The dark matter problem A historical perspective

Robert H. Sanders 2025 instant download

Available on ebookfinal.com
https://ebookfinal.com/download/the-dark-matter-problem-a-
historical-perspective-robert-h-sanders/

★★★★★
4.7 out of 5.0 (99 reviews )

Click & Get PDF

 The dark matter problem A historical perspective Robert H.
Sanders Pdf Download

EBOOK

Available Formats

■ PDF eBook Study Guide Ebook

EXCLUSIVE 2025 ACADEMIC EDITION – LIMITED RELEASE

Available Instantly Access Library

Here are some recommended products for you. Click the link to
download, or explore more at ebookfinal

The Dark Matter of Pragmatics 1st Edition Stephen C.

Levinson.

https://ebookfinal.com/download/the-dark-matter-of-pragmatics-1st-
edition-stephen-c-levinson/

The Quantum Revolution A Historical Perspective 1st

Edition Kent A. Peacock

https://ebookfinal.com/download/the-quantum-revolution-a-historical-
perspective-1st-edition-kent-a-peacock/

Jungians A Comparative and Historical Perspective 1st

Edition Thomas B Kirsch

https://ebookfinal.com/download/jungians-a-comparative-and-historical-
perspective-1st-edition-thomas-b-kirsch/

The White Goddess A Historical Grammar of Poetic Myth

Robert Graves

https://ebookfinal.com/download/the-white-goddess-a-historical-
grammar-of-poetic-myth-robert-graves/
The Broadband Problem Anatomy of a Market Failure and a
Policy Dilemma Charles H. Ferguson

https://ebookfinal.com/download/the-broadband-problem-anatomy-of-a-
market-failure-and-a-policy-dilemma-charles-h-ferguson/

Jews Are The Problem 1st Edition Ayo H. Kimathi

https://ebookfinal.com/download/jews-are-the-problem-1st-edition-ayo-
h-kimathi/

Dark Feelings Grim Thoughts 1st Edition Robert C. Solomon

https://ebookfinal.com/download/dark-feelings-grim-thoughts-1st-
edition-robert-c-solomon/

Charitable giving and tax policy a historical and

comparative perspective First Edition Fack

https://ebookfinal.com/download/charitable-giving-and-tax-policy-a-
historical-and-comparative-perspective-first-edition-fack/

Dark World A Book on the Deep Dark Web 1st Edition Atif
Ali

https://ebookfinal.com/download/dark-world-a-book-on-the-deep-dark-
web-1st-edition-atif-ali/
The dark matter problem A historical perspective Robert
H. Sanders Digital Instant Download
Author(s): Robert H. Sanders
ISBN(s): 9780521113014, 0521113016
Edition: draft
File Details: PDF, 4.36 MB
Year: 2009
Language: english
The dark matter problem
A historical perspective

Robert H. Sanders
 Contents

1 Introduction page 1
2 Early history of the dark matter hypothesis 13
2.1 Prehistory 13
2.2 Zwicky and the modern concept of dark matter 14
2.3 Dark matter on galaxy scales 17
2.4 Radio astronomy: a new tool for galactic astronomy 23
2.5 Finzi sums it up 27
3 The stability of disk galaxies: the dark halo solution 30
3.1 Building disk galaxies: too hot to be real 30
3.2 Dark halos to the rescue 35
3.3 Larger implications 39
4 Direct evidence: Extended rotation curves of spiral
galaxies 43
4.1 Radio telescopes: single dish and interferometers 43
4.2 Early results of single dish neutral hydrogen obser-
vations 49
4.3 Early observations of spiral galaxies with radio
interferometers 54
4.4 Flat rotation curves: perception approaches reality 57
5 The maximum disk: Light traces mass 65
5.1 Reaction follows revolution 65
5.2 The anomaly exists beyond the visible disk 70
5.3 Low surface brightness galaxies and sub-maximal disks 74
5.4 Reflections on observations of rotation curves 75
6 Cosmology and the birth of astroparticle physics 79
6.1 A brief history of modern cosmological models 80

