Dark matter

From Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core
Jump to: navigation, search
Rotation curve of a typical spiral galaxy: predicted by Newtonian gravity (A) and observed (B). In order to save the theory of Newtonian gravity, Dark Matter was made up to explain the 'flat' appearance of the velocity curve out to a large radius
Dark matter is invisible. Based on the effect of gravitational lensing, a ring of dark matter has been inferred in this image of a galaxy cluster (CL0024+17) and has been represented in blue.[1]

Dark matter is a hypothetical kind of matter that has not been detected with telescopes or any other instrument. It was originally proposed because the stars that make up the galaxies do not orbit the galactic centers in the way that planets orbit the Sun. In the Solar System, planets further out move much more slowly than planets closer in. In a galaxy, stars further out move at almost the same speed as stars closer in. This is an enormous contradiction to Newton's Law of gravitation. The Dark Matter hypothesis was created to account for this contradiction. From orbital calculations of these galactic stars, it turns out that either this undetected dark matter would have to account for most of the matter in the universe, or that the basic theory of gravity is wrong, or that there is some other phenomenon involved in shaping the galaxies.

The existence and properties of dark matter are inferred from its gravitational effects on visible matter, on radiation, and on the large-scale structure of the universe. Dark matter has not been detected directly, making it one of the greatest mysteries in modern astrophysics.

Dark matter neither emits nor absorbs light or any other electromagnetic radiation at any significant level. According to the Planck mission team, and based on the standard model of cosmology, the total mass–energy of the known universe contains 4.9% ordinary (baryonic) matter, 26.8% dark matter and 68.3% dark energy.[2][3] Thus, dark matter is estimated to constitute 84.5%[note 1] of the total matter in the universe, while dark energy plus dark matter constitute 95.1% of the total mass–energy content of the universe.[4][5][6]

A few astrophysicists hypothesized the existence of dark matter to account for discrepancies between the mass of large astronomical objects determined from their gravitational effects, and their mass as calculated from the observable matter (stars, gas, and dust) that they can be seen to contain. Their gravitational effects suggest that their masses are much greater than the observable-matter survey suggests.

Dark matter was postulated by Jan Oort in 1932 to account for the orbital velocities of stars in the Milky Way. In 1933, Fritz Zwicky was the first to use LaGrange's virial theorem (which is itself a controversial mathematical artifice) to infer the existence of unseen matter, which he referred to as dunkle Materie 'dark matter'.[7] More robust evidence from galaxy rotation curves was discovered by Horace W. Babcock in 1939, but was not attributed to dark matter. The first hypothesis to postulate "dark matter" based upon robust evidence was formulated by Vera Rubin and Kent Ford in the 1960s–1970s, using galaxy rotation curves.[8][9] Subsequently, many other observations have indicated the presence of dark matter in the universe, including gravitational lensing of background objects by galaxy clusters such as the Bullet Cluster, the temperature distribution of hot gas in galaxies and clusters of galaxies and, more recently, the pattern of anisotropies in the cosmic microwave background. According to consensus among cosmologists, dark matter is composed primarily of a not yet characterized type of subatomic particle.[10][11] The search for this particle, by a variety of means, is one of the major efforts in particle physics today.[12]

Although the existence of dark matter is promoted by some within the mainstream scientific community, some alternative theories of gravity have been proposed, such as MOND and TeVeS, which try to account for the anomalous observations without requiring additional matter. However, these theories cannot account for the properties of galaxy clusters.[13]

The Dark Matter hypothesis has become one of the key components of the Big Bang theory, which is also the subject of wide-ranging controversy. |


Estimated distribution of matter and energy in the universe, today (top) and when the CMB was released (bottom)

Dark matter's existence is inferred from gravitational effects on visible matter and gravitational lensing of background radiation. It was originally hypothesized to account for discrepancies between calculations of the mass of galaxies, clusters of galaxies and the entire universe made through dynamical and general relativistic means, and calculations based on the mass of the visible "luminous" matter these objects contain: stars and the gas and dust of the interstellar and intergalactic medium.[14]

The most widely promoted explanation for these phenomena is that dark matter exists and that it is most probably[10] composed of weakly interacting massive particles (WIMPs) that interact only through gravity and the weak force. Alternative explanations have been proposed, and there is not yet sufficient experimental evidence to determine whether any of them are correct. Many experiments to detect proposed dark matter particles through non-gravitational means are under way.[12]

One theory, similar to ideas found in science fiction, suggests the existence of a “Hidden Valley”, a parallel world made of dark matter having very little in common with matter we know,[15] and that could only interact with our visible universe through gravity.[16][17]

From observations of structures larger than star systems, as well as the controversial Big Bang cosmology interpreted under the Friedmann equations and the Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker metric, dark matter would have to account for 26.8% of the mass-energy content of the observable universe. In comparison, ordinary (baryonic) matter accounts for only 4.9% of the mass-energy content of the observable universe, with the remainder being attributable to dark energy. This leaves the subscribing astrophysicists to study a field in which about 95% of the subject matter is simply made up.[18] From these figures, matter accounts for 31.7% of the mass-energy content of the universe, and 84.5% of the matter is dark matter.

Dark matter plays a central role in government-funded modeling of cosmic structure formation and galaxy formation and evolution and is claimed to have measurable effects on the anisotropies observed in the cosmic microwave background (CMB). All these lines of evidence suggest that galaxies, clusters of galaxies, and the universe as a whole would have to contain far more matter than that which is easily visible with electromagnetic radiation.[16]

Though the theory of dark matter remains the most widely promoted theory to explain the anomalies in observed galactic rotation, some alternative theoretical approaches have been developed which broadly fall into the categories of modified gravitational laws and quantum gravitational laws. Other alternative theories build on the ideas of the dynamic aether and on plasma cosmology.[19]

Baryonic and nonbaryonic dark matter

Fermi-LAT observations of dwarf galaxies provide new insights on dark matter.

There are three separate lines of evidence that suggest the majority of dark matter is not made of baryons (ordinary matter including protons and neutrons):

  • The theory of Big Bang nucleosynthesis, which predicts the observed abundance of the chemical elements,[20] predicts that baryonic matter accounts for around 4–5 percent of the critical density of the universe. In contrast, evidence from large-scale structure and other observations indicates that the total matter density is about 30% of the critical density.
  • Large astronomical searches for gravitational microlensing, including the MACHO, EROS and OGLE projects, have shown that only a small fraction of the dark matter in the Milky Way can be hiding in dark compact objects; the excluded range covers objects above half the Earth's mass up to 30 solar masses, excluding nearly all the plausible candidates.
  • Detailed analysis of the small irregularities (anisotropies) in the cosmic microwave background observed by WMAP and Planck shows that around five-sixths of the total matter is in a form which does not interact significantly with ordinary matter or photons except through gravitational effects.

A small proportion of dark matter may be baryonic dark matter: astronomical bodies, such as massive compact halo objects, which are composed of ordinary matter but emit little or no electromagnetic radiation. The study of nucleosynthesis in the Big Bang gives an upper bound on the amount of baryonic matter in the universe,[21] which indicates that the vast majority of dark matter in the universe cannot be baryons, and thus does not form atoms. It also cannot interact with ordinary matter via electromagnetic forces; in particular, dark matter particles do not carry any electric charge.

Candidates for nonbaryonic dark matter are hypothetical particles such as axions, or supersymmetric particles; neutrinos can only form a small fraction of the dark matter, due to limits from large-scale structure and high-redshift galaxies.[22] Unlike baryonic dark matter, nonbaryonic dark matter does not contribute to the formation of the elements in the early universe ("Big Bang nucleosynthesis")[10] and so its presence is revealed only via its gravitational attraction. In addition, if the particles of which it is composed are supersymmetric, they can undergo annihilation interactions with themselves, possibly resulting in observable by-products such as gamma rays and neutrinos ("indirect detection").[22]

Nonbaryonic dark matter is classified in terms of the mass of the particle(s) that is assumed to make it up, and/or the typical velocity dispersion of those particles (since more massive particles move more slowly). There are three prominent hypotheses on nonbaryonic dark matter, called cold dark matter (CDM), warm dark matter (WDM), and hot dark matter (HDM); some combination of these is also possible. The most widely discussed models for nonbaryonic dark matter are based on the cold dark matter hypothesis, and the corresponding particle is most commonly assumed to be a weakly interacting massive particle (WIMP). Hot dark matter may include (massive) neutrinos, but observations imply that only a small fraction of dark matter can be hot. Cold dark matter leads to a "bottom-up" formation of structure in the universe while hot dark matter would result in a "top-down" formation scenario; since the late 1990s, the latter has been ruled out by observations of high-redshift galaxies such as the Hubble Ultra-Deep Field.[12]

Observational evidence

This artist’s impression shows the expected distribution of dark matter in the Milky Way galaxy as a blue halo of material surrounding the galaxy.[23]

The first person to interpret evidence and infer the presence of dark matter was Dutch astronomer Jan Oort, a pioneer in radio astronomy, in 1932.[24] Oort was studying stellar motions in the local galactic neighbourhood and found that the mass in the galactic plane must be greater than what was observed, but this measurement was later determined to be essentially erroneous.[25]

In 1933, the Swiss astrophysicist Fritz Zwicky, who studied clusters of galaxies while working at the California Institute of Technology, made a similar inference.[26][27] Zwicky applied the virial theorem to the Coma cluster of galaxies and obtained evidence of unseen mass. Zwicky estimated the cluster's total mass based on the motions of galaxies near its edge and compared that estimate to one based on the number of galaxies and total brightness of the cluster. He estimated that there was about 400 times more mass than was visually observable. The gravity effect of the visible galaxies in the cluster would be far too small for such fast orbits, unless there was mass hidden from visual observation. This is known as the "missing mass problem". Based on these conclusions, Zwicky inferred that there must be some non-visible form of matter which would provide enough mass and gravitation attraction to hold the cluster together. This was the first formal inference about the existence of dark matter.[28]

Zwicky's estimates were not accurate and were off by more than an order of magnitude.[29] Notwithstanding, although the same calculation today shows a smaller factor, based on greater values for the mass of luminous material, it is still clear that the great majority of matter in Zwicky's calculations was correctly inferred to be dark.[28]

Observations have provided hints that the dark matter around one of the central four merging galaxies is not moving with the galaxy itself.[30]

Much of the evidence for dark matter comes from the study of the motions of galaxies.[31] Many of these appear to be fairly uniform, so by the virial theorem, the total kinetic energy should be half the total gravitational binding energy of the galaxies. Observationally, however, the total kinetic energy is found to be much greater. In particular, assuming the gravitational mass is due to only the visible matter of the galaxy, stars far from the center of galaxies have much higher velocities than are predicted by the virial theorem. Galactic rotation curves, which illustrate the velocity of rotation versus the distance from the galactic center, show the well known phenomenology that cannot be explained by the presence of the visible matter only. Assuming that the visible material makes up only a small part of the cluster's mass is the most straightforward way of accounting for this discrepancy. The distribution of dark matter in galaxies required to explain the motion of the observed baryonic matter suggests the presence of a roughly spherically symmetric, centrally concentrated halo of dark matter with the visible matter concentrated in a disc at the center. Low surface brightness dwarf galaxies are important sources of information for studying dark matter, as they have an uncommonly low ratio of visible matter to dark matter, and have few bright stars at the center which would otherwise impair observations of the rotation curve of outlying stars.

