Student finds Universe’s missing mass

Source: UPI


MELBOURNE, May 24 (UPI) -- An Australian undergraduate has helped discover what has, until now, been described as the universe's "missing mass," university officials said.

Amelia Fraser-McKelvie, working with a team at the Monash University School of Physics, conducted a targeted X-ray search for the matter and found evidence of it within three months, a Monash release said Monday.

Fraser-McKelvie, a 22-year-old undergraduate aerospace engineering/science student, helped pinpoint the missing mass during a summer scholarship, the school said.


<...>

"She has managed to get a refereed publication accepted by one of the highest ranking astronomy journals in the world as a result of her endeavors," Pimbblet said. "I cannot underscore enough what a terrific achievement this is."



Read more: http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2011/05/24/Student-finds-universes-missing-mass/UPI-36851306283405/

---

Like we haven't known this for years. :P

It had fallen into a cushion under the couch.

What this discovery really explains is the Universe's missing couches.

We really had no idea how many were missing, you see. Say a Dover couple hires a moving company. The couch goes in the lorry the day before they move out. As anyone who has ever moved knows, it is virtually impossible to track the lorry with the couch in it (perhaps having something to do with the also missing mass of the Universe). During the time that the lorry, or as some lot say; 'lorry which is a very large vehicle for transporting various items and/or people as well as perhaps non-people and which bears a striking resemblance to a 'truck'), is ostensibly road-bound, the couch, if not the entire 'truck' are, in fact, 'missing'. Even if one observes the 'truck', there is no way, without opening it up and subjecting it to a thorough inspection (Which can be a nasty business, particularly if any of the other household items have built up a strategy for avoiding any close, and potentially demeaning, inspection over the years, like say the refrigerator or that mysterious box once kept in the basement that has deliberately instilled the impression of soft menace in the subconscious, thereby making the resident averse to opening it.), to determine if indeed there is a 'couch' therein*.


Traveling at an average speed of 45 km/hr, the truck might pass through several small hamlets while neither bearing nor not bearing the couch at any point in time. Therefore, the couch both does and does not add and subtract to the couch quotient in any given small town. This means that at any point in time, and in any town at all there could be anywhere from 1, to 5x10∞, to -37 couches in any given place at all.

One scientist attempted to extrapolate the 'Missing Couch Quotient' to a large city, and was found several days later in a fetal position on, so very un-ironically, a coffee table in Lancashire.

*A fellow with a penchant for torturing cats in boxes both proved and disproved that exact theory out.

Now... about the socks...

Schrodinger missed having those cats in boxes so much was discovering the fact that cats can actually see the ends of super strings dangling into our dimension from another one.If you've ever wondered why your cat will sit in a corner looking up as if paying attention to something you can't see.That's the explanation.Erwin could have found that out if he'd just let those cats out of the boxes.

:)

While we predicted that the mass of dark matter is what strings galaxies together in their local groups, I don't know if the student has actually found a way to observe it or if she has debunked that theory entirely by locating it elsewhere.

As I understand it, the effects of dark matter has been observed through "lensing", or looking at distant clusters and observing the distortions caused by a massive but invisible gravitational pull, as if someone was holding a tiny lens at arm's length.

I'm going to look further into this to see what she actually discovered.
Thanks for posting.

It is a by-product of the crush of the constant, with galaxies and their gravitational density being the points of highest 'feedback creation' on the linear acceleration of space.

I was using a reference from a Discovery Channel program I watched last night. It might be a theory, but they showed galaxies that were strung together on a computer to form a local group. I forget the name of the series about the universe, but Phil Plait was on it. Indeed, I went to his Bad Astronomy blog for clarification an this discovery, and oddly found nothing.

It's obvious you have a better grasp than I do so I defer to your explaination.

It's actually pretty simple if you can take one step.

Right now, the majority of the (astro)physics community has one thing backwards; gravity.

Gravity is not 'pulling' you toward the planet. Not. At. All.

What is really happening is way more interesting than thousands of years of orthodox perspectives have told us. This isn't going to be easy to get at first, but once you get it, it snaps everything into place. It also illuminates what we're trying so hard to see with regard to 'dark matter'. You'll probably enjoy this;

Imagine you are in a white room with no doors or windows, holding a red ball in your outstretched hand. Now try to imagine that you, the room, and the ball are all growing at an ever-increasing, ever-accelerating rate.

What do you notice?

I'll do the second part after you answer.

(There's no wrong answer... as far as I know)

if the room, myself and the ball all doubled in size, wouldnt it appear (to me) to be unchanged? The relative sizes stay the same right?

Now picture the same thing, but add just one other thing;

The room that you are in is on a gigantic red ball itself.