iii
iv Contents
6.2 Structure formation: Dark matter again to the rescue 82
6.3 Some like it hot, most like it cold, all like it in the
pot 10 billion years old 87
6.4 What is the matter? 92
6.5 A new paradigm: Standard CDM 96
7 Clusters revisited: missing mass found 99
7.1 The reality of the cluster discrepancy 99
7.2 Hot gas in clusters of galaxies 100
7.3 Gravitational lensing: a new method for probing
cluster mass distribution 106
7.4 The Bullet 111
8 CDM confronts galaxy rotation curves 114
8.1 What do rotation curves require of dark matter 114
8.2 Global scaling relations 118
8.3 structure formation in a CDM Universe 120
8.4 The mass distribution in CDM dark halos 122
8.5 Substructure in CDM halos 129
8.6 The Tully-Fisher law 131
8.7 Can CDM be falsified by galaxy phenomenology? 132
9 The new cosmology: dark matter is not enough 135
9.1 The accelerated expansion of the Universe 135
9.2 COBE finds the primordial fluctuations. 140
9.3 What do we see in the CMB? 142
9.4 BOOMERANG to WMAP; the age of precision
cosmology 145
9.5 Reflections 147
10 An alternative to dark matter: Modified Newtonian
Dynamics 150
10.1 Naive modifications of Newtonian attraction 150
10.2 MOND 151
10.3 MOND and hot galaxies 157
10.4 MOND and rotation curves 158
10.5 The problem of clusters 163
10.6 Relativistic MOND: TeVeS 165
10.7 Summing up: MOND vs. dark matter 168
11 Seeing dark matter: the theory and practice of detec-
tion 171
11.1 Non-gravitational detection of dark matter 171
 Contents v
11.2 The practice of direct detection 173
11.3 Indirect detection of dark matter 181
11.4 Light on dark matter: the story so far 188
12 Reflections: a personal point of view 190
Appendix 1 Astronomy made simple 197
References 221
Acknowledgements 227
Index 229
 1
Introduction

My purpose here is to discuss the past and present of the dark matter
hypothesis: how it has developed that most astronomers and physicists
now believe that the matter content of the Universe is dominated by
an unseen, non-luminous substance that interacts with ordinary matter,
protons, neutrons, and electrons, primarily through the force of gravity.
This description is personal and based largely upon my perspective as
an interpretive astronomer. It is also necessarily biased. Throughout
most of my career, for the past 40 years now, I have been involved –
at times peripherally, often directly – in research on the discrepancy
between the detectable mass of astronomical systems and the inferred
Newtonian dynamical mass. Since my graduate student days, I have
worked at institutes where consideration of this problem, both theoret-
ical and observational, has been a dominant theme. My views on these
developments are certainly colored by my experience at these particular
institutes and, no doubt, by my own prejudices. But I do hope that the
account that I will give here is reasonably honest and fair.
Forty years ago, I was a graduate student at Princeton University.
In the Peyton Hall basement, every Wednesday, there was a a lively
lunch meeting attended by staff members and students. Theses projects
would be described, new ideas would be tossed out and batted around,
and often politics (in that lively rebellious period) would be discussed
in a highly dialectical manner. One Wednesday – it must have been in
1969 – one of our young assistant professors, Jerry Ostriker , appeared
at lunch with a radical new idea. Jerry was an expert on the stability
of rotating fluid spheroids (and many other subjects as well). He had
been following with interest the computer simulations of disk galaxies
which, at that point, were becoming extremely sophisticated, involving
large numbers of particles all interacting gravitationally. He had noticed

