Haha, not my title, the article’s. I don’t change them too often because it disrupts my flow going through my RSS feeds while I select things I want to get into in depth myself, and I know publishers make these decisions for a reason. The text is pretty ok though. Feel free to downvote them.
Yes, it would just be surprising because, gravity should make them not be evenly distributed.
The whole thing with dark matter is that it’s this magic stuff that causes gravity but isn’t affected by it, which… is not how gravity normally works.
Though there is still room for it, we just need a better framework other than “I added 3 and 5 and got 12, so obviously I must mean to add 3 and 5 and 4 too”.
Then it should also coelescce, particularly since it doesn’t have the em force to keep it repelled, the universe should be dominated by massive dark matter black holes.
Yes, there’s math that explains part of the distribution, but also there is 0 force opposing any collapse we’d have a lot more neutron stars and other degenerate matter catalyzed by dark matter.
We have hypotheses like this when our observations don’t make sense and we need to explain them, it’s definitely a possibility but we still have room to understand the large scale physics at play.
You don’t need a force to prevent collapse if there’s no drag force to slow things down. It would actually be almost impossible for a cloud of dark matter to collapse since any individual particle has momentum and no way to slow down, so they’ll all be in some sort of mutual orbit
I’m guessing you’ve seen as many lorentz attractor simulations as I have, what always happens is something like tidal effects or angular momentum means 90% slow down while a few particles get shot out of hell at ludicrous speed.
The effect is similar to drag, and is basically how we get entropy even without em effects.
It’s not the only problem with them, and potentially not the biggest either - there is no plan to remove or maintain them when they die other than de-orbiting them into the upper atmosphere. A recent study suggests that this will critically harm the ozone layer, and that adding metallic particles in the quantities implied by the number of starlink satellites that Elmo plans to launch could do far more damage to the ozone layer than our previous attempts to screw it up!
The new flexible polymer and carbon composite boom is coupled with a twelve-unit (12U) CubeSat built by NanoAvionics. After the mission launches atop a Rocket Lab Electron rocket from the company’s Launch Complex 1 in Māhia, New Zealand, the spacecraft will go into a Sun-synchronous orbit at an altitude of about 600 miles (~1,000 km) and the sail will deploy in about 25 minutes to cover an area of 860 ft² (80 m²) with the boom unfolding from the size of a hand to 23 ft (7 m) long. Once deployed, the sail will adjust the vehicle’s orbit by angling itself in relation to the solar wind.
Wow, that’s not something I even considered could happen. It does raise an interesting question though – how many more of these could be out there? Seems like it would require a whole-sky survey just to detect them.
Peregrine 1 is not NASA’s. NASA paid for some payloads on the lander, but the lander itself is from Astrobiotic. It’s an important distinction because it seems like people are trying to blame NASA for whatever went wrong.
astronomy
Ważne
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.