Where's the Dark Matter?

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Image: Boomerang Experiment

The University of Maryland's Stacy McGaugh is taking his victory lap around a theoretical track in cosmology this month. In a paper in the October issue of theAstrophysical Journal, McGaugh details how data collected by the balloon-borne Boomerang telescope (right) in the spring matches predictions he made in 1999, and not those based on traditional theories. The difference between the forecasts is this: whereas most astronomers believe that mysterious cold dark matter--comprised of unknown elementary particles--makes up 90 percent of our universe, McGaugh subscribes to the idea that all matter is entirely ordinary, a theory dubbed Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND).

The Boomerang experiment that, in McGaugh's view, tosses out cold dark matter theory measured the cosmic microwave background--the radiation that scientists think is an echo of sorts of the energy released during the Big Bang. (The artificial sky in the photo shows how big the background microwave fluctuations would appear to a standard 35mm camera if the camera were sensitive to microwave light.) The first peak that Boomerang showed in the background's power spectrum confirmed the idea, from inflation theory, that the universe is "flat." But a second, tinier peak contradicted cold dark matter theory and supported MOND.

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

As compelling as McGaugh's arguments are, they are still highly controversial. "Though Stacy's idea is very interesting, it's not really possible to point to the Boomerang findings or to any current observation and conclusively say which theory is correct," comments Cole Miller, McGaugh's colleague at UMD. "MOND introduces a new fundamental constant in a way that seems ad hoc and that is aesthetically displeasing to most cosmologists. On the other hand, cold dark matter postulates so many new and so far unobserved particles, so it's good to keep an open mind about both possibilities."

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American