1
2 Introduction
that in these simulations disks of particles which were initially supported
against gravity by rotation – lets say, centrifugal force – did not seem
to remain that way. The round disks developed elongated shapes and
heated up – that is, they became more like hot pressure supported sys-
tems rather than rotating systems.
This corresponded perfectly to what Jerry knew about rotating fluid
spheroids: it is impossible to construct such an object supported entirely
by rotation; Newtonian dynamical systems supported by rotation are
unstable. But our Galaxy, the Milky Way Galaxy, appears to be held up
almost entirely by rotation; the stars near the sun are moving on nearly
circular orbits about the center of the Galaxy. How is it that the Galaxy
can remain rotationally supported and yet stable? Jerry’s brilliant leap
was to suggest that the Galaxy, in fact, is not rotationally supported
– that the rotationally supported disk is only one component of the
Galaxy. There is another major component, a spheroidal component,
at least equal in mass to the disk, and this system is primarily pressure
supported. Because no such massive spheroidal component is seen, it
must be dark – a dark halo.
On that Wednesday, this suggestion appeared radical; I recall that
it caused a great stir and considerable argument, especially from some
of the more senior staff members such as Martin Schwarzschild . He
raised a number of questions most of which concerned the composition
of the dark halo (Schwarzschild was an astronomer after all). What is
the dark halo made out of? Low luminosity stars possibly – red dwarfs
– remnants of dead stars – white dwarfs . How might it be detected by
means other than its gravitational influence? An infrared glow around
galaxies, perhaps; high velocity, low luminosity stars, maybe. No one
could have supposed at that point that the halo might consist of weakly
interacting, subatomic particles. This would have been far too radical.
No one of us would have dared to suggest, even if they had thought of
it, that Newton’s laws might need revision on the scale of galaxies and
larger; that would have seemed insane.
In 1973, Ostriker , joined by his Princeton colleague, Jim Peebles,
published this proposal which by that point had been bolstered by their
own N-body calculations; the idea provoked even more controversy in the
larger community than it had on that Wednesday afternoon in Princeton
(Chapter 3). Although this was a radically new idea with an entirely
theoretical basis, there had been considerable earlier evidence that as-
tronomical systems contain large quantities of unseen matter. In 1933
the Swiss astronomer Fritz Zwicky had made the first systematic kine-
 Introduction 3
matic study of a cluster of galaxies and pointed out that in order to
gravitationally bind the cluster the actual mass had to be several hun-
dred times larger than the observed mass in stars (Chapter 2). Earlier,
in 1932 the Dutch astronomer Jan Oort , by looking at the motion of
the stars above the galactic plane, concluded that there must be about
50% more mass in the Galaxy disk than is evidenced by luminous stars.
But Oort ’s dark matter was distributed in the plane of the Galaxy,
like most of the observed stars; this would probably not solve Ostriker’s
stability problem. Moreover, Oort included the undetected component
of the interstellar medium, dust and gas, as part of the dark component
so that it did not seem, at the time particularly mysterious.
But observational evidence in support of the idea that spiral galaxies
possessed a substantial more extended unseen component was begin-
ning to appear in the early 1970s. My first real position, in 1972, was
at the National Radio Astronomy Observatory in Charlottesville, Vir-
ginia. This was primarily an observational institute and I was known as
a “house theoretician”. Radio astronomers at NRAO , such as Mort
Roberts and Seth Shostak, had been observing the distribution and
motion of neutral hydrogen in the outer parts of galaxies through the
spectral line emitted by hydrogen at a wavelength of 21 cm (Chapter
4). They noticed that the rotational velocity of the gas does not seem
to be declining with distance from the centers of galaxies as it should
for a bounded mass distribution. The rotation velocity appeared to be
constant well beyond the visible image of the galaxy. This was a very
contentious result at the time, with heated debates about telescope side
lobes and possible warping of the gas layers in spiral galaxies, but it was
a clear early indication that there is a real discrepancy between the dy-
namical and visible mass in galaxies. And it was in complete accordance
with the suggestion of Ostriker and Peebles.
Later in my career, in 1977, I accepted a position at the Kapteyn As-
tronomical Institute at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands,
again, a house theoretician at a primarily observational institute. A few
years before that, the synthesis radio telescope at Westerbork, a one
