Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

OddClass134 t1_ja9iixt wrote

Reply to comment by ForTech45 in How to make a model of dark matter and energy? by Poise-on

>I think you misheard what that guy said, because the leading theory is still 100% an unknown subatomic particle, and I would hazard to guess that 90-95% of physicists in a field involving dark matter believe that it is just that— matter that only interacts with gravity, or interacts extremely weakly with the other known interactions.

Ah, well yes then, I suppose that is the leading theory. That was not however the theory he presented.

He did not speak directly to or for its existence, but he did speak about how many of the effects attributed to dark matter may well be explained through re-examination of the theory of general relativity itself.

He began the talk with a criticism of a lot of high energy physics and particle physics. The association may have been one I made on my own, but the implication seemed to be that this theory was an alternative to the subatomic particle theory.

1

ForTech45 t1_jaa67si wrote

What did he call the theory? What was the speakers name?

There are many alternatives, but very few are fleshed out and most are just frameworks

1

OddClass134 t1_jaabdhx wrote

I dont hope to put anyone on blast, as it wasnt my presentation or my paper and I may be wrong.

I also think Im not being clear here when I say "theory" and considering the topic, I probably shouldnt throw that term around. I meant more the argument of looking at modifications of GR rather than for undiscovered particles. Which modification one supports is a different discussion.

1