Gravitational lensing observations of galaxy clusters allow direct estimates of the gravitational mass based on its effect on light coming from background galaxies, since large collections of matter (dark or otherwise) will gravitationally deflect light. In clusters such as Abell 1689, lensing observations confirm the presence of considerably more mass than is indicated by the clusters' light alone. In the Bullet Cluster, lensing observations show that much of the lensing mass is separated from the X-ray-emitting baryonic mass. In July 2012, lensing observations were used to identify a "filament" of dark matter between two clusters of galaxies, as cosmological simulations have predicted.[32]

Galaxy rotation curves

Rotation curve of a typical spiral galaxy: predicted (A) and observed (B). Dark matter can explain the 'flat' appearance of the velocity curve out to a large radius

The first robust indications that the mass to light ratio was anything other than unity came from measurements of galaxy rotation curves. In 1939, Horace W. Babcock reported in his PhD thesis measurements of the rotation curve for the Andromeda nebula which suggested that the mass-to-luminosity ratio increases radially.[33] He, however, attributed it to either absorption of light within the galaxy or modified dynamics in the outer portions of the spiral and not to any form of missing matter.

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, Vera Rubin was the first to both make robust measurements indicating the existence of dark matter and attribute them to dark matter. Rubin worked with a new sensitive spectrograph that could measure the velocity curve of edge-on spiral galaxies to a greater degree of accuracy than previously.[9] Together with fellow staff-member Kent Ford, Rubin announced at a 1975 meeting of the American Astronomical Society the discovery that most stars in spiral galaxies orbit at roughly the same speed, which implied that the mass densities of the galaxies were uniform well beyond the regions containing most of the stars (the galactic bulge), a result independently found in 1978.[34] An influential paper presented Rubin's results in 1980.[35] Rubin's observations and calculations showed that most galaxies must contain about six times as much “dark” mass as could be accounted for by the visible stars. Eventually other astronomers began to corroborate her work. It soon became well-established that most galaxies were dominated by "dark matter":

  • Low-surface-brightness (LSB) galaxies.[36] LSB galaxies are probably totally dominated by dark matter, with the observed stellar populations making only a small contribution to their total mass. Such a property is extremely important as it allows one to avoid the difficulties associated with the deprojection and disentanglement of the dark and visible matter contributions to the rotation curves.[12]
  • Spiral galaxies.[37] Rotation curves of both low and high surface luminosity galaxies suggest a universal rotation curve, which can be expressed as the sum of an exponential distribution of visible matter that is maximum at the center and tapering to zero at great distances, and a spherical dark matter halo with a flat core of radius r0 and density ρ0 = 4.5 × 10−2(r0/kpc)−2/3 Mpc−3.
  • Elliptical galaxies. Some elliptical galaxies show evidence for dark matter via strong gravitational lensing,[38] X-ray evidence reveals the presence of extended atmospheres of hot gas that fill the dark haloes of isolated elliptical galaxies and whose hydrostatic support provides evidence for the existence of dark matter. Other ellipticals have low velocities in their outskirts (tracked for example by the motion of planetary nebulae embedded within) and were interpreted as not having dark matter haloes.[12] However, simulations of disk-galaxy mergers suggest that stars may have been torn by tidal forces from their original galaxies during the first close passage and put on outgoing trajectories, explaining the low velocities of the remaining stars even with the presence of a dark matter halo.[39] More research is needed to clarify this situation.

Simulated dark matter haloes have significantly steeper density profiles (having central cusps) than are inferred from observations, which is a problem for cosmological models with dark matter at the smallest scale of galaxies (as of 2008).[12] This may only be a problem of resolution: star-forming regions which might alter the dark matter distribution via outflows of gas have been too small to resolve and model simultaneously with larger dark matter clumps. A recent simulation[40] of a dwarf galaxy, that included these star-forming regions, reported that strong outflows from supernovae remove low-angular-momentum gas, which inhibits the formation of a galactic bulge and decreases the dark matter density to less than half of what it would have been in the central kiloparsec. These simulation predictions—bulgeless and with shallow central dark matter density profiles—correspond closely to observations of actual dwarf galaxies. There are no such discrepancies at the larger scales of clusters of galaxies and greater, or in the outer regions of haloes of galaxies.

The exceptions to this general picture of dark matter haloes for galaxies appear to be galaxies with mass-to-light ratios that are close to that of the stars they contain.[citation needed] Otherwise, numerous observations have been made that do indicate the presence of dark matter in various parts of the cosmos, such as observations of the cosmic microwave background, of supernovas used as distance measures, of gravitational lensing at various scales, and many types of sky survey. Starting with Rubin's findings for spiral galaxies, such robust observational evidence for dark matter has collected over the decades to the point that by the 1980s most astrophysicists have accepted its existence.[41] As a unifying concept, dark matter is one of the dominant features considered in the analysis of structures on the order of galactic scale and larger.

Velocity dispersions of galaxies

Rubin's pioneering work has stood the test of time. Measurements of velocity curves in spiral galaxies were soon followed up with velocity dispersions of elliptical galaxies.[42] While some elliptical galaxies display lower mass-to-light ratios, measurements of ellipticals generally indicate a relatively high dark matter content. Likewise, measurements of the diffuse interstellar gas found at the edge of galaxies indicate not only dark matter distributions that extend beyond the visible limit of the galaxies, but also that the galaxies are virialized (i.e., gravitationally bound and orbiting each other with velocities which appear to disproportionately correspond to predicted orbital velocities of general relativity) up to ten times their visible radii.[43] This has the effect of pushing up the dark matter as a fraction of the total matter from 50% as measured by Rubin to the now accepted value of nearly 95%.

There are places where dark matter seems to be a small component or totally absent. Globular clusters show little evidence that they contain dark matter,[44] though their orbital interactions with galaxies do show evidence for galactic dark matter.[citation needed] For some time, measurements of the velocity profile of stars seemed to indicate concentration of dark matter in the disk of the Milky Way. It now appears, however, that the high concentration of baryonic matter in the disk of the galaxy (especially in the interstellar medium) can account for this motion. Galaxy mass profiles are thought to look very different from the light profiles. The typical model for dark matter galaxies is a smooth, spherical distribution in virialized halos. Such would have to be the case to avoid small-scale (stellar) dynamical effects. Recent research reported in January 2006 from the University of Massachusetts Amherst would explain the previously mysterious warp in the disk of the Milky Way by the interaction of the Large and Small Magellanic Clouds and the predicted 20 fold increase in mass of the Milky Way taking into account dark matter.[45]

In 2005, astronomers from Cardiff University claimed to have discovered a galaxy made almost entirely of dark matter, 50 million light years away in the Virgo Cluster, which was named VIRGOHI21.[46] Unusually, VIRGOHI21 does not appear to contain any visible stars: it was seen with radio frequency observations of hydrogen. Based on rotation profiles, the scientists estimate that this object contains approximately 1000 times more dark matter than hydrogen and has a total mass of about 1/10 that of the Milky Way. For comparison, the Milky Way is estimated to have roughly 10 times as much dark matter as ordinary matter. Models of the Big Bang and structure formation have suggested that such dark galaxies should be very common in the universe[citation needed], but none had previously been detected.

There are some galaxies, such as NGC 3379, whose velocity profile indicates an absence of dark matter.[47]

Galaxy clusters and gravitational lensing

Strong gravitational lensing as observed by the Hubble Space Telescope in Abell 1689 indicates the presence of dark matter—enlarge the image to see the lensing arcs.

Galaxy clusters are especially important for dark matter studies since their masses can be estimated in three independent ways:

  • From the scatter in radial velocities of the galaxies within the clusters (as in Zwicky's early observations, but with more accurate measurements and much larger samples).
  • From X-rays emitted by very hot gas within the clusters. The temperature and density of the gas can be estimated from the energy and flux of the X-rays, and hence the gas pressure derived; assuming pressure and gravity balance, this enables the mass profile of the cluster to be derived. Many of the experiments of the Chandra X-ray Observatory use this technique to independently determine the mass of clusters. These observations generally indicate that baryonic mass is approximately 12–15 percent, in reasonable agreement with the Planck spacecraft cosmic average of 15.5–16 percent.[48]
  • From their gravitational lensing effects on background objects (usually more distant galaxies). This is observed as "strong lensing" (multiple images) near the cluster core, and weak lensing (shape distortions) in the outer parts. Several large Hubble projects have used this method to measure cluster masses.

Generally these three methods are in reasonable agreement, that clusters contain much more matter than suggested by the visible components of galaxies and gas.

A gravitational lens is formed when the light from a more distant source (such as a quasar) is "bent" around a massive object (such as a cluster of galaxies) lying inline between the source object and the observer. The process is known as gravitational lensing.

The galaxy cluster Abell 2029 is composed of thousands of galaxies enveloped in a cloud of hot gas, and an amount of dark matter equivalent to more than 1014 M. At the center of this cluster is an enormous, elliptically shaped galaxy that is thought to have been formed from the mergers of many smaller galaxies.[49] The measured orbital velocities of galaxies within galactic clusters have been found to be consistent with dark matter observations.

Another important tool for future dark matter observations is gravitational lensing. Lensing relies on the bending of light, as described by general relativity, to predict masses without relying on observations of the distant galaxies dynamics, and so is a completely independent means of measuring the dark matter. Strong lensing, the observed distortion of background galaxies into arcs when their light passes through such a gravitational lens, has been observed around a few distant clusters including Abell 1689 (pictured).[50] By measuring the distortion geometry, the mass of the intervening cluster causing the phenomena can be obtained. In the dozens of cases where this has been done, the mass-to-light ratios obtained correspond to the dynamical dark matter measurements of clusters.[51]

The Bullet Cluster: HST image with overlays. The total projected mass distribution reconstructed from strong and weak gravitational lensing is shown in blue, while the X-ray emitting hot gas observed with Chandra is shown in red.

Weak gravitational lensing investigates minute distortions of galaxies, using statistical analyses of vast galaxy surveys, caused by foreground objects. By examining the apparent shear deformation of the adjacent background galaxies, astrophysicists can characterize the mean distribution of dark matter and have found mass-to-light ratios that correspond to dark matter densities predicted by other large-scale structure measurements.[52] The correspondence of the two gravitational lens techniques to other dark matter measurements has convinced almost all astrophysicists that dark matter actually exists as a major component of the universe's composition.