and one-half kilometer array of dishes used as a single telescope, had
begun operating and was being applied to observe the distribution and
motion of neutral hydrogen in spiral galaxies with relatively high spa-
tial and velocity resolution. The radio astronomers at Groningen were
making precise measurements of the “rotation curves” of spiral galax-
ies – how the gas rotates as a function of distance from the center well
beyond the visible object. Consistent with the earlier observations, the
4 Introduction
rotation velocity was not seen to decline but remained constant with
distance implying that the gas, although well beyond most of the light
of the galaxies, is still immersed in the mass distribution of the galaxy –
that the mass in the outer regions of the galaxies is dark. Coming from
Princeton and from NRAO , with all my theoretical and observational
prejudices, this was not a surprising result for me. I realize now that I
was not as excited as I should have been. Westerbork was producing the
most convincing and direct observational confirmation of an idea that
was still quite tentative – the idea that the visible parts of galaxies were
a tiny shiny central component of a vast dark system.
Evidence from other sources had been mounting as well. High resolu-
tion measurements of rotation curves from spectroscopic observations of
optical emission lines by Vera Rubin and her collaborators were begin-
ning to appear in the literature – these rotation curves were also flat out
to the optical edge of the galaxy. Because the rotation velocity was not
measured beyond the optical image, this did not constitute compelling
evidence for dark matter, as I will discuss in Chapter 5, but that was not
the perception at the time. These observations had an enormous impact
on the growing realization that there was a substantial dark matter com-
ponent in spiral galaxies. By the early 1980s this viewpoint was rapidly
becoming the paradigm.
My own interest has been mostly centered on galaxies and the man-
ifestations of the mass discrepancy on galaxy-scale. But evidence was
mounting on other scales as well. In the 1970s satellites that could ob-
serve the sky at X-ray wavelengths (this radiation does not penetrate
the atmosphere of the earth) were launched into earth orbit. It was dis-
covered that distant clusters of galaxies were powerful sources of X-rays
and that this emission is thermal radiation from vast pools of hot gas
filling the clusters. In fact, the mass of gas generally exceeds that of
the stars in galaxies by a factor of two or three. Could this be Zwicky’s
missing cluster mass? For such a gaseous object in equilibrium one can,
by measuring the temperature and density distribution of the gas, de-
termine the gravitational field and, hence, with Newton’s law of gravity,
the mass of the entire system. When this was done, it became apparent
that most of the mass of clusters of galaxies was still unseen; that the
clusters contained at least five or six times more mass than was detected
in stars and gas. Was this dark matter the same as that in individual
galaxies? It was, and is, generally assumed to be so.
It was also becoming evident in the late 1970s that something was
missing on a cosmological scale. The Universe is typically modeled as
 Introduction 5
an expanding, isotropic, homogeneous fluid, and certainly on the largest
scales it appears to be that way. The Cosmic Microwave Background
radiation (the CMB) discovered in 1965 by Arno Penzias and Robert
Wilson should reflect density fluctuations in the cosmic fluid when the
Universe was only 300 000 years old – when protons and electrons com-
bined to make neutral hydrogen and the radiation decoupled from the
matter. These fluctuations in the CMB were looked for and not found
at the level of about one part in 10 000. This means that all of the
structure that we observe in the Universe – from stars to galaxies to
clusters of galaxies and to super-clusters – has formed in the last 14
billion years or so by the gravitational growth of incredibly small fluc-
tuations. This just did not seem possible in the context of the standard
theory of gravitational instability. A solution to this problem was to
add dark matter but a special kind of dark matter: matter consisting of
particles that interacts with light or ordinary (baryonic) matter primar-
ily through gravity– non-baryonic dark matter. Because it is decoupled
from the radiation, this dark matter fluid can begin to gravitationally
collapse sooner than the normal baryonic matter – before the recombi-
nation of hydrogen. This gives the observed structure time to form from
the very small density fluctuations. So dark matter on a cosmological
scale appeared to be a necessity as well. (the missing fluctuations were
finally seen at a level of 10−5 by the COBE satellite in 1992).
But a completely new aspect of the dark matter problem emerged
from these cosmological considerations. This cosmological dark matter
