1
   

WIMPs and MACHOs

 
 
ReX
 
Reply Mon 21 Jun, 2004 09:24 am
I got this from a pretty nice site with an Introduction to Cosmology.
I quote for those of you who also did not know this:

The snag is that, according to the standard and highly successful calculations of what went on at the birth of the Universe, the amount of deuterium around is very closely tied to the total amount of atomic matter made in the Big Bang. The more deuterium there is, the less atomic matter there can be overall.

Using the deuterium abundances measured for stars in our Galaxy, the Big Bang could have produced ten times more atomic matter than we see in bright stars. But using the new figures from the Keck observations, there is barely enough scope to make the stars themselves, and no room for MACHOs.

The implication is clear -- any dark matter around must be in the form of WIMPs, after all. Only, something is making the stars in the LMC flicker as we watch them, and nobody knows how WIMPs could be made to clump together to make the kind of massive, compact objects needed to do the gravitational lensing trick.


So, my question, is simple:
Why exactly are MACHOs not an option? And how exactly do they go from there can be more to there can be less, so therefor there must be more; thus we can conclude there is none of it. :/
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 837 • Replies: 5
No top replies

 
ReX
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Jun, 2004 09:37 am
Let me just add that I do not have elaborate knowledge on the subject as you probably already noticed(reading something along the lines of the cosmos for dummies :p). There's one thing I always have known though:
In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea.
Smile
(I just felt the need for a joke regarding the subject was in order due to the 'gravity', no wait 'density' of the problem :-)
0 Replies
 
Heliotrope
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Jun, 2004 01:56 pm
MACHOS are Massive Compact Halo Objects.
These are basically very dense little planet-type things that are conjectured to exist in their zillions in the halo surrounding a galaxy.
The article is saying that given the abundance of deuterium after the Big Bang this implies that there is only a certain amount of matter in the universe and we can see all that matter in the form of stars, galaxies etc... without having any MACHOS.
So, if MACHOS exist then there would have to be more mass in the Universe and so the deuterium abundance would have been different.
It isn't and so therefore MACHOS don't exist.
0 Replies
 
ReX
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Jun, 2004 04:12 pm
Yes, after rereading (again) yesterday I finally got it. Consider this topic closed Smile
And thank you Wink
0 Replies
 
Mr Stillwater
 
  1  
Reply Wed 23 Jun, 2004 05:22 pm
Heliotrope wrote:
MACHOS are Massive Compact Halo Objects.
... and so therefore MACHOS don't exist.



So, MACHO ain't mucho? Is that what you're saying?
0 Replies
 
ReX
 
  1  
Reply Thu 24 Jun, 2004 03:52 pm
The 'but' in the second paragraph just threw me of, that's all. And MACHOs mucho, that's why they don't fit in, it's better to be a WIMP, that way you have all the room you need Wink
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Evolution 101 - Discussion by gungasnake
Typing Equations on a PC - Discussion by Brandon9000
The Future of Artificial Intelligence - Discussion by Brandon9000
The well known Mind vs Brain. - Discussion by crayon851
Scientists Offer Proof of 'Dark Matter' - Discussion by oralloy
Blue Saturn - Discussion by oralloy
Bald Eagle-DDT Myth Still Flying High - Discussion by gungasnake
DDT: A Weapon of Mass Survival - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » WIMPs and MACHOs
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 01/16/2025 at 01:46:32