The most direct observational evidence to date for dark matter comes from a system known as the Bullet Cluster. In most regions of the universe, dark matter and visible matter are found together,[53] as expected due to their mutual gravitational attraction. In the Bullet Cluster however, a collision between two galaxy clusters appears to have caused a separation of dark matter and baryonic matter. X-ray observations show that much of the baryonic matter (in the form of 107–108 Kelvin[54] gas or plasma) in the system is concentrated in the center of the system. Electromagnetic interactions between passing gas particles caused them to slow and settle near the point of impact of those galaxies. However, weak gravitational lensing observations of the same system show that much of the mass resides outside of the central region of baryonic gas. Because dark matter does not interact by electromagnetic forces, it would not have been slowed as the X-ray visible gas, so the dark matter components of the two clusters passed through each other without slowing substantially, throwing the dark matter further out than that of the baryonic gas. This accounts for the separation. Unlike the galactic rotation curves, this evidence for dark matter is independent of the details of Newtonian gravity, so it is claimed to be direct evidence of the existence of dark matter.[54]

Another galaxy cluster, known as the Train Wreck Cluster/Abell 520, initially appeared to have an unusually massive and dark matter core containing few of the cluster's galaxies, which presented problems for standard dark matter models.[55] However, more precise observations since that time have shown that the earlier observations were misleading, and that the distribution of dark matter and its ratio to normal matter are very similar to those in galaxies in general, making novel explanations unnecessary.[56]

The observed behavior of dark matter in clusters constrains whether and how much dark matter scatters off other dark matter particles, quantified as its self-interaction cross section. More simply, the question is whether the dark matter has pressure, and thus can be described as a perfect fluid that has no damping.[57] The distribution of mass (and thus dark matter) in galaxy clusters has been used to argue both for[58] and against[59] the existence of significant self-interaction in dark matter. Specifically, the distribution of dark matter in merging clusters such as the Bullet Cluster shows that dark matter scatters off other dark matter particles only very weakly if at all.[60]

A currently ongoing survey using the Subaru telescope is using weak lensing to analyze background light, bent by dark matter, to determine how dark matter is distributed in the foreground. The analysis of dark matter and its effects could determine how dark matter assembled over time, which can be related to the history of the expansion of the universe, and could reveal some physical properties of dark energy, its strength and how it has changed over time. The survey is observing galaxies more than a billion light-years away, across an area greater than a thousand square degrees (about one fortieth of the entire sky).[61][62]

Cosmic microwave background

The cosmic microwave background by WMAP

Angular fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background (CMB) spectrum provide evidence for dark matter. Since the 1964 discovery and confirmation of the CMB radiation,[63] many measurements of the CMB have supported and constrained this theory. The NASA Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE) found that the CMB spectrum to be a blackbody spectrum with a temperature of 2.726 K. In 1992, COBE detected fluctuations (anisotropies) in the CMB spectrum, at a level of about one part in 105.[64] In the following decade, CMB anisotropies were further investigated by a large number of ground-based and balloon experiments. The primary goal of those was to measure the angular scale of the first acoustic peak of the power spectrum of the anisotropies, for which COBE did not have sufficient resolution. In 2000–2001, several experiments, most notably BOOMERanG[65] found the universe to be almost spatially flat by measuring the typical angular size of the anisotropies. During the 1990s, the first peak was measured with increasing sensitivity and by 2000 the BOOMERanG experiment reported that the highest power fluctuations occur at scales of approximately one degree. These measurements were able to rule out cosmic strings as the leading theory of cosmic structure formation, and suggested cosmic inflation was the correct theory.

A number of ground-based interferometers provided measurements of the fluctuations with higher accuracy over the next three years, including the Very Small Array, the Degree Angular Scale Interferometer (DASI) and the Cosmic Background Imager (CBI). DASI made the first detection of the polarization of the CMB,[66][67] and the CBI provided the first E-mode polarization spectrum with compelling evidence that it is out of phase with the T-mode spectrum.[68] COBE's successor, the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) has provided the most detailed measurements of (large-scale) anisotropies in the CMB as of 2009 with ESA's Planck spacecraft returning more detailed results in 2012-2014.[69] WMAP's measurements played the key role in establishing the current Standard Model of Cosmology, namely the Lambda-CDM model, a flat universe dominated by dark energy, supplemented by dark matter and atoms with density fluctuations seeded by a Gaussian, adiabatic, nearly scale invariant process. The basic properties of this universe are determined by five numbers: the density of matter, the density of atoms, the age of the universe (or equivalently, the Hubble constant today), the amplitude of the initial fluctuations, and their scale dependence.

A successful Big Bang cosmology theory must fit with all available astronomical observations, including the CMB. In cosmology, the CMB is explained as relic radiation from shortly after the big bang. The anisotropies in the CMB are explained as being the result of acoustic oscillations in the photon-baryon plasma (prior to the emission of the CMB after the photons decouple from the baryons 379,000 years after the Big Bang) whose restoring force is gravity.[70] Ordinary (baryonic) matter interacts strongly by way of radiation whereas dark matter particles, such as WIMPs for example, do not; both affect the oscillations by way of their gravity, so the two forms of matter will have different effects. The typical angular scales of the oscillations in the CMB, measured as the power spectrum of the CMB anisotropies, thus reveal the different effects of baryonic matter and dark matter. The CMB power spectrum shows a large first peak and smaller successive peaks, with three peaks resolved as of 2009.[69] The first peak tells mostly about the density of baryonic matter and the third peak mostly about the density of dark matter, measuring the density of matter and the density of atoms in the universe.[clarification needed]

Sky surveys and baryon acoustic oscillations

The acoustic oscillations in the early universe (see the previous section) have left their imprint on visible matter by way of Baryon Acoustic Oscillation (BAO) clustering, in a way that can be measured with sky surveys such as the Sloan Digital Sky Survey and the 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey.[71] These measurements are consistent with those of the CMB derived from the WMAP spacecraft and further constrain the Lambda CDM model and dark matter. Note that the CMB data and the BAO data measure the acoustic oscillations at very different distance scales.[70]

Type Ia supernovae distance measurements

Type Ia supernovae can be used as "standard candles" to measure extragalactic distances, and extensive data sets of these supernovae can be used to constrain cosmological models.[72] They constrain the dark energy density ΩΛ = ~0.713 for a flat, Lambda CDM universe and the parameter w for a quintessence model. Once again, the values obtained are roughly consistent with those derived from the WMAP observations and further constrain the Lambda CDM model and (indirectly) dark matter.[70]

Lyman-alpha forest

In astronomical spectroscopy, the Lyman-alpha forest is the sum of the absorption lines arising from the Lyman-alpha transition of the neutral hydrogen in the spectra of distant galaxies and quasars. Observations of the Lyman-alpha forest can also be used to constrain cosmological models.[73] These constraints are again in agreement with those obtained from WMAP data.

Structure formation

3D map of the large-scale distribution of dark matter, reconstructed from measurements of weak gravitational lensing with the Hubble Space Telescope.[74]

Dark matter is crucial to the Big Bang model of cosmology as a component which corresponds directly to measurements of the parameters associated with Friedmann cosmology solutions to general relativity. In particular, measurements of the cosmic microwave background anisotropies correspond to a cosmology where much of the matter interacts with photons more weakly than the known forces that couple light interactions to baryonic matter. Likewise, a significant amount of non-baryonic, cold matter is necessary to explain the large-scale structure of the universe.

Observations suggest that structure formation in the universe proceeds hierarchically, with the smallest structures collapsing first and followed by galaxies and then clusters of galaxies. As the structures collapse in the evolving universe, they begin to "light up" as the baryonic matter heats up through gravitational contraction and approaches hydrostatic pressure balance. Originally, baryonic matter had too high a temperature, and pressure left over from the Big Bang to allow collapse and form smaller structures, such as stars, via the Jeans instability. Dark matter acts as a compactor allowing the creation of structure where there would not have been any. This model not only corresponds with statistical surveying of the visible structure in the universe but also corresponds precisely to the dark matter predictions of the cosmic microwave background.

This bottom up model of structure formation requires something like cold dark matter to succeed. Large computer simulations of billions of dark matter particles have been used[75] to confirm that the cold dark matter model of structure formation is consistent with the structures observed in the universe through galaxy surveys, such as the Sloan Digital Sky Survey and 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey, as well as observations of the Lyman-alpha forest. These studies have been crucial in constructing the Lambda-CDM model which measures the cosmological parameters, including the fraction of the universe made up of baryons and dark matter. The recent discovery of the structure of Laniakea, a 500 million light year structure is currently the limit to structural formation in the universe. However, Laniakea is not gravitationally bound and is projected to be torn apart by dark energy.[76]

There are, however, several points of tension between observation and simulations of structure formation driven by dark matter. There is evidence that there exist 10 to 100 times fewer small galaxies than permitted by what the dark matter theory of galaxy formation predicts.[77][78] This is known as the dwarf galaxy problem. In addition, the simulations predict dark matter distributions with a very dense cusp near the centers of galaxies, but the observed halos are smoother than predicted.

History of the search for its composition

Question dropshade.png Open problem in physics:
What is dark matter? How is it generated? Is it related to supersymmetry?
(more open problems in physics)

Although dark matter had historically been inferred from many astronomical observations, its composition long remained speculative. Early theories of dark matter concentrated on hidden heavy normal objects (such as black holes, neutron stars, faint old white dwarfs, and brown dwarfs) as the possible candidates for dark matter, collectively known as massive compact halo objects or MACHOs. Astronomical surveys for gravitational microlensing, including the MACHO, EROS and OGLE projects, along with Hubble telescope searches for ultra-faint stars, have not found enough of these hidden MACHOs.[79][80][81] Some hard-to-detect baryonic matter, such as MACHOs and some forms of gas, were additionally speculated to make a contribution to the overall dark matter content, but evidence indicated such would constitute only a small portion.[82][83][84]

Furthermore, data from a number of lines of other evidence, including galaxy rotation curves, gravitational lensing, structure formation, and the fraction of baryons in clusters and the cluster abundance combined with independent evidence for the baryon density, indicated that 85–90% of the mass in the universe does not interact with the electromagnetic force. This "nonbaryonic dark matter" is evident through its gravitational effect. Consequently, the most commonly held view was that dark matter is primarily non-baryonic, made of one or more elementary particles other than the usual electrons, protons, neutrons, and known neutrinos. The most commonly proposed particles then became WIMPs (Weakly Interacting Massive Particles, including neutralinos), axions, or sterile neutrinos, though many other possible candidates have been proposed.

Dark matter candidates can be divided into three classes, called cold, warm and hot dark matter.[85] These categories do not correspond to an actual temperature, but instead refer to how fast the particles were moving, thus how far they moved due to random motions in the early universe, before they slowed due to the expansion of the universe – this is an important distance called the "free streaming length". Primordial density fluctuations smaller than this free-streaming length get washed out as particles move from overdense to underdense regions, while fluctuations larger than the free-streaming length are unaffected; therefore this free-streaming length sets a minimum scale for structure formation.

