A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Research
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

WIMPS?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 31st 13, 07:03 AM posted to sci.astro.research
Richard D. Saam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 240
Default WIMPS?

There are no (within 95% CL)
WIMP annihilation cross sections and decay lifetimes
as measured by FERMI LAT
that could contribute to dark matter.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.5597
  #2  
Old May 31st 13, 01:39 PM posted to sci.astro.research
Phillip Helbig---undress to reply
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 629
Default WIMPS?

In article , "Richard D. Saam"
writes:

There are no (within 95% CL)
WIMP annihilation cross sections and decay lifetimes
as measured by FERMI LAT
that could contribute to dark matter.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.5597


Note that this says nothing about the viability of WIMPs as dark matter.
It could be that they neither annihilate nor decay.
  #3  
Old June 3rd 13, 06:10 AM posted to sci.astro.research
Robert L. Oldershaw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 617
Default WIMPS?

On Friday, May 31, 2013 2:03:51 AM UTC-4, Richard D. Saam wrote:
There are no (within 95% CL)

WIMP annihilation cross sections and decay lifetimes

as measured by FERMI LAT

that could contribute to dark matter.

http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.5597


----------------------------------------------------

In light of Helbig's reaction, I am left wondering if "WIMPs" are completely unfalsifiable since it appears that any failed prediction can be rationalized away in the Helbig manner. Note that Helbig is hardly the sole practitioner of this type of reasoning which typifies the theoretical branches of particle physics and cosmology these days.

Can the "WIMP" conjecture make a definitive prediction and stand by it, or is it pure pseudo-science?

Robert L. Oldershaw
http://www3.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw
Discrete Scale Relativity/Fractal Cosmology
  #4  
Old June 3rd 13, 08:54 AM posted to sci.astro.research
jacob navia[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 543
Default WIMPS?

Le 31/05/13 14:39, Phillip Helbig---undress to reply a écrit :
In article , "Richard D. Saam"
writes:

There are no (within 95% CL)
WIMP annihilation cross sections and decay lifetimes
as measured by FERMI LAT
that could contribute to dark matter.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.5597


Note that this says nothing about the viability of WIMPs as dark matter.
It could be that they neither annihilate nor decay.


OK, they do not travel at high speeds, wimps go leisurely around,
and the interaction between them and this universe is highly difficult,
possible only in some specialized environment: living beings.

Since this invisible matter is heavier than our matter, it can
gravitationally influence a solution, guiding slowly dissolved
components into more concentrated areas.

If that kind of matter can control its density, it can acquire any
gravitational field it wants, what allows it in principle, to guide
atoms to specific places, where prepared reactions take place.

A black hole the size of an atom, made of that kind of matter can guide
accurately an atom to any place it wants.

Using just CO2, some solution containing enough raw materials, it can
start a self-sustaining living thing in a new planet.

Those kind of interactions of dark matter with normal matter are
maybe more interesting than just looking for a simple cross-section
annihilation reaction.

In any case it is a good sci-fi start isn't it?

Because we are just like a group of blind people extending their arms
and trying to figure out an elephant.

That matter must be HERE.

But where?

:-)

jacob at jacob punkt remcomp punkt fr
  #5  
Old June 3rd 13, 09:11 AM posted to sci.astro.research
Jos Bergervoet
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 126
Default WIMPS?

On 6/3/2013 7:10 AM, Robert L. Oldershaw wrote:
On Friday, May 31, 2013 2:03:51 AM UTC-4, Richard D. Saam wrote:

There are no (within 95% CL)
WIMP annihilation cross sections and decay lifetimes
as measured by FERMI LAT that could contribute to dark matter.

http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.5597


In light of Helbig's reaction,


NB: Philip commented: (why doesn't Robert quote this?)
"Note that this says nothing about the viability of WIMPs as dark
matter. It could be that they neither annihilate nor decay."

I am left wondering if "WIMPs" are completely unfalsifiable
since it appears that any failed prediction can be rationalized
away ...


You have to discern between (1) the *existence* of WIMPS,
which can of course not be falsified by not observing
them and (2) WIMPS being the main components of dark
matter, which *can* be falsified simply by finding what
it is made of instead. Pure logic answers your question!

... in the Helbig manner. Note that Helbig is hardly the sole
practitioner of this type of reasoning


Not surprising. As I said, it's pure logic.

--
Jos
  #6  
Old June 4th 13, 07:20 AM posted to sci.astro.research
David Staup[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 347
Default WIMPS?

On 6/3/2013 3:11 AM, Jos Bergervoet wrote:
You have to discern between (1) the *existence* of WIMPS,
which can of course not be falsified by not observing
them and (2) WIMPS being the main components of dark
matter, which *can* be falsified simply by finding what
it is made of instead. Pure logic answers your question!


simply by finding what it's made of?????

would you care to break down your "pure logic" a bit further?