is very different than what had originally been imagined for the dark
halos surrounding galaxies. It is not small or dead stars, but subatomic
particles – and not the ordinary subatomic particles like protons and
neutrons, but something else which interacts very weakly – neutrinos
perhaps, or something even more exotic, something not yet detected in
terrestrial laboratories. At about the same time particle physics theory
was advancing beyond its so-called Standard Model. New ideas on the
unification of forces were being proposed – grand unification and then,
Supersymmetry. These new theories provide a host of particle dark mat-
ter candidates in addition to the modest neutrino. Subatomic particles
possess an attribute called “spin” that is quantized (it comes in distinct
lumps). In Supersymmetry every known Standard Model particle is re-
quired to have a supersymmetric partner that differs by half-integer spin.
So this theory, in effect, doubles the number of possible particles. Only
one of these hypothetical particles – the lowest mass superpartner – is
stable and long lived and could be the dark matter. But because of this
6 Introduction
possibility, physicists became very excited about the prospect of dark
matter – some even appeared to believe that they had invented dark
matter. This union of astronomers, cosmologists and particle physicists
led to the development of a new, interdisciplinary subject – astroparticle
physics. Once again, astronomical observations had spawned not only a
new paradigm, but a new field of study.
In the Spring of 1982, I was taking a four month sabbatical at NRAO
and enjoying the Virginia Spring while working on an absolutely unre-
lated topic – the jets observed to be emanating from some active galactic
nuclei. In those days, preprints of scientific articles – pre-publication ver-
sions of papers which were usually in press already – were not placed on
the Internet – there was no Internet – but were distributed in printed
form between various scientific institutes. NRAO was definitely on this
preprint circuit, and at some point, around April 1982, three preprints
arrived from the Institute of Advanced Study in Princeton. These were
preprints on the missing matter problem authored by an Israeli physi-
cist, Mordehai Milgrom. I had actually encountered Milgrom before in
a rather competitive way; he had independently developed a model that
I had proposed some years before – a model for compact radio sources
with apparent faster-than-light motion. But here, in these articles, Mil-
grom was proposing a very radical new idea – and not one that I could
claim to have thought of. He was suggesting there is no dark matter
but that the usual Newtonian dynamics or gravity was not applicable
on these extragalactic scales. His hypothesis was called “modified New-
tonian dynamics” or MOND for short. These preprints first brought
home to me the realization that, after all, dark matter is a sort of ether
– a medium that is necessary to make observations consistent with the
expectations of existing theory. If the theory is inappropriate on these
scales, then perhaps there is no ether.
Now Milgrom’s idea is basically very simple: Newtonian dynamics is
modified at low accelerations – that the familiar old formula F = ma
becomes more like F = ma2 /a0 at accelerations below a critical value a0 .
This simple modification appears to accomplish a great deal. It yields
flat galaxy rotation curves in the limit of large radius (low acceleration),
and provides a relation between the mass of a galaxy and its rotation
velocity, or if mass is proportional to luminosity, a luminosity-rotation
velocity relation. In fact, such a relation had been observed years before
by Brent Tully and Rick Fisher – the Tully-Fisher relation – and Mil-
grom’s acceleration-based modification provided a simple explanation of
this correlation as resulting from existent physical law, as opposed to
 Introduction 7
dark matter which attributed such scaling relations to the contingen-
cies of galaxy formation. Moreover, MOND predicts that high surface
brightness systems, like globular star clusters for example, should have
no apparent dark matter problem – and that low surface brightness sur-
face brightness systems, such as the dwarf spheroidal satellites of our
own Galaxy, should have a large discrepancy.
I was fascinated by this idea, but I thought that it was probably
not correct. Such a drastic modification would surely have other conse-
quences – consequences for cosmology and large scale structure in the
Universe. It seemed to me that it was not just sufficient to explain a
few facts about galaxies, the idea had to fit into a much large picture.
There is much more to explain than galaxies.
I let this go for a while, but then, a couple of years later, back in
Groningen, I had my own idea. I read a paper by a French physicist,
Joel Sherck, who proposed that, consistent with Supersymmetry or its
follower, Supergravity, additional fields might exist in the Universe, fields