  • Cold dark matter – objects with a free-streaming length much smaller than a protogalaxy.[86]
  • Warm dark matter – particles with a free-streaming length similar to a protogalaxy.
  • Hot dark matter – particles with a free-streaming length much larger than a protogalaxy.[87]

Though a fourth category had been considered early on, called mixed dark matter, it was quickly eliminated (from the 1990s) since the discovery of dark energy.

As an example, Davis et al. wrote in 1985:

Candidate particles can be grouped into three categories on the basis of their effect on the fluctuation spectrum (Bond et al. 1983). If the dark matter is composed of abundant light particles which remain relativistic until shortly before recombination, then it may be termed "hot". The best candidate for hot dark matter is a neutrino ... A second possibility is for the dark matter particles to interact more weakly than neutrinos, to be less abundant, and to have a mass of order 1 keV. Such particles are termed "warm dark matter", because they have lower thermal velocities than massive neutrinos ... there are at present few candidate particles which fit this description. Gravitinos and photinos have been suggested (Pagels and Primack 1982; Bond, Szalay and Turner 1982) ... Any particles which became nonrelativistic very early, and so were able to diffuse a negligible distance, are termed "cold" dark matter (CDM). There are many candidates for CDM including supersymmetric particles.[88]

The full calculations are quite technical, but an approximate dividing line is that "warm" dark matter particles became non-relativistic when the universe was approximately 1 year old and 1 millionth of its present size; standard hot big bang theory implies the universe was then in the radiation-dominated era (photons and neutrinos), with a photon temperature 2.7 million K. Standard physical cosmology gives the particle horizon size as 2ct in the radiation-dominated era, thus 2 light-years, and a region of this size would expand to 2 million light years today (if there were no structure formation). The actual free-streaming length is roughly 5 times larger than the above length, since the free-streaming length continues to grow slowly as particle velocities decrease inversely with the scale factor after they become non-relativistic; therefore, in this example the free-streaming length would correspond to 10 million light-years or 3 Mpc today, which is around the size containing on average the mass of a large galaxy.

The above temperature of 2.7 million K gives a typical photon energy of 250 electron-volts, thereby setting a typical mass scale for "warm" dark matter: particles much more massive than this, such as GeV – TeV mass WIMPs, would become non-relativistic much earlier than 1 year after the Big Bang and thus have a free-streaming length much smaller than a proto-galaxy, making them cold dark matter. Conversely, much lighter particles, such as neutrinos with masses of only a few eV, have a free-streaming length much larger than a proto-galaxy, thus making them hot dark matter.

Cold dark matter

Today, cold dark matter is the simplest explanation for most cosmological observations. "Cold" dark matter is dark matter composed of constituents with a free-streaming length much smaller than the ancestor of a galaxy-scale perturbation. This is currently the area of greatest interest for dark matter research, as hot dark matter does not seem to be viable for galaxy and galaxy cluster formation, and most particle candidates become non-relativistic at very early times, hence are classified as cold.

The composition of the constituents of cold dark matter is currently unknown. Possibilities range from large objects like MACHOs (such as black holes[89]) or RAMBOs, to new particles like WIMPs and axions. Possibilities involving normal baryonic matter include brown dwarfs, other stellar remnants such as white dwarfs, or perhaps small, dense chunks of heavy elements.

Studies of big bang nucleosynthesis and gravitational lensing have convinced most scientists[12][90][91][92][93][94] that MACHOs of any type cannot be more than a small fraction of the total dark matter.[10][90] Black holes of nearly any mass are ruled out as a primary dark matter constituent by a variety of searches and constraints.[90][92] According to A. Peter: "... the only really plausible dark-matter candidates are new particles."[91]

The DAMA/NaI experiment and its successor DAMA/LIBRA have claimed to directly detect dark matter particles passing through the Earth, but many scientists remain skeptical, as negative results from similar experiments seem incompatible with the DAMA results.

Many supersymmetric models naturally give rise to stable dark matter candidates in the form of the Lightest Supersymmetric Particle (LSP). Separately, heavy sterile neutrinos exist in non-supersymmetric extensions to the standard model that explain the small neutrino mass through the seesaw mechanism.

Warm dark matter

Warm dark matter refers to particles with a free-streaming length comparable to the size of a region which subsequently evolved into a dwarf galaxy. This leads to predictions which are very similar to cold dark matter on large scales, including the CMB, galaxy clustering and large galaxy rotation curves, but with less small-scale density perturbations. This reduces the predicted abundance of dwarf galaxies and may lead to lower density of dark matter in the central parts of large galaxies; some researchers consider this may be a better fit to observations. A challenge for this model is that there are no very well-motivated particle physics candidates with the required mass ~ 300 eV to 3000 eV.

There have been no particles discovered so far that can be categorized as warm dark matter. There is a postulated candidate for the warm dark matter category, which is the sterile neutrino: a heavier, slower form of neutrino which does not even interact through the Weak force unlike regular neutrinos. Interestingly, some modified gravity theories, such as Scalar-tensor-vector gravity, also require that a warm dark matter exist to make their equations work out.

Hot dark matter

Hot dark matter consists of particles that have a free-streaming length much larger than that of a proto-galaxy.

An example of hot dark matter is already known: the neutrino. Neutrinos were discovered quite separately from the search for dark matter, and long before it seriously began: they were first postulated in 1930, and first detected in 1956. Neutrinos have a very small mass: at least 100,000 times less massive than an electron. Other than gravity, neutrinos only interact with normal matter via the weak force making them very difficult to detect (the weak force only works over a small distance, thus a neutrino will only trigger a weak force event if it hits a nucleus directly head-on). This would make them 'weakly interacting light particles' (WILPs), as opposed to cold dark matter's theoretical candidates, the weakly interacting massive particles (WIMPs).

There are three different known flavors of neutrinos (i.e., the electron, muon, and tau neutrinos), and their masses are slightly different. The resolution to the solar neutrino problem demonstrated that these three types of neutrinos actually change and oscillate from one flavor to the others and back as they are in-flight. It is hard to determine an exact upper bound on the collective average mass of the three neutrinos (let alone a mass for any of the three individually). For example, if the average neutrino mass were chosen to be over 50 eV/c2 (which is still less than 1/10,000th of the mass of an electron), just by the sheer number of them in the universe, the universe would collapse due to their mass. So other observations have served to estimate an upper-bound for the neutrino mass. Using cosmic microwave background data and other methods, the current conclusion is that their average mass probably does not exceed 0.3 eV/c2 Thus, the normal forms of neutrinos cannot be responsible for the measured dark matter component from cosmology.[95]

Hot dark matter was popular for a time in the early 1980s, but it suffers from a severe problem: because all galaxy-size density fluctuations get washed out by free-streaming, the first objects that can form are huge supercluster-size pancakes, which then were theorised somehow to fragment into galaxies. Deep-field observations clearly show that galaxies formed at early times, with clusters and superclusters forming later as galaxies clump together, so any model dominated by hot dark matter is seriously in conflict with observations.

Mixed dark matter

Mixed dark matter is a now obsolete model, with a specifically chosen mass ratio of 80% cold dark matter and 20% hot dark matter (neutrinos) content. Though it is presumable that hot dark matter coexists with cold dark matter in any case, there was a very specific reason for choosing this particular ratio of hot to cold dark matter in this model. During the early 1990s it became steadily clear that a universe with critical density of cold dark matter did not fit the COBE and large-scale galaxy clustering observations; either the 80/20 mixed dark matter model, or LambdaCDM, were able to reconcile these. With the discovery of the accelerating universe from supernovae, and more accurate measurements of CMB anisotropy and galaxy clustering, the mixed dark matter model was essentially ruled out while the concordance LambdaCDM model remained a good fit.


If the dark matter within the Milky Way is made up of Weakly Interacting Massive Particles (WIMPs), then millions, possibly billions, of WIMPs must pass through every square centimeter of the Earth each second.[96][97] There are many experiments currently running, or planned, aiming to test this hypothesis by searching for WIMPs. Although WIMPs are the historically more popular dark matter candidate for searches,[12] there are experiments searching for other particle candidates; the Axion Dark Matter eXperiment (ADMX) is currently searching for the dark matter axion, a well-motivated and constrained dark matter source. It is also possible that dark matter consists of very heavy hidden sector particles which only interact with ordinary matter via gravity.

These experiments can be divided into two classes: direct detection experiments, which search for the scattering of dark matter particles off atomic nuclei within a detector; and indirect detection, which look for the products of WIMP annihilations.[22]

An alternative approach to the detection of WIMPs in nature is to produce them in the laboratory. Experiments with the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) may be able to detect WIMPs produced in collisions of the LHC proton beams. Because a WIMP has negligible interactions with matter, it may be detected indirectly as (large amounts of) missing energy and momentum which escape the LHC detectors, provided all the other (non-negligible) collision products are detected.[98] These experiments could show that WIMPs can be created, but it would still require a direct detection experiment to show that they exist in sufficient numbers to account for dark matter.

Direct detection experiments

Direct detection experiments usually operate in deep underground laboratories to reduce the background from cosmic rays. These include: the Stawell mine (Australia); the Soudan mine; the SNOLAB underground laboratory at Sudbury, Ontario (Canada); the Gran Sasso National Laboratory (Italy); the Canfranc Underground Laboratory (Spain); the Boulby Underground Laboratory (United Kingdom); the Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory, South Dakota (United States); and the Particle and Astrophysical Xenon Detector (China).

The majority of present experiments use one of two detector technologies: cryogenic detectors, operating at temperatures below 100mK, detect the heat produced when a particle hits an atom in a crystal absorber such as germanium. Noble liquid detectors detect the flash of scintillation light produced by a particle collision in liquid xenon or argon. Cryogenic detector experiments include: CDMS, CRESST, EDELWEISS, EURECA. Noble liquid experiments include ZEPLIN, XENON, DEAP, ArDM, WARP, DarkSide, PandaX, and LUX, the Large Underground Xenon experiment. Both of these detector techniques are capable of distinguishing background particles which scatter off electrons, from dark matter particles which scatter off nuclei. Other experiments include SIMPLE and PICASSO.

The DAMA/NaI, DAMA/LIBRA experiments have detected an annual modulation in the event rate,[99] which they claim is due to dark matter particles. (As the Earth orbits the Sun, the velocity of the detector relative to the dark matter halo will vary by a small amount depending on the time of year). This claim is so far unconfirmed and difficult to reconcile with the negative results of other experiments assuming that the WIMP scenario is correct.[100]

Directional detection of dark matter is a search strategy based on the motion of the Solar System around the Galactic Center.[101][102][103][104]

By using a low pressure TPC, it is possible to access information on recoiling tracks (3D reconstruction if possible) and to constrain the WIMP-nucleus kinematics. WIMPs coming from the direction in which the Sun is travelling (roughly in the direction of the Cygnus constellation) may then be separated from background noise, which should be isotropic. Directional dark matter experiments include DMTPC, DRIFT, Newage and MIMAC.

