Talk:Dark matter

Dark matter in fiction was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 11 December 2022 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Dark matter. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dark matter article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8: 90 days

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Dark matter. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Dark matter at the Reference desk.

Dark matter was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 4, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
January 28, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
July 11, 2009	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

Astronomy: Cosmology Top‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Cosmology task force.

Physics Top‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Gantz, John F.; et al. (March 2008). "The Diverse and Exploding Digital Universe". International Data Corporation, a subsidiary of IDG. {{cite news}}: Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help)

Archives

Index

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 3 sections are present.

Preprints to add after peer review[edit]

Putting these here to remember to check in on later:

Oncins (2022) "Constraints on PBH as dark matter from observations: a review", comes with a video
Bernard Carr et al. (2023) "Observational Evidence for Primordial Black Holes: A Positivist Perspective"
Su, Li, and Feng (2023) "An inflation model for massive primordial black holes to interpret the JWST observations"
Depta et al. (2023) "Do pulsar timing arrays observe merging primordial black holes?"

All four are pretty juicy relative to the dark matter composition question, which is why I'm a bit reluctant to add until they pass review. Sandizer (talk) 02:21, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Probably worth checking in on those peer review statuses, as https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2041-8213/ad1bf0 states as an unqualified premise that AGN were around from z ≳ 15 (see the second line in the Discussion section.)

... Carr et al. 2024 made it in Physics Reports: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370157323003976 -- it's a pretty ambitious review with 68 pages and 451 references.

From the Conclusions: "much of the evidence point towards dark matter in PBHs with around a solar mass ... naturally explained if PBHs form at the QCD epoch and this is our preferred scenario." Sandizer (talk) 20:59, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How old is matter?[edit]

Motsaathebekhanyisile (talk) 07:45, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Motsaathebekhanyisile: 13.8 billion years. Before that everything was energy, and before that it was basically only geometry. But logic is and has been forever. Sandizer (talk) 05:24, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

21st century history[edit]

@Johnjbarton: what is the reason for this deletion? Is there a way to keep the sources? Do you think they can be summarized better? 141.239.252.245 (talk) 08:16, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for opening this topic.

I reverted the edit as I said in the summary because the content is not "History" of Dark Matter. No historian has analyzed the history of Dark Matter and shown how primordial black holes became the alternative. On the contrary, the current consensus is cold dark matter: Lambda-CDM.

The sources and a summary are already in the article in the section "Alternative hypotheses". As it stands it appears to be WP:UNDUE: with in the section "Alternative hypotheses" primordial black hole is given an entire paragraph while other alternatives rate a couple of words. Johnjbarton (talk) 15:18, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]