New map of dark matter supports Einstein's theory of general relativity

[Judi Lynn]

By Joshua Hawkins
Published Apr 12th, 2023 9:18PM EDT



Image: Denis Rozhnovsky/Adobe

In the early 1900s, Albert Einstein proposed the theory of general relativity, which challenged everything scientists believed they understood about the universe at the time. Over the years, scientists have questioned whether this theory was true. However, a newly created dark matter map finally gives undeniable proof.

We must first look at Einstein’s original theory to fully understand this new development. Before Einstein proposed the theory of general relativity, scientists believed space to be almost featureless and changeless. Further, they thought that time flowed at its own pace, oblivious to clocks that tried to measure it, as Isaac Newton had suggested two centuries earlier.

However, Einstein proposed that both space and time were one force, spacetime, and that matter within this ever-changing stage was controlled by the curving path that gravity dictated. But to create gravity, we needed mass, a force so strong it could literally curve spacetime around it. This is where dark matter comes into play.

Dark matter is an invisible force found throughout our universe in vast quantities. It, scientists believe, is the force creating the gravity pull that determines how the universe curves and moves. But we’ve never been able to map dark matter out, at least not until now.

More:
https://bgr.com/science/new-map-of-dark-matter-supports-einsteins-theory-of-general-relativity/

[Redleg]

1. "Undeniable proof" seems like an un-scientific statement

"Strong support" for Einstein's theory seems more apt. Having said that, this seems to be an interesting and important finding.

[Igel]

2. Usually there's a scientific publication.

With a "sci news" derivative.

Version 1, highly technical.

Derivative, pop science. It simplifies and dumbs down version 1 to produce version 2.

This is sort of "acceleration," the second derivative, i.e., version 3. d original / d intelligence is v. 2. We're at d o / d i = 0, d o^2/d^2 i strongly positive. Min-max? We're firmly min.

Better edition, v. 2, not quite so bad:
https://www.princeton.edu/news/2023/04/11/new-map-universes-cosmic-growth-supports-einsteins-theory-gravity

I think the ur-link is https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.05202 but the princeton.edu merely says that the link is available on arxiv.org. The named authors are prolific. And I don't feel like wading through their arxiv.org posting to find *the* source.

Primary sources are *always* better than what's in the reticulum or even the absomasum " target="_blank">.

[Redleg]

3. Yes

The same phenomenon occurs when laypeople write about research studies in the behavior and social-science fields.