On 17 December 2009, CDMS researchers reported two possible WIMP candidate events. They estimate that the probability that these events are due to a known background (neutrons or misidentified beta or gamma events) is 23%, and conclude "this analysis cannot be interpreted as significant evidence for WIMP interactions, but we cannot reject either event as signal."[105]

More recently, on 4 September 2011, researchers using the CRESST detectors presented evidence[106] of 67 collisions occurring in detector crystals from subatomic particles, calculating there is a less than 1 in 10,000 chance that all were caused by known sources of interference or contamination. It is quite possible then that many of these collisions were caused by WIMPs, and/or other unknown particles.

Indirect detection experiments

Collage of six cluster collisions with dark matter maps. The clusters were observed in a study of how dark matter in clusters of galaxies behaves when the clusters collide.[107]
Video about the potential gamma-ray detection of dark matter annihilation around supermassive black holes. (Duration 3:13, also see file description.)

Indirect detection experiments search for the products of WIMP annihilation or decay. If WIMPs are Majorana particles (WIMPs are their own antiparticle) then two WIMPs could annihilate to produce gamma rays or Standard Model particle-antiparticle pairs. Additionally, if the WIMP is unstable, WIMPs could decay into standard model particles. These processes could be detected indirectly through an excess of gamma rays, antiprotons or positrons emanating from regions of high dark matter density. The detection of such a signal is not conclusive evidence for dark matter, as the production of gamma rays from other sources is not fully understood.[12][22]

The EGRET gamma ray telescope observed more gamma rays than expected from the Milky Way, but scientists concluded that this was most likely due to a mis-estimation of the telescope's sensitivity.[108]

The Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope, launched 11 June 2008, is searching for gamma rays from dark matter annihilation and decay.[109] In April 2012, an analysis[110] of previously available data from its Large Area Telescope instrument produced strong statistical evidence of a 130 GeV line in the gamma radiation coming from the center of the Milky Way. At the time, WIMP annihilation was the most probable explanation for that line.[111]

At higher energies, ground-based gamma-ray telescopes have set limits on the annihilation of dark matter in dwarf spheroidal galaxies[112] and in clusters of galaxies.[113]

The PAMELA experiment (launched 2006) has detected a larger number of positrons than expected. These extra positrons could be produced by dark matter annihilation, but may also come from pulsars. No excess of anti-protons has been observed.[114] The Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer on the International Space Station is designed to directly measure the fraction of cosmic rays which are positrons. The first results, published in April 2013, indicate an excess of high-energy cosmic rays which could potentially be due to annihilation of dark matter.[115][116][117][118][119][120]

A few of the WIMPs passing through the Sun or Earth may scatter off atoms and lose energy. This way a large population of WIMPs may accumulate at the center of these bodies, increasing the chance that two will collide and annihilate. This could produce a distinctive signal in the form of high-energy neutrinos originating from the center of the Sun or Earth.[121] It is generally considered that the detection of such a signal would be the strongest indirect proof of WIMP dark matter.[12] High-energy neutrino telescopes such as AMANDA, IceCube and ANTARES are searching for this signal.

WIMP annihilation from the Milky Way Galaxy as a whole may also be detected in the form of various annihilation products.[122] The Galactic Center is a particularly good place to look because the density of dark matter may be very high there.[123]

Alternative theories

Mass in extra dimensions

In some multidimensional theories, the force of gravity is the unique force able to have an effect across all the various extra dimensions,[17] which would explain the relative weakness of the force of gravity compared to the other known forces of nature that would not be able to cross into extra dimensions: electromagnetism, strong interaction, and weak interaction.

In that case, dark matter would be a perfect candidate for matter that would exist in other dimensions and that could only interact with the matter on our dimensions through gravity. That dark matter located on different dimensions could potentially aggregate in the same way as the matter in our visible universe does, forming exotic galaxies.[16]

Topological defects

Dark matter could consist of primordial defects (defects originating with the birth of the universe) in the topology of quantum fields, which would contain energy and therefore gravitate. This possibility may be investigated by the use of an orbital network of atomic clocks, which would register the passage of topological defects by monitoring the synchronization of the clocks. The Global Positioning System may be able to operate as such a network.[124]

Modified gravity

Numerous alternative theories have been proposed to explain these observations without the need for a large amount of undetected matter. Most of these theories modify the laws of gravity established by Newton and Einstein.

The earliest modified gravity model to emerge was Mordehai Milgrom's Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND) in 1983, which adjusts Newton's laws to create a stronger gravitational field when gravitational acceleration levels become tiny (such as near the rim of a galaxy). It had some success explaining galactic-scale features, such as rotational velocity curves of elliptical galaxies, and dwarf elliptical galaxies, but did not successfully explain galaxy cluster gravitational lensing. However, MOND was not relativistic, since it was just a straight adjustment of the older Newtonian account of gravitation, not of the newer account in Einstein's general relativity. Soon after 1983, attempts were made to bring MOND into conformity with general relativity; this is an ongoing process, and many competing hypotheses have emerged based around the original MOND model—including TeVeS, MOG or STV gravity, and phenomenological covariant approach,[125] among others.

In 2007, John W. Moffat proposed a modified gravity hypothesis based on the nonsymmetric gravitational theory (NGT) that claims to account for the behavior of colliding galaxies.[126] This model requires the presence of non-relativistic neutrinos, or other candidates for (cold) dark matter, to work.

Another proposal uses a gravitational backreaction in an emerging theoretical field that seeks to explain gravity between objects as an action, a reaction, and then a back-reaction. Simply, an object A affects an object B, and the object B then re-affects object A, and so on: creating a sort of feedback loop that strengthens gravity.[127]

In 2008, another group has proposed a modification of large-scale gravity in a hypothesis named "dark fluid". In this formulation, the attractive gravitational effects attributed to dark matter are instead a side-effect of dark energy. Dark fluid combines dark matter and dark energy in a single energy field that produces different effects at different scales. This treatment is a simplified approach to a previous fluid-like model called the generalized Chaplygin gas model where the whole of spacetime is a compressible gas.[128] Dark fluid can be compared to an atmospheric system. Atmospheric pressure causes air to expand, but part of the air can collapse to form clouds. In the same way, the dark fluid might generally expand, but it also could collect around galaxies to help hold them together.[128]

Another set of proposals is based on the possibility of a double metric tensor for space-time.[129] It has been argued that time-reversed solutions in general relativity require such double metric for consistency, and that both dark matter and dark energy can be understood in terms of time-reversed solutions of general relativity.[130]

Fractality of spacetime

Applying relativity to fractal non-differentiable spacetime, Laurent Nottale suggests that potential energy may arise due to the fractality of spacetime, which would account for the missing mass-energy observed at cosmological scales.[131][132]

Popular culture

Mention of dark matter is made in some video games and other works of fiction. In such cases, it is usually attributed extraordinary physical or magical properties. Such descriptions are often inconsistent with the properties of dark matter proposed in physics and cosmology.