[Mod. note: quoted text trimmed. Logically, it's quite simple:
practically, it may be a little harder -- mjh]
  #7  
Old June 4th 13, 07:22 AM posted to sci.astro.research
Phillip Helbig---undress to reply
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 629
Default WIMPS?

In article , "Robert L.
Oldershaw" writes:

In light of Helbig's reaction, I am left wondering if "WIMPs" are
completely unfalsifiable since it appears that any failed prediction can
be rationalized away in the Helbig manner. Note that Helbig is hardly
the sole practitioner of this type of reason

Can the "WIMP" conjecture make a definitive prediction and stand by
it, or is it pure pseudo-science?


Lest anyone think I am dead, I have decided to stop replying to RLO's
comments, especially since his own DSR is the prime example of a theory
for which---as has been pointed out here and elsewhere many times---a
definitive prediction has been falsified, hence ruling out the theory.
RLO then claims that the theory has a backup prediction which hasn't
been falsified, which of course is what he criticises elsewhere, even
when---as here---it is not the case (there has never been a definitive
prediction such as "if dark matter consists of WIMPs, then they must
annihilate or decay at a rate detectable with current technology").

So, RLO has not convinced me, but rather---especially when name-calling
is brought into it---I see no point in investing any more time in this;
even for bystanders but not participants, enough has been said for all
to make up their minds.
  #8  
Old June 4th 13, 07:23 AM posted to sci.astro.research
Phillip Helbig---undress to reply
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 629
Default WIMPS?

In article , Jos Bergervoet
writes:

In light of Helbig's reaction,


NB: Philip commented: (why doesn't Robert quote this?)


Surely a rhetorical question.

"Note that this says nothing about the viability of WIMPs as dark
matter. It could be that they neither annihilate nor decay."

  #9  
Old June 4th 13, 07:24 AM posted to sci.astro.research
Robert L. Oldershaw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 617
Default WIMPS?

On Monday, June 3, 2013 4:11:54 AM UTC-4, Jos Bergervoet wrote:

You have to discern between (1) the *existence* of WIMPS,

which can of course not be falsified by not observing

them and (2) WIMPS being the main components of dark

matter, which *can* be falsified simply by finding what

it is made of instead. Pure logic answers your question!


------------------------------------------------

Unless it is pretzel logic!

(1) We have been searching fruitlessly for "WIMPs" for 40 years! If this can go on forever, with a "maybe the next experiment, maybe the next experiment, maybe..." mentality, then the ad hoc hypothesis is not falsifiable.

Do you get it? If your dogma is "search until you find, and not finding is not considered a possibility" then you do not have falsifiable science. You have effectively unfalsifiable pseudo-science.

(2) If there is strong observational evidence for another dark matter candidate, then it is possible that "WIMP" adherents might give up, but I strongly doubt it. Rather they would peck the competing empirical evidence to death, modify the "WIMP" properties, and claim it was still the "leading candidate".

No my friend. If you want real dark matter science you must say exactly what the dark matter is! Saying it is some weakly interacting particle does not cut it because the parameter space is effectively infinite. If you cannot say what the exact masses of the individual DM objects are, then you know nothing about the DM and have no scientific prediction.

Beware glib answers. Science requires much more thought and skepticism.
  #10  
Old June 4th 13, 07:25 AM posted to sci.astro.research
Richard D. Saam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 240
Default WIMPS?

On 5/31/13 7:39 AM, Phillip Helbig---undress to reply wrote:
In article , "Richard D. Saam"
writes:

There are no (within 95% CL)
WIMP annihilation cross sections and decay lifetimes
as measured by FERMI LAT
that could contribute to dark matter.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.5597


Note that this says nothing about the viability of WIMPs as dark matter.
It could be that they neither annihilate nor decay.

It must also be noted that reported FERMI LAT energy detection range
is 5 - 300 GeV.
It is conceivable that WIMP annihilation and decay energies
could be outside that range.
What energies are the underground (old mine shafts etc)
large volumetric fluid detection systems tuned to?
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DarkAttack2012 Conference: NO "WIMPs"! Robert L. Oldershaw Research 1 July 20th 12 07:04 AM
Generic WIMPs Ruled Out Robert L. Oldershaw Research 10 November 27th 11 10:09 AM
WIMPs AWOL Again? Robert L. Oldershaw Research 91 November 16th 11 10:28 AM
Constraints on WIMPs as Dark Matter. dlzc Astronomy Misc 4 August 24th 11 03:21 PM
Xenon100: No "WIMPs" Robert L. Oldershaw Research 0 April 14th 11 09:39 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.