Now, you, the room, the ball in your hand, and the gigantic red ball beneath you are all growing at an ever faster/ever accelerating rate.

Now... notice anything?

Assuming we are IN a sealed room, and that room rests on the surface of a ball, it should not matter what the spehere does beneath the room, right? It can grow or shrink as much as it wants; us, in the sealed room, have no relation to it AFAIK.

If you are ever increasing the physical dimensions, wouldn't you have to slow down time to keep a balance?

But since the way we experience time is relative, it really wouldn't matter much.

Your question shows that you are getting 99% of the picture. Just practice imagining the above. It sometimes helps to stand up, hold out your hand (like there's a ball in it), and close your eyes while doing so.

I'm guessing that in a constant state of physics that I'd notice the scale of mass compared to the unchanging gravity (mass) of Earth. The result would be (I suppose) that the ball and soon my arm itself would become unsustainable heavy because, much like an ant, my strength is proportional to my size and relatively low mass (which has grown considerably in recent years, BTW). I admit to not fully understanding the relation of mass to gravity or how it translates to dark matter.

I doubt I'm on to something, but I'm not a scientist.

For this to happen relative to the rest of the universe, then yes, the subjects would have to gain atomic mass. But that's not what's happening in the model.

We have a case of the question not being as thoughtful as the participants here. ;)

Her paper mentions the measurement of baryonic matter, the usual non-exotic stuff that almost everything is made of.

The large cosmic filaments are way more dense than previously thought, but they don't account for all the matter that should be out there.

This would seem to suggest that dark matter needn't be as strange and abundant in the current model of the universe as previously thought.

http://arxiv.org/abs/1104.0711

Cool.

You read any Stephen Baxter?

Sounds like good stuff, and he certainly has racked up some awards for his writing.

Mmmmm... crunchy!

That, and he deals in remarkable time frames. His imagination is wonderfully expansive. If you want to know how humans could survive on Mercury with today's technology, he has some real insights.

If you love physics at all, especially astro-physics, then Baxter is a MUST read.

I'm no science whiz, but his stories are great. There's some I still haven't read, but The Light Of Other Days sticks out. Every one I've read has been really good, and he's only behind Kim Stanley Robinson and Greg Bear as my fave sci-fi writers.

"The Reality Dysfunction" by Peter Hamilton.

On the darker side, "Midshipman's Hope", by David Feintuch.

But, if you want to experience a Sci-Fi saga on par in breadth, scope, and depth with the LoTR, but with a far more satisfying and elegant conclusion, then there is nothing that can touch, or even come close to, the "Hyperion" series by Dan Simmons.

If you can get through all four, and make it through the last chapter without weeping for joy and pain, then you are likely an android.

I've read many, many works, and that one is the absolute highest recommendation I could ever give. Even saying so cannot detract from its potency.

You have my word... unless you are an android who speaks in Zen Koans.

I just moved last week and I now live right across the street from my library, so I have plans to raid their sci-fi section soon. I'll look for any of those. I've heard of the Hyperion series, but the other ones are totally new to me. Always on the lookout for some good sci-fi (easier said than found).

I accidentally lost it during one wild weekend in Vegas… Whew, that was a lot of fun.

Now, I want it back.. Its name is Herbie.

Is it on the stomach or the hips!

You go Girl!

+1

This was a 6-week project, which usually means the student essentially did some data analysis and maybe some programming work on a project her supervisors had set up in all essential details. Good for her... I'm sure she's a very talented student, but it's very misleading to portray this as a case of a young genius swooping in and scooping an entire profession on a major discovery.

If you want the scientific details http://arxiv.org/abs/1104.0711">the paper is on the arXiv. http://www.monash.edu.au/news/show/monash-student-finds-universes-missing-mass?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=main&utm_campaign=newsfeed">Monash University's article (paraphrased by UPI in the OP) gives a more realistic account of the work.

But she was part of it, so I'm going to let her have it.

Get out more.

and its a major journal.

Either she really did have the insight / discovery, or there's fraud going on.

Up to now it just seemed to be a fog like substance, but further exploration dispelled the fog.

But props to the student, it's a big deal.

I hate when that happens.

Though, I figured any holistic detective might have worked that out already.

Edit: Perhaps a clever, hilarious nitwit, I grant.

for later reading

can't be too far ahead.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_SCfwBkF65oY/SZ5FQHtZvjI/AAAAAAAALDM/dvKDBc4lHEA/s400/Star+Wars+-+Warp+Speed,+Disney.png

so give it a little while.

good try though

Dark Matter is the title of a new David Lynch series on HBO this fall.