See also


  1. Since dark energy, by convention, does not count as "matter", this is 26.8/(4.9 + 26.8)=0.845


  1. "Hubble Finds Dark Matter Ring in Galaxy Cluster".<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  2. Ade, P. A. R.; Aghanim, N.; Armitage-Caplan, C.; (Planck Collaboration); et al. (22 March 2013). "Planck 2013 results. I. Overview of products and scientific results – Table 9". Astronomy and Astrophysics. 1303: 5062. arXiv:1303.5062. Bibcode:2014A&A...571A...1P. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201321529.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  3. Francis, Matthew (22 March 2013). "First Planck results: the Universe is still weird and interesting". Arstechnica.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  4. "Planck captures portrait of the young Universe, revealing earliest light". University of Cambridge. 21 March 2013. Retrieved 21 March 2013.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  5. Sean Carroll, Ph.D., Cal Tech, 2007, The Teaching Company, Dark Matter, Dark Energy: The Dark Side of the Universe, Guidebook Part 2 page 46, Accessed Oct. 7, 2013, "...dark matter: An invisible, essentially collisionless component of matter that makes up about 25 percent of the energy density of the universe... it's a different kind of particle... something not yet observed in the laboratory..."
  6. Ferris, Timothy. "Dark Matter". Retrieved 10 June 2015.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  7. Zwicky, F. (1933), "Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln", Helvetica Physica Acta, 6: 110–127, Bibcode:1933AcHPh...6..110Z<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles> See also Zwicky, F. (1937), "On the Masses of Nebulae and of Clusters of Nebulae", Astrophysical Journal, 86: 217, Bibcode:1937ApJ....86..217Z, doi:10.1086/143864<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  8. First observational evidence of dark matter. Darkmatterphysics.com. Retrieved 6 August 2013.
  9. 9.0 9.1 Rubin, Vera C.; Ford, W. Kent, Jr. (February 1970). "Rotation of the Andromeda Nebula from a Spectroscopic Survey of Emission Regions". The Astrophysical Journal. 159: 379–403. Bibcode:1970ApJ...159..379R. doi:10.1086/150317.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  10. 10.0 10.1 10.2 10.3 Copi, C. J.; Schramm, D. N.; Turner, M. S. (1995). "Big-Bang Nucleosynthesis and the Baryon Density of the Universe". Science. 267 (5195): 192–199. arXiv:astro-ph/9407006. Bibcode:1995Sci...267..192C. doi:10.1126/science.7809624. PMID 7809624.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  11. Bergstrom, L. (2000). "Non-baryonic dark matter: Observational evidence and detection methods". Reports on Progress in Physics. 63 (5): 793–841. arXiv:hep-ph/0002126. Bibcode:2000RPPh...63..793B. doi:10.1088/0034-4885/63/5/2r3.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  12. 12.0 12.1 12.2 12.3 12.4 12.5 12.6 12.7 12.8 12.9 Bertone, G.; Hooper, D.; Silk, J. (2005). "Particle dark matter: Evidence, candidates and constraints". Physics Reports. 405 (5–6): 279–390. arXiv:hep-ph/0404175. Bibcode:2005PhR...405..279B. doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2004.08.031.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  13. Angus, G. (2013). "Cosmological simulations in MOND: the cluster scale halo mass function with light sterile neutrinos". Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. 436: 202–211. arXiv:1309.6094. Bibcode:2013MNRAS.436..202A. doi:10.1093/mnras/stt1564.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  14. Trimble, V. (1987). "Existence and nature of dark matter in the universe". Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics. 25: 425–472. Bibcode:1987ARA&A..25..425T. doi:10.1146/annurev.aa.25.090187.002233.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  15. Dark matter. CERN. Retrieved on 17 November 2014.
  16. 16.0 16.1 16.2 Siegfried, T. (5 July 1999). "Hidden Space Dimensions May Permit Parallel Universes, Explain Cosmic Mysteries". The Dallas Morning News.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  17. 17.0 17.1 Extra dimensions, gravitons, and tiny black holes. CERN. Retrieved on 17 November 2014.
  18. Jarosik, N.; et al. (2011). "Seven-Year Wilson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Sky Maps, Systematic Errors, and Basic Results". Astrophysical Journal Supplement. 192 (2): 14. arXiv:1001.4744. Bibcode:2011ApJS..192...14J. doi:10.1088/0067-0049/192/2/14.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  19. Kroupa, P.; et al. (2010). "Local-Group tests of dark-matter Concordance Cosmology: Towards a new paradigm for structure formation". Astronomy and Astrophysics. 523: 32–54. arXiv:1006.1647. Bibcode:2010A&A...523A..32K. doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201014892.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  20. Achim Weiss, "Big Bang Nucleosynthesis: Cooking up the first light elements" in: Einstein Online Vol. 2 (2006), 1017
  21. Raine, D.; Thomas, T. (2001). An Introduction to the Science of Cosmology. IOP Publishing. p. 30. ISBN 0-7503-0405-7.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  22. 22.0 22.1 22.2 22.3 Bertone, G.; Merritt, D. (2005). "Dark Matter Dynamics and Indirect Detection". Modern Physics Letters A. 20 (14): 1021–1036. arXiv:astro-ph/0504422. Bibcode:2005MPLA...20.1021B. doi:10.1142/S0217732305017391.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  23. "Serious Blow to Dark Matter Theories?" (Press release). European Southern Observatory. 18 April 2012.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  24. "The Hidden Lives of Galaxies: Hidden Mass". Imagine the Universe!. NASA/GSFC.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  25. Kuijken K. and Gilmore G. (1989). "The Mass Distribution in the Galactic Disc - Part III - the Local Volume Mass Density". Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. 239: 651. Bibcode:1989MNRAS.239..651K. doi:10.1093/mnras/239.2.651.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  26. Zwicky, F. (1933). "Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln". Helvetica Physica Acta. 6: 110–127. Bibcode:1933AcHPh...6..110Z.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  27. Zwicky, F. (1937). "On the Masses of Nebulae and of Clusters of Nebulae". The Astrophysical Journal. 86: 217. Bibcode:1937ApJ....86..217Z. doi:10.1086/143864.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  28. 28.0 28.1 Some details of Zwicky's calculation and of more modern values are given in Richmond, M., Using the virial theorem: the mass of a cluster of galaxies, retrieved 10 July 2007<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  29. Freese, Katerine (2014). The Cosmic Cocktail: Three Parts Dark Matter. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0691153353.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  30. "First Signs of Self-interacting Dark Matter?". ESO Press Release. European Southern Observatory. Retrieved 15 April 2015.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  31. Freeman, K.; McNamara, G. (2006). In Search of Dark Matter. Birkhäuser. p. 37. ISBN 0-387-27616-5.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  32. Jörg, D.; et al. (2012). "A filament of dark matter between two clusters of galaxies". Nature. 487 (7406): 202. arXiv:1207.0809. Bibcode:2012Natur.487..202D. doi:10.1038/nature11224.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  33. Babcock, H, 1939, "The rotation of the Andromeda Nebula", Lick Observatory bulletin ; no. 498
  34. Bosma, A. (1978). "The distribution and kinematics of neutral hydrogen in spiral galaxies of various morphological types" (Ph.D. Thesis). Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  35. Rubin, V.; Thonnard, W. K. Jr.; Ford, N. (1980). "Rotational Properties of 21 Sc Galaxies with a Large Range of Luminosities and Radii from NGC 4605 (R = 4kpc) to UGC 2885 (R = 122kpc)". The Astrophysical Journal. 238: 471. Bibcode:1980ApJ...238..471R. doi:10.1086/158003.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  36. de Blok, W. J. G.; McGaugh, S. S.; Bosma, A.; Rubin, V. C. (2001). "Mass Density Profiles of Low Surface Brightness Galaxies". The Astrophysical Journal Letters. 552 (1): L23–L26. arXiv:astro-ph/0103102. Bibcode:2001ApJ...552L..23D. doi:10.1086/320262.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  37. Salucci, P.; Borriello, A. (2003). "The Intriguing Distribution of Dark Matter in Galaxies". Lecture Notes in Physics. Lecture Notes in Physics. 616: 66–77. arXiv:astro-ph/0203457. Bibcode:2003LNP...616...66S. doi:10.1007/3-540-36539-7_5. ISBN 978-3-540-00711-1.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  38. Koopmans, L. V. E.; Treu, T. (2003). "The Structure and Dynamics of Luminous and Dark Matter in the Early-Type Lens Galaxy of 0047–281 at z = 0.485". The Astrophysical Journal. 583 (2): 606–615. arXiv:astro-ph/0205281. Bibcode:2003ApJ...583..606K. doi:10.1086/345423.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  39. Dekel, A.; et al. (2005). "Lost and found dark matter in elliptical galaxies". Nature. 437 (7059): 707–710. arXiv:astro-ph/0501622. Bibcode:2005Natur.437..707D. doi:10.1038/nature03970. PMID 16193046.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  40. Governato, F.; et al. (2010). "Bulgeless dwarf galaxies and dark matter cores from supernova-driven outflows". Nature. 463 (7278): 203–206. arXiv:0911.2237. Bibcode:2010Natur.463..203G. doi:10.1038/nature08640.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  41. Ostriker, J. P.; Steinhardt, P. (2003). "New Light on Dark Matter". Science. 300 (5627): 1909–1913. arXiv:astro-ph/0306402. Bibcode:2003Sci...300.1909O. doi:10.1126/science.1085976. PMID 12817140.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  42. Faber, S. M.; Jackson, R. E. (1976). "Velocity dispersions and mass-to-light ratios for elliptical galaxies". The Astrophysical Journal. 204: 668–683. Bibcode:1976ApJ...204..668F. doi:10.1086/154215.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  43. Collins, G. W. (1978). "The Virial Theorem in Stellar Astrophysics". Pachart Press. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  44. Rejkuba, M.; Dubath, P.; Minniti, D.; Meylan, G. (2008). "Masses and M/L Ratios of Bright Globular Clusters in NGC 5128". Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union. 246: 418–422. Bibcode:2008IAUS..246..418R. doi:10.1017/S1743921308016074.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  45. Weinberg, M. D.; Blitz, L. (2006). "A Magellanic Origin for the Warp of the Galaxy". The Astrophysical Journal Letters. 641 (1): L33–L36. arXiv:astro-ph/0601694. Bibcode:2006ApJ...641L..33W. doi:10.1086/503607.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  46. Minchin, R.; et al. (2005). "A Dark Hydrogen Cloud in the Virgo Cluster". The Astrophysical Journal Letters. 622: L21–L24. arXiv:astro-ph/0502312. Bibcode:2005ApJ...622L..21M. doi:10.1086/429538.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  47. Ciardullo, R.; Jacoby, G. H.; Dejonghe, H. B. (1993). "The radial velocities of planetary nebulae in NGC 3379". The Astrophysical Journal. 414: 454–462. Bibcode:1993ApJ...414..454C. doi:10.1086/173092.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  48. Vikhlinin, A.; et al. (2006). "Chandra Sample of Nearby Relaxed Galaxy Clusters: Mass, Gas Fraction, and Mass–Temperature Relation". The Astrophysical Journal. 640 (2): 691–709. arXiv:astro-ph/0507092. Bibcode:2006ApJ...640..691V. doi:10.1086/500288.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  49. "Abell 2029: Hot News for Cold Dark Matter". Chandra X-ray Observatory. 11 June 2003.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  50. Taylor, A. N.; et al. (1998). "Gravitational Lens Magnification and the Mass of Abell 1689". The Astrophysical Journal. 501 (2): 539. arXiv:astro-ph/9801158. Bibcode:1998ApJ...501..539T. doi:10.1086/305827.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  51. Wu, X.; Chiueh, T.; Fang, L.; Xue, Y. (1998). "A comparison of different cluster mass estimates: consistency or discrepancy?". Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. 301 (3): 861–871. arXiv:astro-ph/9808179. Bibcode:1998MNRAS.301..861W. doi:10.1046/j.1365-8711.1998.02055.x.