Black Matter..Atoms.. and the Universe

From what I understand, scientists believe that only about 10% of the mass in the universe consist of atoms…and the other 90% which is invisible is called black matter which altho it contains no atoms, does affect the speed of planets as they rotate around the sun…the heavier planets rotate faster around the sun than less dense planets. And apparently this can only be explained by the presence of black matter. Lastly, if atoms have neither decreased or increased since the universe started, don’t we all, if this in correct, consist of atoms that are approximately 12 billion years old?. And wouldn’t the atoms from which we are made of, come from from atoms possibly from dead people, dead animals etc. If I’m stating any wrong information, please let me know, but please answer these questions. t


The closest I ever got to a 4.0 in high school was my blood alcohol content.

Since no one else has jumped in yet, let me start off.

First, the term generally used is “dark matter” (which you probably slightly misremembered), though sometimes you may hear references to “missing matter.”

Now, on to my wildly simplified explanation: Why is this matter “missing?” Well, we (meaning cosmologists and physicists, not me personally) have a pretty good idea of the age of the universe, from evidence like the cosmic background radiation and the observed motions of distant galaxies. From these and other data, scientists have been able to determine roughly how much mass the universe must have. (Because we can observe the effects of gravity, and know how gravity operates, we can deduce how much mass there is.)

For example, the Milky Way (our favorite galaxy) can be seen to contain a whole lotta stars (400 billion, roughly, IIRC). Judging from the evidence of our solar system, in which the sun is by far the greatest concentration of mass (everything else is trivial compared to the sun), we can make a rough estimate of the amount of matter in the galaxy. That calculated amount is lower than the amount of matter the Milky Way needs to have to revolve and stay together in the way that we’ve observed it to do by a factor of ten. In other words, the matter we know if there is only 10% of the matter needed to make the system operate in the way we know it is operating. Whether or not the missing mass is composed of the same elmentary particles as the matter we’re familiar with (quarks up through protons and their friends to atoms) is not quite clear.

So, where is that mass? There are several theories.

MACHOs are MAssive Compact Halo Objects – dark, extrememly massive objects in space. These would most likely be neutron stars and/or black holes. One problem with this theory is that if you chuck that much matter into what’s effectively a single point, the gravitational effects would be very obvious – it wouldn’t really be “missing.”

WIMPs are Weakly Interacting Massive Particles – theorized elementary particles that have great mass but only interact with “regular” matter rarely and weakly. The problem with this theory is that particles that interact weakly have so far without exception been massless or nearly so; in fact, many scientists believe that it’s physically impossible for a particle to be both massive and weakly interacting.

Then there are the more exotic theories (which I think are actually gaining in popularity at the moment), such as that the matter is a function of space itself. I don’t pretend to understand this one, but it seems to say that “empty” space itself has a measurable mass.

If you’re really interested in the subject, I recommend you pick up a recent book called Quintessence by Lawrence Krauss. It’s not easy reading, but it’s a serious look at the missing matter problem from one of the major theorists of the day.


…but when you get blue, and you’ve lost all your dreams, there’s nothing like a campfire and a can of beans!

Well, er, um … you’re not quite up on current thinking.

As much as 90% of the mass of the universe may be stuff that doesn’t radiate anything that we can detect yet. This conclusion is based on the fact that the matter we can see doesn’t have enough gravitational force to account for the observed motions of galaxies. The other 10% includes lots of stuff that isn’t atoms, such as elementary particles that are not parts of atoms, and the 90% may include a lot of atoms. See Dark Matter in the Universe, [Dark Matter], and [url=http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/html/comp.html]What is the Universe Made Of?](http://cfpa.berkeley.edu/darkmat/essay.html).

Assuming this “dark matter” does indeed exist, it does have mass and does have a gravitational effect on all other matter (including the planets in our Solar system). The effect on our local planets is immeasurably small.

The motion of a planet around the sun depends on its initial location, speed, and direction; the mass of the planet and the sun; and (to a lesser extent) on other factors such as the masses and locations of the other planets. It is not true in general that “heavier planets rotate faster around the sun than less dense planets”; Mercury (mass 330 Yg, mean orbital velocity 47.89 km/sec, period 88 days) rotates a lot faster than Jupiter (mass 1,900,000 Yg, mean orbital velocity 13.07 km/sec, period 4,333 days), and Jupiter rotates a lot faster than Pluto (mass 18 Yg, mean orbital velocity 4.75 km/sec, period 90,474 days). Because the Sun (mass 1,988,000,000 Yg) is very much larger than any planet, it is a very good approximation to say that the orbital velociy and period of a planet in stable orbit around the Sun depends only on the distance between the Sun and the planet. See Laws of Planetary Motion and Chris Dolan’s Astrophysical Calculator.

Physicists strongly believe that the amount of mass-energy in the universe is constant, but this does not mean that atoms (and elementary particles) cannot be converted to other forms of mass-energy. Atoms are assembled from other atoms and elementary particles in stars and nuclear fusion. However, the atoms of which we are made are indeed very old compared to our lifetimes. I recall a calculation that showed that it is very probable that the last breath you took contained at least one atom of oxygen that passed through Julius Ceasar’s lungs, but I don’t have a link to it.


jrf

Da Ace and Jon F: Thanks for your efforts in making this subject more understandable. I was under the impression that if Jupiter was the same distance from the Sun as Earth, that all things being equal, it would rotate around the sun in less than 100 days rather than 365+. Is this incorrect? and Why?


The closest I ever got to a 4.0 in high school was my blood alcohol content.

No, the only thing that determines the speed of an object in orbit is its distance from the thing that it’s orbiting. This was one of Kepler’s laws: the square of the length of time of a planet’s trip around the sun varies as the cube of the mean distance from the planet to the sun - and nothing else. A deeper explanation of why that’s true is that gravity causes everything to fall at the same speed from a given distance, if you can ignore friction (and you can in space). Jupiter would be pulled toward the sun by precisely the same amount if it were at the same distance as Earth.

Incidentally, what exactly is the point of announcing that you were an alcoholic in high school?

Wendell Wagner: I trust your question about the 4.0 signature is a serious one. I personally can’t stand alcohol except for an occasional beer. The Signature was meant as sort of a sardonic joke. But I have plenty more to use so I’ll get rid of that one.

Sorry, I guess I have trouble picking up irony.

[A deeper explanation of why that’s true is that gravity causes everything to fall at the same speed from a given distance, if you can ignore friction (and you can in space). Jupiter would be pulled toward the sun by precisely]
would this still hold if lets say planet (or astoriod) pluto was replaced by lets say a black hole traveling at the same distance and speed.
this would cause the sun to orbit the black hole, but would the distance remain the same- if so, what if the black hole’s event horizon enveloped the sun.

I think the law has to do with the combined mass of the 2 objects interacting. A simplification in plantary systems is to neglect the mass of the planet compaired to the star.

I generally adhere to Douglas Adams’ theory that the Missing Mass in the Universe is cheifly composed of styrofoam packing peanuts.

drewbert, eagerly waiting to see if his new signature works…

Aparrently not. Drat.