which couple to matter with gravitational strength. One possibility is a
vector field, but vector fields, like electromagnetism, produce a repulsive
force between similar particles – an anti-gravity. The force would be
carried by a particle, a so-called vector boson. Sherck wanted this vector
boson to have a finite mass and therefore a limited range, but a range
so small that it would have no actual macroscopic effect on scales of one
meter or so where the inverse square law of gravity had been carefully
measured (the larger the mass of the field, the smaller its range). I
picked up on this suggestion and warped it to my own purpose.
How could a repulsive force yield flat rotation curves. I thought –
perhaps gravity, locally, is a mixture of repulsion and attraction, but
slightly more attraction. Suppose also that the vector boson which me-
diates the repulsive force has a such small mass that its range would be
on the scale of galaxies. This would mean that on a scale larger than
a galaxy the repulsive force would die away leaving pure attraction. It
would be possible to have a larger effective gravitational attraction on
extragalactic scales than on sub-galactic scale. Adjusting the mass of
the vector boson correctly and the ratio of repulsion to attraction cor-
rectly, one could produce flat rotation curves for spiral galaxies over a
range of about a factor of 10 in radius. This, I thought, led to a more
cosmologically acceptable model, because on largest scale, there was a
return to inverse square attraction, and the Universe behaved as it would
in the standard picture with 10 times more dark than visible matter. I
might add here that I didn’t know very much about General Relativity
8 Introduction
in those days and didn’t realize that my proposal would violate the local
universality of free fall (first tested by Galileo in his famous, but proba-
bly fictional, Tower of Pisa experiment) in a very blatant and detectable
way.
I immediately submitted a short paper to Astronomy and Astrophysics
(the European Journal) and waited to see what would happen. There
were two reviewers of the paper, one of whom was Milgrom. He was
very negative in his report. He pointed out that such a modification
would, indeed, lead to a Tully-Fisher law, but the wrong Tully-Fisher
law: L ∝ V 2 instead of L ∝ V 4 , as is, so he claimed, more consistent
with observations. I protested. I thought that the form of the Tully-
Fisher law was not so evident at that point; it seems to depend upon the
color in which the luminosity is measured, and in blue light it is more
like L ∝ V 2 . I was so attracted by my idea that I thought that it must
be published, and after much pleading with the editor (who occupied an
office a few doors from my own), it was.
I cherished this idea for several years more, but then, the reality of
galaxy phenomenology caught up with me in the form of two facts. The
first fact is that Milgrom was right about the form of the Tully-Fisher
law – when measured in the near-infrared emission from stars (the ra-
diation from the old, low-mass stars that are the dominant component
of the stellar disk), the relation really is more like L ∝ V 4 as he said.
The second is this: larger galaxies do not exhibit a larger discrepancy –
big galaxies do not need more “dark matter”. I had proposed a modi-
fication of gravity attached to a definite fixed length scale. This means
that galaxies which are larger than this length scale should have a larger
discrepancy and smaller galaxies a smaller discrepancy or even no dis-
crepancy at all. Being at an institute that was primarily observational
and producing new rotation curves every day, I realized that this was
not true. There are very small galaxies with a large discrepancy, and
very large galaxies with a small discrepancy. The discrepancy seems
to be more dependent upon surface brightness (the energy of radiation
emerging per second per square meter at the source) than size, and sur-
face brightness, in so far as it reflects surface density, is proportional to
acceleration.
My idea seemed pitiful and lonely without any observational support,
so even I had to abandon it. I think, actually, that many scientist have
trouble with this. We become too deeply attached to ideas because
they are ours – but confronted by the facts, painful though it is, we
are forced to forsake our pet theories. It must have been around 1985
 Introduction 9
when I realized that Milgrom was right. The only sort of modification
of gravity or dynamics that could possibly replace dark matter was a
modification attached to an acceleration scale. Then began for me a
long period, still continuing, of work on MOND – observational and
theoretical. I corresponded with and met another Israeli colleague of
Milgrom’s – the physicist Jacob Bekenstein . Jacob was a relativist –
expert in General Relativity well-known for his work on black holes –
and he believed that MOND should be viewed as a modification of the
theory of gravity. Jacob thought, and I agreed, that if MOND is to ever