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  52. Refregier, A. (2003). "Weak gravitational lensing by large-scale structure". Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics. 41 (1): 645–668. arXiv:astro-ph/0307212. Bibcode:2003ARA&A..41..645R. doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.41.111302.102207.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  53. Massey, R.; et al. (2007). "Dark matter maps reveal cosmic scaffolding". Nature. 445 (7125): 286–290. arXiv:astro-ph/0701594. Bibcode:2007Natur.445..286M. doi:10.1038/nature05497. PMID 17206154.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  54. 54.0 54.1 Clowe, D.; et al. (2006). "A direct empirical proof of the existence of dark matter". The Astrophysical Journal. 648 (2): 109–113. arXiv:astro-ph/0608407. Bibcode:2006ApJ...648L.109C. doi:10.1086/508162.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  55. "Dark Matter Mystery Deepens in Cosmic "Train Wreck"". Chandra X-Ray Observatory. 16 August 2007.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  56. Douglas Clowe1, Maxim Markevitch, Maruša Bradač, Anthony H. Gonzalez, Sun Mi Chung, Richard Massey, and Dennis Zaritsky. "On dark peaks and missing mass: a weak-lensing mass reconstruction of the merging cluster system a520". The Astrophysical Journal. arXiv:1209.2143. Bibcode:2012ApJ...758..128C. doi:10.1088/0004-637x/758/2/128.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  57. Tiberiu, H.; Lobo, F. S. N. (2011). "Two-fluid dark matter models". Physical Review D. 83 (12): 124051. arXiv:1106.2642. Bibcode:2011PhRvD..83l4051H. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.83.124051.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  58. Spergel, D. N.; Steinhardt, P. J. (2000). "Observational evidence for self-interacting cold dark matter". Physical Review Letters. 84 (17): 3760–3763. arXiv:astro-ph/9909386. Bibcode:2000PhRvL..84.3760S. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.84.3760.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  59. Allen, S. W.; Evrard, A. E.; Mantz, A. B. (2011). "Cosmological Parameters from Observations of Galaxy Clusters". Annual Review of Astronomy & Astrophysics. 49: 409–470. arXiv:1103.4829. Bibcode:2011ARA&A..49..409A. doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081710-102514.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  60. Markevitch, M.; et al. (2004). "Direct Constraints on the Dark Matter Self-Interaction Cross Section from the Merging Galaxy Cluster 1E 0657-56". The Astrophysical Journal. 606 (2): 819–824. arXiv:astro-ph/0309303. Bibcode:2004ApJ...606..819M. doi:10.1086/383178.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  61. "Press Release - Dark Matter Map Begins to Reveal the Universe's Early History - Subaru Telescope". www.subarutelescope.org. Retrieved 3 July 2015.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  62. Miyazaki, Satoshi; Oguri, Masamune; Hamana, Takashi; Tanaka, Masayuki; Miller, Lance; Utsumi, Yousuke; Komiyama, Yutaka; Furusawa, Hisanori; Sakurai, Junya (1 July 2015). "Properties of Weak Lensing Clusters Detected on Hyper Suprime-Cam's 2.3 deg2 field". The Astrophysical Journal. 807 (1): 22. arXiv:1504.06974. Bibcode:2015ApJ...807...22M. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/807/1/22. ISSN 0004-637X.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  63. Penzias, A.A.; Wilson, R. W. (1965). "A Measurement of Excess Antenna Temperature at 4080 Mc/s". The Astrophysical Journal. 142: 419. Bibcode:1965ApJ...142..419P. doi:10.1086/148307.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  64. Boggess, N. W.; et al. (1992). "The COBE Mission: Its Design and Performance Two Years after the launch". The Astrophysical Journal. 397: 420. Bibcode:1992ApJ...397..420B. doi:10.1086/171797.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  65. Melchiorri, A.; et al. (2000). "A Measurement of Ω from the North American Test Flight of Boomerang". The Astrophysical Journal Letters. 536 (2): L63–L66. arXiv:astro-ph/9911445. Bibcode:2000ApJ...536L..63M. doi:10.1086/312744.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  66. Leitch, E. M.; et al. (2002). "Measurement of polarization with the Degree Angular Scale Interferometer". Nature. 420 (6917): 763–771. arXiv:astro-ph/0209476. Bibcode:2002Natur.420..763L. doi:10.1038/nature01271. PMID 12490940.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  67. Leitch, E. M.; et al. (2005). "Degree Angular Scale Interferometer 3 Year Cosmic Microwave Background Polarization Results". The Astrophysical Journal. 624 (1): 10–20. arXiv:astro-ph/0409357. Bibcode:2005ApJ...624...10L. doi:10.1086/428825.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  68. Readhead, A. C. S.; et al. (2004). "Polarization Observations with the Cosmic Background Imager". Science. 306 (5697): 836–844. arXiv:astro-ph/0409569. Bibcode:2004Sci...306..836R. doi:10.1126/science.1105598. PMID 15472038.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  69. 69.0 69.1 Hinshaw, G.; et al. (2009). "Five-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe Observations: Data Processing, Sky Maps, and Basic Results". The Astrophysical Journal Supplement. 180 (2): 225–245. arXiv:0803.0732. Bibcode:2009ApJS..180..225H. doi:10.1088/0067-0049/180/2/225.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  70. 70.0 70.1 70.2 Komatsu, E.; et al. (2009). "Five-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe Observations: Cosmological Interpretation". The Astrophysical Journal Supplement. 180 (2): 330–376. arXiv:0803.0547. Bibcode:2009ApJS..180..330K. doi:10.1088/0067-0049/180/2/330.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  71. Percival, W. J.; et al. (2007). "Measuring the Baryon Acoustic Oscillation scale using the Sloan Digital Sky Survey and 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey". Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. 381 (3): 1053–1066. arXiv:0705.3323. Bibcode:2007MNRAS.381.1053P. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12268.x.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  72. Kowalski, M.; et al. (2008). "Improved Cosmological Constraints from New, Old, and Combined Supernova Data Sets". The Astrophysical Journal. 686 (2): 749–778. arXiv:0804.4142. Bibcode:2008ApJ...686..749K. doi:10.1086/589937.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  73. Viel, M.; Bolton, J. S.; Haehnelt, M. G. (2009). "Cosmological and astrophysical constraints from the Lyman α forest flux probability distribution function". Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. 399 (1): L39–L43. arXiv:0907.2927. Bibcode:2009MNRAS.399L..39V. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3933.2009.00720.x.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  74. "Hubble Maps the Cosmic Web of "Clumpy" Dark Matter in 3-D" (Press release). NASA. 7 January 2007.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  75. Springel, V.; et al. (2005). "Simulations of the formation, evolution and clustering of galaxies and quasars". Nature. 435 (7042): 629–636. arXiv:astro-ph/0504097. Bibcode:2005Natur.435..629S. doi:10.1038/nature03597. PMID 15931216.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  76. Elizabeth Gibney (3 September 2014). "Earth's new address: 'Solar System, Milky Way, Laniakea'". Nature. doi:10.1038/nature.2014.15819.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  77. Mateo, M. L. (1998). "Dwarf Galaxies of the Local Group". Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics. 36 (1): 435–506. arXiv:astro-ph/9810070. Bibcode:1998ARA&A..36..435M. doi:10.1146/annurev.astro.36.1.435.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  78. Moore, B.; et al. (1999). "Dark Matter Substructure within Galactic Halos". The Astrophysical Journal Letters. 524 (1): L19–L22. arXiv:astro-ph/9907411. Bibcode:1999ApJ...524L..19M. doi:10.1086/312287.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  79. Tisserand, P.; Le Guillou, L.; Afonso, C.; Albert, J. N.; Andersen, J.; Ansari, R.; Aubourg, É.; Bareyre, P.; Beaulieu, J. P.; Charlot, X.; Coutures, C.; Ferlet, R.; Fouqué, P.; Glicenstein, J. F.; Goldman, B.; Gould, A.; Graff, D.; Gros, M.; Haissinski, J.; Hamadache, C.; De Kat, J.; Lasserre, T.; Lesquoy, É.; Loup, C.; Magneville, C.; Marquette, J. B.; Maurice, É.; Maury, A.; Milsztajn, A.; Moniez, M. (2007). "Limits on the Macho content of the Galactic Halo from the EROS-2 Survey of the Magellanic Clouds". Astronomy and Astrophysics. 469 (2): 387. arXiv:astro-ph/0607207. Bibcode:2007A&A...469..387T. doi:10.1051/0004-6361:20066017.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  80. Graff, D. S.; Freese, K. (1996). "Analysis of a Hubble Space Telescope Search for Red Dwarfs: Limits on Baryonic Matter in the Galactic Halo". The Astrophysical Journal. 456. arXiv:astro-ph/9507097. Bibcode:1996ApJ...456L..49G. doi:10.1086/309850.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  81. Najita, J. R.; Tiede, G. P.; Carr, J. S. (2000). "From Stars to Superplanets: The Low‐Mass Initial Mass Function in the Young Cluster IC 348". The Astrophysical Journal. 541 (2): 977. arXiv:astro-ph/0005290. Bibcode:2000ApJ...541..977N. doi:10.1086/309477.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  82. Wyrzykowski, Lukasz et al. (2011) The OGLE view of microlensing towards the Magellanic Clouds – IV. OGLE-III SMC data and final conclusions on MACHOs, MNRAS, 416, 2949
  83. Freese, Katherine; Fields, Brian; Graff, David (2000). "Death of Stellar Baryonic Dark Matter Candidates". arXiv:astro-ph/0007444 |class= ignored (help).<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  84. Freese, Katherine; Fields, Brian; Graff, David (2000). "Death of Stellar Baryonic Dark Matter". The First Stars. ESO Astrophysics Symposia. p. 18. arXiv:astro-ph/0002058. Bibcode:2000fist.conf...18F. doi:10.1007/10719504_3. ISBN 3-540-67222-2.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  85. Silk, Joseph (1980). The Big Bang (1989 ed.). San Francisco: Freeman. chapter ix, page 182. ISBN 0-7167-1085-4.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  86. Vittorio, N.; J. Silk (1984). "Fine-scale anisotropy of the cosmic microwave background in a universe dominated by cold dark matter". Astrophysical Journal, Part 2 – Letters to the Editor. 285: L39–L43. Bibcode:1984ApJ...285L..39V. doi:10.1086/184361.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  87. Umemura, Masayuki; Satoru Ikeuchi (1985). "Formation of Subgalactic Objects within Two-Component Dark Matter". Astrophysical Journal. 299: 583–592. Bibcode:1985ApJ...299..583U. doi:10.1086/163726.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  88. Davis, M.; Efstathiou, G., Frenk, C. S., & White, S. D. M. (15 May 1985). "The evolution of large-scale structure in a universe dominated by cold dark matter". Astrophysical Journal. 292: 371–394. Bibcode:1985ApJ...292..371D. doi:10.1086/163168.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  89. Hawkins, M. R. S. (2011). "The case for primordial black holes as dark matter". Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. 415 (3): 2744–2757. arXiv:1106.3875. Bibcode:2011MNRAS.415.2744H. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.18890.x.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  90. 90.0 90.1 90.2 Carr, B. J.; et al. (May 2010). "New cosmological constraints on primordial black holes" (PDF). Physical Review D. 81 (10): 104019. arXiv:0912.5297. Bibcode:2010PhRvD..81j4019C. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81.104019.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  91. 91.0 91.1 Peter, A. H. G. (2012). "Dark Matter: A Brief Review". arXiv:1201.3942 [astro-ph.CO].<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  92. 92.0 92.1 Garrett, Katherine; Dūda, Gintaras (2011). "Dark Matter: A Primer". Advances in Astronomy. 2011: 1. arXiv:1006.2483. Bibcode:2011AdAst2011E...8G. doi:10.1155/2011/968283. MACHOs can only account for a very small percentage of the nonluminous mass in our galaxy, revealing that most dark matter cannot be strongly concentrated or exist in the form of baryonic astrophysical objects. Although microlensing surveys rule out baryonic objects like brown dwarfs, black holes, and neutron stars in our galactic halo, can other forms of baryonic matter make up the bulk of dark matter? The answer, surprisingly, is no...<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  93. Bertone, G. (2010). "The moment of truth for WIMP dark matter". Nature. 468 (7322): 389–393. arXiv:1011.3532. Bibcode:2010Natur.468..389B. doi:10.1038/nature09509. PMID 21085174.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  94. Olive, Keith A. (2003). "TASI Lectures on Dark Matter". p. 21
