Dark matter, what the majority of the universe appears to consist, may be where some sort of God notion resides. But no one has any idea.

In astronomy and cosmology, dark matter is hypothetical matter that is undetectable by its emitted radiation, but whose presence can be inferred from gravitational effects on visible matter.[1] According to present observations of structures larger than galaxies, as well as Big Bang cosmology, dark matter and dark energy could account for the vast majority of the mass in the observable universe.

Dark matter is postulated to partially account for evidence of "missing mass" in the universe, including the rotational speeds of galaxies, orbital velocities of galaxies in clusters, gravitational lensing of background objects by galaxy clusters such as the Bullet Cluster, and the temperature distribution of hot gas in galaxies and clusters of galaxies.

Dark matter is believed to play a central role in structure formation and galaxy evolution, and has measurable effects on the anisotropy of the cosmic microwave background. All these lines of evidence suggest that galaxies, clusters of galaxies, and the universe as a whole contain far more matter than that which interacts with electromagnetic radiation: the remainder is frequently called the "dark matter component," even though there is a small amount of baryonic dark matter. The largest part of dark matter which does not interact with electromagnetic radiation is not only "dark" but also by definition utterly transparent; in recognition of this, it has been referred to as transparent matter by some astronomers.[2]

As important as dark matter is believed to be in the universe, direct evidence of its existence and a concrete understanding of its nature have remained elusive. Though the theory of dark matter remains the most widely accepted theory to explain the anomalies in observed galactic rotation, some alternative theories such as modified Newtonian dynamics and tensor-vector-scalar gravity have been proposed. None of these alternatives, however, have garnered equally widespread support in the scientific community.

Posted Dec 7, 2009, 1:32 PM UTC

012
salbris•

There's no reason to jump to conclusions. Dark matter is probably just another form of matter not composed of the traditional components we associate matter with. This non-baryonic matter does not interact with electromagnetic radiation, therefore it's "dark".

3
nonpareilpearlSecular Humanist•

Exactly. Why would this make dark matter a god? It's just matter.

0
Gravity13•

This is quite literally, the most apt description of "God of the gaps" I have ever seen.

Yes. It's perfectly reasonable to presume that there is a god who some kind of infatuation to mass and clumping up in certain random parts of the galaxy.

3
BorealismemeKnight of /new•

When you say "no one has any idea", the logical conclusion is most emphatically not to invoke a god. Of all the things in the past that we have not understood but do now, none of them has been in any way involved with divine magic.

2
loadedgeodeOP•

What is "divine magic"? The first time the light bulb worked, flight, nuclear reactions? I would say it is the previously unimaginable--discovered.

1
BorealismemeKnight of /new•

Precisely my point. Magic of any nature (assuming we're not talking about the misdirection/sleight of hand of a stage magician) is contrary to the notion of cause and effect. As you point out, light bulbs, flight and nuclear reactions all follow orderly rules of cause and effect. If you put a certain amount of electricity through a filament with a certain resistance then you can make the filament glow and give light and that will happen every time you do it until your filament evaporates/oxidizes to the breaking point.

The idea of a god is contrary to this well ordered view. If god does something it is an effect without a cause. Essentially a magic event. To invoke a god simply because we don't have an explanation for something is irrational unless you believe in magic.

Dark matter, if it exists, is not divine in nature. Rather it is merely undiscovered.

1
loadedgeodeOP•

Are you sure? How can you be? You can't. You are just using a very limited scientific method approach that has been hammered into you through education.

If we don't know what the vast majority of the universe consists of, then how can you say that the scientific method is even a relevant approach to the subject?

With this much uncertainty and the short history of human intelligence, it is irrational to think we can figure it all out with our 500 year old paradigms (which continually change).

To me the idea of a scientific law is a joke. It is only a law until it is disproved.

1
BorealismemeKnight of /new•

If we don't know what the vast majority of the universe consists of, then how can you say that the scientific method is even a relevant approach to the subject?

It beats saying "A God created by sheep herders over 2000 years ago did it". Until a better method than the scientific one is devised this is what we've got.

To me the idea of a scientific law is a joke. It is only a law until it is disproved.

This is exactly correct, however the alternative is to say "magic did it". The scientific method is so versatile not just because it requires accuracy, but also because it is fairly unequivocal in stating that incorrect models must be discarded in favor of more correct models.

Asking me if I'm sure is an incorrect question in the scientific model, the correct question is whether what I believe can be disproved. The answer to a scientist is either "not yet" or "yes, I'm currently looking for a better answer". Certainty is for folks with a dogmatic approach to existence, I can't even be sure we're not just a giant "The Sims" game for some 7-dimensional factory worker to play on his 7-dimensional equivalent of a personal computer.

As I mentioned, the alternative is to assume that the universe doesn't follow an orderly cause and effect relationship. In that case, there's really no point in bothering with any sort of reasoning at all, because according to that world view, anything can happen for no discernible reason.

1
kencabbit•

You provide a nice summary of what we know about Dark Matter. Notice that the sum of our knowledge about Dark Matter fits into a few short paragraphs. Note also that nothing in those paragraphs is evidence for God. Dark Matter is a gap, but there is no reason to suspect that gap is god shaped.

1
Grinyarg•

Needs more quantum mechanics.

1
loadedgeodeOP•

The only thing that I was aiming at in this thread is that if a smart person wanted to hang their hat on a scientific reason to have "faith", then I would hang it on dark matter. Personally, dark matter is one of several reasons why I choose to be agnostic vs. atheist--at least for now.

1
[deleted]•

Oh, how convenient. A theory about god that doesn't require looking through a telescope. Get back to work!

1