It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

X-Ray Discovery Points to Location of Missing Matter in Universe

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2010 @ 12:00 PM
link   

ScienceDaily (May 12, 2010) — Using observations with NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory and ESA's XMM-Newton, astronomers have announced a robust detection of a vast reservoir of intergalactic gas about 400 million light years from Earth. This discovery is the strongest evidence yet that the "missing matter" in the nearby Universe is located in an enormous web of hot, diffuse gas.





This missing matter -- which is different from dark matter -- is composed of baryons, the particles, such as protons and electrons, that are found on the Earth, in stars, gas, galaxies, and so on. A variety of measurements of distant gas clouds and galaxies have provided a good estimate of the amount of this "normal matter" present when the universe was only a few billion years old. However, an inventory of the much older, nearby universe has turned up only about half as much normal matter, an embarrassingly large shortfall.

The mystery then is where does this missing matter reside in the nearby universe? This latest work supports predictions that it is mostly found in a web of hot, diffuse gas known as the Warm-Hot Intergalactic Medium (WHIM). Scientists think the WHIM is material left over after the formation of galaxies, which was later enriched by elements blown out of galaxies.

"Evidence for the WHIM is really difficult to find because this stuff is so diffuse and easy to see right through," said Taotao Fang of the University of California at Irvine and lead author of the latest study. "This differs from many areas of astronomy where we struggle to see through obscuring material."

To look for the WHIM, the researchers examined X-ray observations of a rapidly growing supermassive black hole known as an active galactic nucleus, or AGN. This AGN, which is about two billion light years away, generates immense amounts of X-ray light as it pulls matter inwards.

Lying along the line of sight to this AGN, at a distance of about 400 million light years, is the so-called Sculptor Wall. This "wall," which is a large diffuse structure stretching across tens of millions of light years, contains thousands of galaxies and potentially a significant reservoir of the WHIM if the theoretical simulations are correct. The WHIM in the wall should absorb some of the X-rays from the AGN as they make their journey across intergalactic space to Earth.

Continued at link

Source

Again, more light shed on the wonderful realm of space! I found this article quite interesting myself and hope you do the same!




posted on May, 12 2010 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Crossfate
 



This discovery is the strongest evidence yet that the "missing matter" in the nearby Universe is located in an enormous web of hot, diffuse gas.


Such matter is called plasma.

It is electrically conductive (magnetic) ionized gas.

Physicist Anthony Peratt has demonstrated using Los Alamos lab's super-computers how such plasma can fully account for galaxy formation without the need of dark matter, dark energy, or black holes.

This is further confirmation of his findings.

Space is electric.

You can read one of his papers on the subject here:
public.lanl.gov...

Black holes, dark matter, dark energy, "missing matter", etc.... are a joke.

They are blatant failures of Einstein's theories. They are made up matter and energy used as a prop to hold up Einstein's failed theories.

Images of Peratt's super-computer simulation using electrified plasma and Newtonian gravity:




[edit on 12-5-2010 by mnemeth1]



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


Thank you for that input. I will definitely read up on it.



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 01:01 PM
link   
mnemeth1, do you know of any papers that were written more recently then 25 years ago? The references used in the paper date back to the 50s and 60s. A lot of discoveries have been over the past 20 years, and I am afraid plasma cosmology doesn't have an explanation for all of them.

I am failing to see how the article supports the plasma cosmology - this find supports the existing cosmology that was previously experiencing problems due to the lack of matter (which the article is announcing as found).

The paper does nothing to explain background cosmic radiation (1930s?), gravitaitonal lensing (proven 1979), and other proven attributes of the universe. If the plasma cosmology has any merit, there must be more recent papers out there that address the latest findings in science.

You can't expect people to ignore 20 years of research, validating predictions, etc. while comparing it to a theory that was created over two decades previously and doesn't even talk about it.



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by TLomon
mnemeth1, do you know of any papers that were written more recently then 25 years ago? The references used in the paper date back to the 50s and 60s. A lot of discoveries have been over the past 20 years, and I am afraid plasma cosmology doesn't have an explanation for all of them.

I am failing to see how the article supports the plasma cosmology - this find supports the existing cosmology that was previously experiencing problems due to the lack of matter (which the article is announcing as found).

The paper does nothing to explain background cosmic radiation (1930s?), gravitaitonal lensing (proven 1979), and other proven attributes of the universe. If the plasma cosmology has any merit, there must be more recent papers out there that address the latest findings in science.

You can't expect people to ignore 20 years of research, validating predictions, etc. while comparing it to a theory that was created over two decades previously and doesn't even talk about it.


You can safely ignore the past 20 years of research because all of it is wrong.

The wrong turn in science began back around the turn of the 20th century when steady state was rejected over Einstein's wacky theories.

Scientists still use Maxwell's equations as the basis for all electrical theory, should we ignore those too because they are old?

Simply ignoring research because it is old is foolish. One must have a reason other than age to ignore research.

The paper itself isn't that old, its from the 1980s so I'm not sure what your beef is.

Here's some more work:

Magnetic-field aligned electric fields in collisionless space plasmas – a brief review
Fälthammar C., Geofísica Internacional, Vol. 43, Num. 2, pp. 225-239, 2004

Advances in Numerical Modeling of Astrophysical and Space Plasma, Part II Astrophysical Force Laws on the Large Scale.
Peratt A .L. ,Astrophys. & Space Sci., Vol. 256, pp. 51-75, 1998

Evolution of the Plasma Universe: I. Double Radio Galaxies, Quasars, and Extragalactic Jets
Peratt A .L. , IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. Vol. PS-14, N.6, pp.639-660, December 1986

The Role of Particle Beams and Electrical Currents in the Plasma Universe
Peratt A .L. , Laser and Particle Beams, vol.6, part.3, pp.471-491, 1988

Real Properties of Electromagnetic Fields and Plasma in the Cosmos
Scott D. E., IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci., Vol. 35, No. 4, August 2007

On the Concept of Moving Magnetic Field Lines
Falthammar C. ,Eos, Vol. 88, No. 15, pp.169–170, 10 April 2007



Links to the papers can be found here
knol.google.com...


[edit on 12-5-2010 by mnemeth1]



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 01:24 PM
link   
reply to post by TLomon
 


Here's Peratt's website with more research

plasmascience.net...



posted on May, 12 2010 @ 02:16 PM
link   
Thank you for the link. I have a lot of reading to do.

If there are any rebutes after I finish the reading, I will contact you directly to discuss - it is a fascinating subject.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join