be acceptable it must connect to more familiar physics – it must be an
aspect of a more general theory of gravity or inertia. I still think that
this is true, but it is also true that what is “familiar” changes as well.
But what of dark matter? If MOND is right, is dark matter wrong?
Simply defined, MOND is an algorithm for calculating the gravitational
force in an astronomical object, from the observed distribution of ordi-
nary baryonic (detectable) matter. And it works – at least on the scale
of galaxies. Because it works, this is very problematic for dark matter –
at least on the scale of galaxies. It would seem to imply a very precise
coupling between dark matter and baryonic matter – a coupling that is
not comprehensible in the context of standard or “cold” dark matter.
On the other hand, cold dark matter is quite successful on cosmological
scales; it predicts the formation of observed large scale structure and
the magnitude and distribution of fluctuations in the primordial Cosmic
Microwave Background . How could these two be reconciled?
But another interesting twist, which no one really imagined twenty
years ago, emerged in the late 1990s: dark matter alone is not sufficient;
it appears that, on a cosmological scale, “dark energy ” is also required.
This is a mysterious fluid with a negative pressure that does not dilute
as the Universe expands and leads to the accelerated expansion of the
Universe. In Einstein’s theory of gravity, General Relativity , the dark
energy is embodied by the so-called “cosmological constant”. It may
also be identified the energy density of the vacuum, a concept of mod-
ern quantum field theory in which “empty” space is actually filled with
virtual particles popping into and out of existence – virtual but gravi-
tating. In this case, the vacuum energy density should be many orders
of magnitude larger than it is observed to be; in fact, so large that the
Universe as we observe it would be impossible. The observation of a tiny
value for the vacuum energy density, tiny in terms of the expectations of
quantum field theory, is one of the greatest puzzles in modern physics.
Now that we “know” the composition of the Universe, some cosmolo-
10 Introduction
gists have become quite triumphal. There certainly has been enormous
progress, but given this very strange composition – a mysterious and
unnatural dark energy as well as a dark matter fluid which has not
been detected by any means other than its gravitational influence – tri-
umphalism seems to be premature. To me, it appears presumptuous to
assume that we human beings at this point in our development under-
stand either the material content of the Universe or all of its physical
laws.
Here I want to describe the process of discovery over the past 40 years
that has led to the development of the dark matter paradigm as well as
the now standard cosmological model. Of course, these developments
have spawned not only the paradigm but also its alternative as I will
discuss this in Chapter 10. I will discuss the dark matter vs. MOND
controversy as a conflict of paradigms, but my primary purpose is to
provide the reader with a reasonably objective view of the major devel-
opments in the emergence of dark matter-dark energy view of the world.
Most of my own experience is in the field of galactic astronomy. So in
this discussion I will emphasize galaxy scale phenomenology which pro-
vides, after all, the primary observational evidence for dark matter that
clusters on small scale and is, possibly, directly detectable locally.
I will not discuss one very interesting aspect of the dark matter prob-
lem: the development of the astronomy of gravitational micro-lensing
with the goal of detecting “massive compact halo objects” or “MA-
CHOS”. This a brilliant observational technique spawned a new arena
of astronomical research and provided the direct observational evidence
that normal “baryonic” matter in the form of stellar and sub-stellar
mass objects, could not be the principal constituent of dark matter ha-
los about galaxies. I refer the reader to the book on dark matter by
Freeman and McNamara for a highly readable account of this develop-
ment.
The level of this discussion should be appropriate for professionals
as well as beginning students and interested readers with some scientific
background. Therefore, the presentation is essentially non-mathematical.
However, I include an pedagogic appendix is that is primarily for those
who are less familiar with astronomical concepts and terminology. Here
I provide the most relevant formulae and definitions. This can safely be
skipped by professionals or more advanced students, but the scientifi-
cally literate reader may find this survey to be useful as an introduction
to the jargon as well as the more quantitative aspects of the problem.
In particular, I focus on the following points:
Other documents randomly have
different content
 Sociology - Learning Objectives
First 2024 - Laboratory

