Roger Penrose Breaks Silence : 'Dark Matter Doesn't Exist'

In the vast universe, there are plenty of mysteries, and one that has puzzled astronomers for a long time is the concept of dark Matter. Dark Matter constitutes 27% of the universe, but despite possessing powerful telescopes like the James Webb Space Telescope, scientists have been unable to detect the presence of dark Matter.

[mattd]

I'm no physicist, but it seems Dark Matter is just a way of explaining why their equations aren't adding up. Something is wrong with their math. Please reply if you know whether this makes sense or not. This stuff keeps me up at night.

[philipsmeeton]

Perhaps we simply do not understand gravity.

[notredan]

Wow - surprised by many of the comments…especially the ones noting this author as the smartest ever (blah blah).


First, nowhere in here has Roger Penrose said he does not believe dark matter exists (no surprise - there are 10’s of similar videos from as many creators).

Second, the theories they propose here (MOND or it’s many derivatives) have been around since 1982 and every one has lost its way due to conflict with observed data.

There are many here that say the problem is a math one…that is funny because it is MOND that is trying to tweak the math and they have countless times over the last several decades trying to get over the observational shortcomings of MOND.

But you bash the physicists who are try to NOT change the math because it works perfectly - in all cases - to describe the rest of the universe we observe (except black holes). Most physicists are taking the Occams Razor approach (simplest answer is probably the right one). Not saying MOND shouldn’t be studied, it should, but it has failed 10’s of times.

Roger Penrose is not a fan of MOND or any of its derivatives (thus far). This video is nothing but click bait.

[christianself]

In Neil's words, "We are essentially fabricating explanations, merely to justify it, " referring to the unaccounted-for missing pieces of mass.😂

[svirfneblin]

Video is very repetitive and sparse in information. Yet interesting topic, would have expected something new from Roger Penrose than just same statements by the moderator about MOND over and over again (threshold).

[jeffcastaneda]

If dark matter does not exist, it becomes “no matter” or “doesn’t matter”.

[dialectic-scietist]

That is because the 96% of the light from the very old images or has not yet arrived to the observer or because they are only the images of the sources and these, are not visible images, because of depletion of the energy which every source it is putting these to the creation of their images. There isn't dark matter at all and the differences of the masses between the real mass and the expected one are due to the different speed of spinning of the stars and if the spinning speed is greater, then and the inertia is bigger and the mass, as we know, is the measure of the inertia. Also, there isn't such thing like dark energy because the universe isn't expanding and for that reason doesn't need it. On the other hand, if the universe was expanded, then it will need the dark matter to fill the gaps. The red shifting is only an optical phenomenon of depletion in energy of the very old images. When you have a drop in energy, the light is shifting to a bigger wavelength. A simple experiment with a regular flashlight, in a state of energy depletion, is proving it. If The dear Professor is an honest guy, he has to return his Nobel Prize for the unreal things he had said for many years, like B.B and black holes, or multiverses or parallel universes. The Universe is infinity and eternal without beginning or end. Time isn't an absolute value. It is only, e repeatable periodically, material motion and synchronization.

[danhilbert]

One way to find dark matter is to construct a small glass container which can be sealed after a certain quantity of interstellar space is allowed to enter its chamber. It is then sealed and brought back to a laboratory where it is bombarded with electrons. Then a spark is applied to the substance and if there are tiny flashes of light, we will know that dark matter is simply ionized hydrogen, or naked protons. After all, protons are the building blocks of stars.

[johnkochen]

We see gravitational effects in the cosmos that we cannot explain with the matter we can actually see. The conclusion is that there is something out there that has mass/gravity that we cannot see. We call it Dark because we cannot see it (no interaction with light) and Matter because matter is all we know that has gravity. Basically, Dark Matter is just a way of saying “I haven’t the foggiest idea of what is causing this but there has to be something.” Therefore, saying that Dark Matter does not exist is saying that something you know nothing about but is clearly there, does not exist. If that makes sense to you, I will humbly bow my head in reverence to your superior understanding.

[paulmillbank]

I have very little confidence in the information in this video. I’m not a physicist, but I know we don’t use Newtonian gravity on a cosmological scale, we use general relativity because we know the more massive something is the less accurate Newtonian gravity becomes. If physicists are using Newtonian gravity to measure the mass of our galaxy, I would quickly say there’s the problem. I want my Nobel Prize, thank you very much.

[alfonsopayra]

well, humans have the tendency to come up with magic solutions for things we don't understand... i mean, take GOD as an example. just like you said, a character that REALLY changes the story and has NO FACE and it never appears in the picture.

[stevegarcia]

All in all, we are not asking the right questions. Which prevents us from getting right answers. In complex problems, the right answer is not in the first level of things we can foresee. So the first level of questions brings us to a slightly more complete level, but still not the final level. Just a level where we see new questions. In the dark matter problem, dark matter was just bringing us o the 2nd level of questions. We are a long way yet from getting to the final question level. I have never accepted dark matter as real - only a sign that our questions and knowledge were far from any final question level. Our evidence itself needs evolving, and that happens level by level. If we think we only see 4% of the matter in the universe, we can understand that to tell us we are only 4% of the way thru the levels of questions. As we work our way thru new levels of questions that arise, we will learn more, of course - but it will be centuries and take the best minds to ask and get to the final level of questions. Bon voyage, you future best minds! Happy trails to you!

[kiurtosh]

Its all theories, we actualy dont understand sh..

[pierrec]

At every moment, particles and anti-particles come into being, and then annihilate. During their brief existence, these pairs do have a mass. However small these masses may be, their number when considered on a cosmic scale, may well account for some inconsistencies in the Standard Model. I wonder if anybody has ever made any calculations about this mass.

[sharkysharkerson]

I don't know. There are studies, like for example the data in Gaia that found the likelihood of additional gravity outside of the traditional Newtonian to be very unlikely ... like 16 sigma away unlikely. The perceived acceleration likely comes from some other source.

[theodoresweger]

Thanks being a amateur, I love the way this is presented I almost understabd it..Thanks, love astronomy...

[abeblinkin]

Heres a question...does gravity exist in the 4th dimension? I think no.and then what about the other dimensions...specifically the zero dimension? I think the math supports the idea that mass isnt affected by gravity in the 4th dimension. So whether or not thats true force is being applied to mass in this dimension. It makes sense that the mystery force is active in a higher dimension but not present in this dimension.

[philipsmeeton]

A theory is a theory is a theory until you can prove it to be fact. If you can't find dark matter then there has to be another explanation for observations and measurements. We assume that the speed of light is a constant but what if it is not? Is there another way to explain redshift. Perhaps light slows down.

[lrvogt]

Good but your intro keeps referring to an hypothesis as a theory. No wonder creationists get confused.

[monabear]

RP is probably the smartest man alive on the planet.