  95. "Neutrinos as Dark Matter". Astro.ucla.edu. 21 September 1998. Retrieved 6 January 2011.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  96. Gaitskell, Richard J. (2004). "Direct Detection of Dark Matter". "Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Systems". 54: 315–359. Bibcode:2004ARNPS..54..315G. doi:10.1146/annurev.nucl.54.070103.181244.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  97. "NEUTRALINO DARK MATTER". Retrieved 26 December 2011.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles> Griest, Kim. "WIMPs and MACHOs" (PDF). Retrieved 26 December 2011.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  98. Kane, G. and Watson, S. (2008). "Dark Matter and LHC:. what is the Connection?". Modern Physics Letters A. 23 (26): 2103–2123. arXiv:0807.2244. Bibcode:2008MPLA...23.2103K. doi:10.1142/S0217732308028314.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  99. Drukier, A.; Freese, K. and Spergel, D. (1986). "Detecting Cold Dark Matter Candidates". Physical Review D. 33 (12): 3495–3508. Bibcode:1986PhRvD..33.3495D. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.33.3495.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  100. Bernabei, R.; Belli, P.; Cappella, F.; Cerulli, R.; Dai, C. J.; d’Angelo, A.; He, H. L.; Incicchitti, A.; Kuang, H. H.; Ma, J. M.; Montecchia, F.; Nozzoli, F.; Prosperi, D.; Sheng, X. D.; Ye, Z. P. (2008). "First results from DAMA/LIBRA and the combined results with DAMA/NaI". Eur. Phys. J. C. 56 (3): 333–355. arXiv:0804.2741. doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-008-0662-y.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  101. Stonebraker, Alan (3 January 2014). "Synopsis: Dark-Matter Wind Sways through the Seasons". Physics - Synopses. American Physical Society. Retrieved 6 January 2014.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  102. Lee, Samuel K.; Mariangela Lisanti, Annika H. G. Peter, and Benjamin R. Safdi (3 January 2014). "Effect of Gravitational Focusing on Annual Modulation in Dark-Matter Direct-Detection Experiments". Phys. Rev. Lett. American Physical Society. 112 (1): 011301 (2014) [5 pages]. arXiv:1308.1953. Bibcode:2014PhRvL.112a1301L. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.011301.CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  103. The Dark Matter Group. "An Introduction to Dark Matter". Dark Matter Research. Sheffield, UK: University of Sheffield. Retrieved 7 January 2014.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  104. "Blowing in the Wind". Kavli News. Sheffield, UK: Kavli Foundation. Retrieved 7 January 2014. Scientists at Kavli MIT are working on...a tool to track the movement of dark matter.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  105. The CDMS II Collaboration; Ahmed, Z.; Akerib, D. S.; Arrenberg, S.; Bailey, C. N.; Balakishiyeva, D.; Baudis, L.; Bauer, D. A.; Brink, P. L.; Bruch, T.; Bunker, R.; Cabrera, B.; Caldwell, D. O.; Cooley, J.; Cushman, P.; Daal, M.; Dejongh, F.; Dragowsky, M. R.; Duong, L.; Fallows, S.; Figueroa-Feliciano, E.; Filippini, J.; Fritts, M.; Golwala, S. R.; Grant, D. R.; Hall, J.; Hennings-Yeomans, R.; Hertel, S. A.; Holmgren, D.; Hsu, L. (2010). "Dark Matter Search Results from the CDMS II Experiment". Science. 327 (5973): 1619–1621. arXiv:0912.3592. Bibcode:2010Sci...327.1619C. doi:10.1126/science.1186112. PMID 20150446.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  106. Angloher, G.; Bauer; Bavykina; Bento; Bucci; Ciemniak; Deuter; von Feilitzsch; Hauff; et al. (2011). "Results from 730kg days of the CRESST-II Dark Matter Search". arXiv:1109.0702v1 [astro-ph.CO].<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles> [1]
  107. "Dark matter even darker than once thought". Retrieved 16 June 2015.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  108. Stecker, F.W.; Hunter, S; Kniffen, D (2008). "The likely cause of the EGRET GeV anomaly and its implications". Astroparticle Physics. 29 (1): 25–29. arXiv:0705.4311. Bibcode:2008APh....29...25S. doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2007.11.002.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  109. Atwood, W.B.; Abdo, A. A.; Ackermann, M.; Althouse, W.; Anderson, B.; Axelsson, M.; Baldini, L.; Ballet, J.; et al. (2009). "The large area telescope on the Fermi Gamma-ray Space Telescope Mission". Astrophysical Journal. 697 (2): 1071–1102. arXiv:0902.1089. Bibcode:2009ApJ...697.1071A. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/697/2/1071.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  110. Weniger, Christoph (2012). "A Tentative Gamma-Ray Line from Dark Matter Annihilation at the Fermi Large Area Telescope". Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics. 2012 (8): 7. arXiv:1204.2797v2. Bibcode:2012JCAP...08..007W. doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2012/08/007.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  111. Cartlidge, Edwin (24 April 2012). "Gamma rays hint at dark matter". Institute Of Physics. Retrieved 23 April 2013.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  112. Albert, J.; Aliu, E.; Anderhub, H.; Antoranz, P.; Backes, M.; Baixeras, C.; Barrio, J. A.; Bartko, H.; Bastieri, D.; Becker, J. K.; Bednarek, W.; Berger, K.; Bigongiari, C.; Biland, A.; Bock, R. K.; Bordas, P.; Bosch‐Ramon, V.; Bretz, T.; Britvitch, I.; Camara, M.; Carmona, E.; Chilingarian, A.; Commichau, S.; Contreras, J. L.; Cortina, J.; Costado, M. T.; Curtef, V.; Danielyan, V.; Dazzi, F.; De Angelis, A. (2008). "Upper Limit for γ‐Ray Emission above 140 GeV from the Dwarf Spheroidal Galaxy Draco". The Astrophysical Journal. 679: 428. arXiv:0711.2574. Bibcode:2008ApJ...679..428A. doi:10.1086/529135.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  113. Aleksić, J.; Antonelli, L. A.; Antoranz, P.; Backes, M.; Baixeras, C.; Balestra, S.; Barrio, J. A.; Bastieri, D.; González, J. B.; Bednarek, W.; Berdyugin, A.; Berger, K.; Bernardini, E.; Biland, A.; Bock, R. K.; Bonnoli, G.; Bordas, P.; Tridon, D. B.; Bosch-Ramon, V.; Bose, D.; Braun, I.; Bretz, T.; Britzger, D.; Camara, M.; Carmona, E.; Carosi, A.; Colin, P.; Commichau, S.; Contreras, J. L.; Cortina, J. (2010). "Magic Gamma-Ray Telescope Observation of the Perseus Cluster of Galaxies: Implications for Cosmic Rays, Dark Matter, and Ngc 1275". The Astrophysical Journal. 710: 634. arXiv:0909.3267. Bibcode:2010ApJ...710..634A. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/710/1/634.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  114. Adriani, O.; Barbarino, G. C.; Bazilevskaya, G. A.; Bellotti, R.; Boezio, M.; Bogomolov, E. A.; Bonechi, L.; Bongi, M.; Bonvicini, V.; Bottai, S.; Bruno, A.; Cafagna, F.; Campana, D.; Carlson, P.; Casolino, M.; Castellini, G.; De Pascale, M. P.; De Rosa, G.; De Simone, N.; Di Felice, V.; Galper, A. M.; Grishantseva, L.; Hofverberg, P.; Koldashov, S. V.; Krutkov, S. Y.; Kvashnin, A. N.; Leonov, A.; Malvezzi, V.; Marcelli, L.; Menn, W. (2009). "An anomalous positron abundance in cosmic rays with energies 1.5–100 GeV". Nature. 458 (7238): 607–609. arXiv:0810.4995. Bibcode:2009Natur.458..607A. doi:10.1038/nature07942. PMID 19340076.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  115. Aguilar, M. (AMS Collaboration); et al. (3 April 2013). "First Result from the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer on the International Space Station: Precision Measurement of the Positron Fraction in Primary Cosmic Rays of 0.5–350 GeV". Physical Review Letters. Bibcode:2013PhRvL.110n1102A. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.141102. Retrieved 3 April 2013.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  116. "First Result from the Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer Experiment". AMS Collaboration. 3 April 2013. Retrieved 3 April 2013.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  117. Heilprin, John; Borenstein, Seth (3 April 2013). "Scientists find hint of dark matter from cosmos". Associated Press. Retrieved 3 April 2013.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  118. Amos, Jonathan (3 April 2013). "Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer zeroes in on dark matter". BBC. Retrieved 3 April 2013.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  119. Perrotto, Trent J.; Byerly, Josh (2 April 2013). "NASA TV Briefing Discusses Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer Results". NASA. Retrieved 3 April 2013.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  120. Overbye, Dennis (3 April 2013). "New Clues to the Mystery of Dark Matter". New York Times. Retrieved 3 April 2013.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  121. Freese, K. (1986). "Can Scalar Neutrinos or Massive Dirac Neutrinos be the Missing Mass?". Physics Letters B. 167 (3): 295–300. Bibcode:1986PhLB..167..295F. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(86)90349-7.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  122. Ellis, J.; Flores, R. A.; Freese, K.; Ritz, S.; Seckel, D.; Silk, J. (1988). "Cosmic ray constraints on the annihilations of relic particles in the galactic halo". Physics Letters B. 214 (3): 403. Bibcode:1988PhLB..214..403E. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(88)91385-8.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  123. Merritt, David (1 January 2010). "Dark Matter at the Centers of Galaxies". In Bertone, Gianfranco (ed.). Particle Dark Matter : Observations, Models and Searches. Cambridge University Press. pp. 83–104. arXiv:1001.3706. ISBN 978-0-521-76368-4.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  124. Rzetelny, Xaq (19 November 2014). "Looking for a different sort of dark matter with GPS satellites". Ars Technica. Retrieved 24 November 2014.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  125. Exirifard, Q. (2010). "Phenomenological covariant approach to gravity". General Relativity and Gravitation. 43 (1): 93–106. arXiv:0808.1962. Bibcode:2011GReGr..43...93E. doi:10.1007/s10714-010-1073-6.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  126. Brownstein, J.R.; Moffat, J. W. (2007). "The Bullet Cluster 1E0657-558 evidence shows modified gravity in the absence of dark matter". Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. 382 (1): 29–47. arXiv:astro-ph/0702146. Bibcode:2007MNRAS.382...29B. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2007.12275.x.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  127. Anastopoulos, C. (2009). "Gravitational backreaction in cosmological spacetimes". Physical Review D. 79 (8): 084029. arXiv:0902.0159. Bibcode:2009PhRvD..79h4029A. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.79.084029.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  128. 128.0 128.1 "New Cosmic Theory Unites Dark Forces". SPACE.com. 11 February 2008. Retrieved 6 January 2011.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  129. Hossenfelder, S. (2008). "A Bi-Metric Theory with Exchange Symmetry". Physical Review D. 78 (4): 044015. arXiv:gr-qc/0603005. Bibcode:2008PhRvD..78d4015H. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.78.044015.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  130. Ripalda, Jose M. (1999). "Time reversal and negative energies in general relativity". arXiv:gr-qc/9906012 |class= ignored (help).<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  131. Nottale, Laurent (29 May 2009). "Scale relativity and fractal space-time: theory and applications" (PDF). Cite journal requires |journal= (help)<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  132. Nottale, Laurent (2011). Scale Relativity and Fractal Space-Time: A New Approach to Unifying Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. World Scientific. p. 516. ISBN 9781908977878.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>

External links