![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
Rather than move this article to Dark_matter, I believe it and Hot_dark_matter should be there...unless I'm missing something. BF
Does "cold" just mean "slow compared to the speed of light"? 124.168.192.129 ( talk) 05:55, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Machos are not in this group, but in barionic dark matter.- Mazarin07 ( talk) 13:11, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks to you all, contributors to this article. It has now been translated into FR. Hop ! Kikuyu3 ( talk) 20:23, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
I deleted that paragraph for two reasons:
(1) it was very unclear. It never said that the BHs are a dark matter candidate. As such, its meaning was quite obscure to a non-expert. Since the source it referenced does claim that, any such paragraph should mention the numerous major problems with the proposal.
(2) Due weight. This is a fringe idea that's accepted by very, very few cosmologists. It can't be discussed until the more mainstream ideas are. Waleswatcher (talk) 03:38, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
(Let's continue and try to resolve this discussion in one place at Talk:Dark matter#intermediate mass black holes.) 67.6.175.184 ( talk) 03:57, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Cold dark matter/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
The "Missing Galaxies Problem" may have been solved, basically astrophysicists have been able to observe new dwarf galaxies that are 99% dark matter using the Keck II telescope to follow up on objects found during the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. Ref: 'Missing Dwarf Galaxy' Problem May Be Solved |
Last edited at 18:17, 15 September 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 12:00, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
There is a link from the DAB page CCDM to this article, claiming the acronym is used for collisionless cold dark matter. Having seen this in a number of published papers, I believe it correct, but there is no mention of the acronym in the article which could confuse visitors. Can it be shoe-horned in somewhere? Lithopsian ( talk) 15:19, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
Please add short info on this paper to the article – probably to section #Challenges. It's currently featured in 2020 in science like so (you could also edit the item there):
Scientists report that results of cold dark matter simulations – probability of strong gravitational lensing events due to dark-matter distributions in 11 galaxy clusters – based on current theories are substantially inconsistent with observational data. [1] [2]
-- Prototyperspective ( talk) 21:54, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
References
This is the only occurrence of 'particle' in the article as an adjective connoting a type of 'cold dark matter paradigm'. Suggest it be deleted. Humanengr ( talk) 14:55, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
Rather than move this article to Dark_matter, I believe it and Hot_dark_matter should be there...unless I'm missing something. BF
Does "cold" just mean "slow compared to the speed of light"? 124.168.192.129 ( talk) 05:55, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
Machos are not in this group, but in barionic dark matter.- Mazarin07 ( talk) 13:11, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks to you all, contributors to this article. It has now been translated into FR. Hop ! Kikuyu3 ( talk) 20:23, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
I deleted that paragraph for two reasons:
(1) it was very unclear. It never said that the BHs are a dark matter candidate. As such, its meaning was quite obscure to a non-expert. Since the source it referenced does claim that, any such paragraph should mention the numerous major problems with the proposal.
(2) Due weight. This is a fringe idea that's accepted by very, very few cosmologists. It can't be discussed until the more mainstream ideas are. Waleswatcher (talk) 03:38, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
(Let's continue and try to resolve this discussion in one place at Talk:Dark matter#intermediate mass black holes.) 67.6.175.184 ( talk) 03:57, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Cold dark matter/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
The "Missing Galaxies Problem" may have been solved, basically astrophysicists have been able to observe new dwarf galaxies that are 99% dark matter using the Keck II telescope to follow up on objects found during the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. Ref: 'Missing Dwarf Galaxy' Problem May Be Solved |
Last edited at 18:17, 15 September 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 12:00, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
There is a link from the DAB page CCDM to this article, claiming the acronym is used for collisionless cold dark matter. Having seen this in a number of published papers, I believe it correct, but there is no mention of the acronym in the article which could confuse visitors. Can it be shoe-horned in somewhere? Lithopsian ( talk) 15:19, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
Please add short info on this paper to the article – probably to section #Challenges. It's currently featured in 2020 in science like so (you could also edit the item there):
Scientists report that results of cold dark matter simulations – probability of strong gravitational lensing events due to dark-matter distributions in 11 galaxy clusters – based on current theories are substantially inconsistent with observational data. [1] [2]
-- Prototyperspective ( talk) 21:54, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
References
This is the only occurrence of 'particle' in the article as an adjective connoting a type of 'cold dark matter paradigm'. Suggest it be deleted. Humanengr ( talk) 14:55, 14 August 2021 (UTC)