A Dark Dilemma

Scientific theories are descriptions, they are not explanations. Scientific theories develop slowly and only a few create new and useful perspectives, evolution and relativity are examples. Successful theories impact more than just the direction of scientific research. They also alter perspectives within the general population. Successful theories give us a sense that we have arrived at final answers but new discoveries repeatedly make us question even the most established of scientific paradigms. The measurement of galactic movements, starting in the 1930’s, created such questions and has prompted new theories, especially regarding gravity. Gravity has been elusive in our efforts to match it with the other three basic forces of nature. The recent discovery of a ‘Higgs’ particle renewed our hope that we might be close to a unified theory and help us explain the galactic movements we are observing, but finding a large new atomic particle has also created new questions. Newton described the movements of stones falling to the ground, artillery shells curving in flight, and planets orbiting the sun as the result of an attractive force between particles of matter. Einstein described the same movements as the result of matter curving space. Both men used innovative mathematics. Newton used the calculus, Einstein used tensors and complex curves. Both men assumed that matter influences motion, Newton by having matter act on itself, Einstein by having matter alter the geometry of space. Einstein’s relativity replaced Newton’s mechanics and the curved space theory of Einstein has proven more accurate than Newton’s mechanical description by reconciling the planet mercury’s observed orbital discrepancy and by predicting altered paths of light passing near massive objects. Neither theory now accurately describes movements at galactic scales and, with only one macro attractive force in our conceptual repertoire, (gravity) we continue to use it to explain the anomalous rotations we continue to observe in galaxies and clusters of galaxies. Unwilling to question Newton or Einstein we calculated how much missing matter would be needed to cause the strange rotations we are observing. The result of our inverse analytical calculations is a massive amount of invisible matter surrounding small galaxies made of visible matter. Choosing to explain the anomalous rotation of galaxies by additional gravity and with no way to explain gravity without matter we have concluded that an invisible form of matter has to be the cause when all we really know is that galaxies don’t rotate as we expected. As a result we have focused our research on finding and identifying missing dark matter, but there are other ways to explain the observed errant galactic movements. In 1983 Mordehai Milgrom formalized a modification of Newtonian dynamics that describes the anomalies observed in galactic movement as natural variations in gravitational and accelerative forces acting on galactic and larger associations of matter. His predictive formulae also accurately describe the movement of double stars, satellite galaxies, interacting galaxies, and accelerative forces. Unfortunately scientific research has momentum coupled to long term research grants and commitments that can sidetrack promising theories like “MOND”. The anomalous rotation of galaxies was first noted in the 1930s and has been studied in more detail ever since. The idea of hidden matter producing additional gravity is not new, but the name “dark matter” has appeal and attracts media coverage and research funding. The Modified Newtonian Dynamics Theory applies to the same observed galactic phenomena but without any dark postulates. Unfortunately MOND doesn’t the same media appeal. Our conceptual universe was once filled with visible matter, four basic forces and nearly empty space. In the dark world of science It is now filled with, 68.3% dark energy, 26.8% dark matter, and only 4.9% visible matter, which implies, that after more than two thousand years of exploration, we understand less than 5% of what is going on around us. Searching in the dark for matter and forces hidden from us we are reaching beyond current conceptual limits and beyond our most basic assumptions. MOND offers us an alternative that keeps us in the light without the need for dark energy or dark matter and brings closer to reconciling gravity with the other forces of nature. Our primary sense is vision. Visible light has always been our most important portal into the workings of nature. We followed the motion of celestial objects with our eyes noting their movements until we could track and predict their paths. We observed the similarities and differences in living forms, detailing their shapes, colors and behavior in books and paintings until we could explain their similarities as the result of a common trace. We have also developed tools to convert sound and other vibrations into visible curves for analysis. We have invented cloud chambers to study the make up of matter using visible traces of particles too small to see, and have extended our understanding of light to frequencies beyond those available to the eye and now use microwave and infrared light to our advantage. We also symbolize, in symbolic languages, verbal and mathematical predictive descriptions of our observations. Our dependent relationship to light and the pervasiveness of the electromagnetic forces throughout the universe has formed our basic perspectives, shaped our questions, and guided our investigative efforts. Concentrating on (invisible matter) and (invisible forces), instead of re-examining gravity leaves our scientists nearly impotent. Dark matter and dark energy theories find little footing and few experimental options. The MOND theory lets us continue to search in the light and has implications for relating gravity with the weak force and a unified theory. We seem to be searching in the dark for answers that are waiting in the light. My money is on MOND and a few neutrinos for balance.