10 comments

[ 2.5 ms ] story [ 31.6 ms ] thread
"In theory" is a bit of a stretch, it seems. "In fairly wild, currently untestable hypothesis" might have been a better description.
I feel like this entire paragraph, to a real physicist, must read the way absurd TV or movie hacking dialog sounds to people in software:

"Based on the latest evidence and theories our galaxy could be a huge wormhole (or space-time tunnel, have you seen "Interstellar?") and, if that were true, it would be "stable and navigable". This is the hypothesis put forward in a study published in Annals of Physics and conducted with the participation of SISSA in Trieste. The paper, the result of a collaboration between Indian, Italian and North American researchers, prompts scientists to re-think dark matter more accurately."

What an absurd article, through and through.

"By applying intuition, we propose that the observed rotation curve profile in the dark matter region is of the form v φ = αr exp(−k1r) + β[1 − exp(−k2r)]."

I'm no physicist, but I don't think papers are supposed to "apply intuition" to come up with stuff like that.

We in the "biz" call this an "assumption". You assume that for arguments sake, plug it into your models and see what predictions that gets you.
This reminds me -- spoiler alert -- of the wormhole in Alastair Reynolds' House of Suns.
Reynolds is amazing at portraying scale. Battles lasting thousands of years, conspiracies lasting millions.
I hope no mainstream news source runs this story. Stuff like this makes the field look so goofy.
>>we hypothesise the existence of space-time tunnels

Oh, ok.

>>scientists have long tried to explain dark matter by hypothesising the existence of a particular particle, the neutralino, which, however, has never been identified at CERN or observed in the universe

Well, this article is a whole lot of nothing. Seems some phd's wanted to ride Interstallar's coat-tails for a little press. Its also incredibly arrogant and anthrocentric to think that our galaxy is one of the "good ones" for space travel. Seems like wishful, if not borderline religious, thinking to be frank. I guess you don't get published if you say some far off galaxy is the one that's perfect from Einstein–Rosen bridges.

> Its also incredibly arrogant and anthrocentric to think that our galaxy is one of the "good ones" for space travel.

Where did you get that out of the article? There was no comparison to other galaxies. It appears as though the exercise was performed for the Milky Way because of the detailed information available on its potential (and based on the assumption that this maps to dark matter). Presumably similar results would apply to other galaxies, since the shape of dark matter halos seem—from cosmological simulations—to be fairly universal. But I never got out of the article that the authors suggested the Milky Way was somehow "special", compared to other galaixes. In fact, if you look at the abstract from the preprint[0] it concludes with "thereby confirming the possible existence of wormholes in most of the spiral galaxies." So they explicitly state that this result would apply to a large number of galaxies.

[0] http://arxiv.org/abs/1501.00490