
That dark matter is baryon (“normal”) matter is ruled out by its interaction during the formation of the cosmic background and so by the resulting peaks. See “Secrets of the Cosmic Microwave Background” @ PBS Space Time.
And Daniel – seriously!? This is the 3d time in 2 day that you post virtually the same comment – with links to irrelevant and potentially harmful for society pseudoscience – and I note that you have not once responded to criticism!
Are you a communicable person or a troll?
@Howard Jeffrey Bender: “Another possibility, from a view of String Theory, is that Dark Matter appears to us as an effect of string/anti-string annihilations.”
Well, string theory refuse to bear up to tests, so it seems to be on its way out. Nether its natural consequences of thermal WIMPs or axions have been seen, and the Griest Kamionkowski bound combined with cosmological searches (Fermi-LAT for WIMP annihilation), particle collider searches (LHC) nor the electron sphericity allows it.
“With the search for WIMPs seemingly on its last legs, researchers at NIST and their colleagues are now considering a more direct method to look for dark matter particles that have a heftier mass and therefore wield a gravitational force large enough to be detected.”
[“A billion tiny pendulums could detect the universe’s missing mass” @ Phys Org]
Further the inflation field we observe rejects the swampland of unreal string solutions and so the potential landscape of real solutions it could have contained [” “The zoo plot meets the swampland: mutual (in)consistency of single-field inflation, string conjectures, and cosmological data”´@ arxiv].
It is essentially the same problem as for the big bang without inflation – we should see much larger cosmic background fluctuations from strings, or order unity, than the order 10^-5 we see. Seems to me string theory is pre-inflation in that sense.
But it is from inflationary hot big bang – LCDM – cosmology where dark matter and dark energy has its natural place.
Also, you end with gratuitous self promotion (and you have done so before). In the words of Stephen Fry: “That’s not nice, it isn’t nice.”
“Nether its natural consequences of thermal WIMPs or axions have been seen, and the Griest Kamionkowski bound combined with cosmological searches (Fermi-LAT for WIMP annihilation), particle collider searches (LHC) nor the electron sphericity allows it.” – Nether its natural consequences of thermal WIMPs nor axions have been seen, and the Griest Kamionkowski bound combined with cosmological searches (Fermi-LAT for WIMP annihilation), particle collider searches (LHC) or the electron sphericity allows it.
Can you have an electron, with a positive charge? Or how about a neutral charge? Would it be out of phrase or spin backward, on its axis? Too many unknowns yet.
… a new one, it doesn’t mean is the correct one…
Ups, there goes another one…. zimmmmp
Another possibility is Torbjorn and Bender are screwing each other!
And xABBAAA pays money to watch them
… could it be that the dark matter is a negative mass? …
… Unified, that is just rude and false?, …