Prepared by: Assistant Prof. Garcia

Date: July 28, 2025

Practice 1: Practical applications and examples

Learning Objective 1: Best practices and recommendations
• Problem-solving strategies and techniques
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
[Figure 1: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Learning Objective 2: Theoretical framework and methodology
• Historical development and evolution
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Learning Objective 3: Key terms and definitions
• Best practices and recommendations
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Learning Objective 4: Interdisciplinary approaches
• Historical development and evolution
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Learning Objective 5: Best practices and recommendations
• Research findings and conclusions
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
[Figure 5: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Note: Ethical considerations and implications
• Theoretical framework and methodology
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Key Concept: Research findings and conclusions
• Literature review and discussion
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
[Figure 7: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Key Concept: Research findings and conclusions
• Problem-solving strategies and techniques
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Note: Current trends and future directions
• Key terms and definitions
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Note: Key terms and definitions
• Case studies and real-world applications
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Methodology 2: Assessment criteria and rubrics
Note: Ethical considerations and implications
• Research findings and conclusions
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
[Figure 11: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Definition: Theoretical framework and methodology
• Ethical considerations and implications
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Important: Learning outcomes and objectives
• Problem-solving strategies and techniques
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
[Figure 13: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Definition: Historical development and evolution
• Fundamental concepts and principles
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Key Concept: Fundamental concepts and principles
• Current trends and future directions
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Note: Research findings and conclusions
• Theoretical framework and methodology
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
[Figure 16: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Important: Problem-solving strategies and techniques
• Ethical considerations and implications
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Example 17: Interdisciplinary approaches
• Assessment criteria and rubrics
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
[Figure 18: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Important: Comparative analysis and synthesis
• Best practices and recommendations
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
[Figure 19: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Example 19: Assessment criteria and rubrics
• Comparative analysis and synthesis
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Appendix 3: Current trends and future directions
Key Concept: Literature review and discussion
• Case studies and real-world applications
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Remember: Current trends and future directions
• Critical analysis and evaluation
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Remember: Practical applications and examples
• Theoretical framework and methodology
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Important: Best practices and recommendations
• Problem-solving strategies and techniques
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Example 24: Ethical considerations and implications
• Practical applications and examples
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Important: Statistical analysis and interpretation
• Interdisciplinary approaches
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Example 26: Case studies and real-world applications
• Historical development and evolution
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Example 27: Current trends and future directions
• Research findings and conclusions
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Practice Problem 28: Key terms and definitions
• Critical analysis and evaluation
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Remember: Research findings and conclusions
• Current trends and future directions
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
[Figure 30: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Quiz 4: Learning outcomes and objectives
Remember: Comparative analysis and synthesis
• Research findings and conclusions
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
[Figure 31: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Important: Current trends and future directions
• Theoretical framework and methodology
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Practice Problem 32: Key terms and definitions
• Interdisciplinary approaches
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Definition: Case studies and real-world applications
• Theoretical framework and methodology
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Important: Statistical analysis and interpretation
• Problem-solving strategies and techniques
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
[Figure 35: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Note: Key terms and definitions
• Fundamental concepts and principles
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Important: Ethical considerations and implications
• Theoretical framework and methodology
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Example 37: Study tips and learning strategies
• Critical analysis and evaluation
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Practice Problem 38: Critical analysis and evaluation
• Critical analysis and evaluation
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Example 39: Research findings and conclusions
• Ethical considerations and implications
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
[Figure 40: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Section 5: Critical analysis and evaluation
Key Concept: Assessment criteria and rubrics
• Statistical analysis and interpretation
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Example 41: Statistical analysis and interpretation
• Comparative analysis and synthesis
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Note: Statistical analysis and interpretation
• Assessment criteria and rubrics
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
[Figure 43: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Key Concept: Ethical considerations and implications
• Learning outcomes and objectives
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Definition: Fundamental concepts and principles
• Study tips and learning strategies
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Example 45: Practical applications and examples
• Historical development and evolution
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Important: Best practices and recommendations
• Comparative analysis and synthesis
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Practice Problem 47: Fundamental concepts and principles
• Experimental procedures and results
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Key Concept: Current trends and future directions
• Problem-solving strategies and techniques
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Remember: Current trends and future directions
• Fundamental concepts and principles
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Test 6: Current trends and future directions
Note: Comparative analysis and synthesis
• Interdisciplinary approaches
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
[Figure 51: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Remember: Best practices and recommendations
• Statistical analysis and interpretation
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Definition: Experimental procedures and results
• Ethical considerations and implications
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Remember: Case studies and real-world applications
• Theoretical framework and methodology
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Example 54: Key terms and definitions
• Best practices and recommendations
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Definition: Case studies and real-world applications
• Study tips and learning strategies
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Definition: Interdisciplinary approaches
• Literature review and discussion
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Example 57: Key terms and definitions
• Assessment criteria and rubrics
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
[Figure 58: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Important: Critical analysis and evaluation
• Historical development and evolution
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Remember: Key terms and definitions
• Study tips and learning strategies
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Unit 7: Case studies and real-world applications
Note: Practical applications and examples
• Problem-solving strategies and techniques
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Key Concept: Problem-solving strategies and techniques
• Ethical considerations and implications
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
[Figure 62: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Practice Problem 62: Fundamental concepts and principles
• Research findings and conclusions
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Remember: Current trends and future directions
• Ethical considerations and implications
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
[Figure 64: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Important: Study tips and learning strategies
• Statistical analysis and interpretation
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
[Figure 65: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Remember: Learning outcomes and objectives
• Experimental procedures and results
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Key Concept: Statistical analysis and interpretation
• Practical applications and examples
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Definition: Literature review and discussion
• Statistical analysis and interpretation
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Remember: Historical development and evolution
• Case studies and real-world applications
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
[Figure 69: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Important: Best practices and recommendations
• Best practices and recommendations
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Methodology 8: Assessment criteria and rubrics
Important: Literature review and discussion
• Comparative analysis and synthesis
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Note: Historical development and evolution
• Key terms and definitions
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Definition: Statistical analysis and interpretation
• Current trends and future directions
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Note: Research findings and conclusions
• Interdisciplinary approaches
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
[Figure 74: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Remember: Statistical analysis and interpretation
• Literature review and discussion
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Example 75: Practical applications and examples
• Theoretical framework and methodology
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
[Figure 76: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Remember: Case studies and real-world applications
• Historical development and evolution
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Definition: Study tips and learning strategies
• Assessment criteria and rubrics
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Definition: Fundamental concepts and principles
• Current trends and future directions
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Example 79: Problem-solving strategies and techniques
• Experimental procedures and results
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
References 9: Critical analysis and evaluation
Remember: Best practices and recommendations
• Assessment criteria and rubrics
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
[Figure 81: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Key Concept: Experimental procedures and results
• Practical applications and examples
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Key Concept: Fundamental concepts and principles
• Practical applications and examples
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Example 83: Experimental procedures and results
• Key terms and definitions
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebookfinal.com