this post was submitted on 03 Mar 2026
17 points (94.7% liked)

Ask Science

16046 readers
191 users here now

Ask a science question, get a science answer.


Community Rules


Rule 1: Be respectful and inclusive.Treat others with respect, and maintain a positive atmosphere.


Rule 2: No harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or trolling.Avoid any form of harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or offensive behavior.


Rule 3: Engage in constructive discussions.Contribute to meaningful and constructive discussions that enhance scientific understanding.


Rule 4: No AI-generated answers.Strictly prohibit the use of AI-generated answers. Providing answers generated by AI systems is not allowed and may result in a ban.


Rule 5: Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.Adhere to community guidelines and comply with instructions given by moderators.


Rule 6: Use appropriate language and tone.Communicate using suitable language and maintain a professional and respectful tone.


Rule 7: Report violations.Report any violations of the community rules to the moderators for appropriate action.


Rule 8: Foster a continuous learning environment.Encourage a continuous learning environment where members can share knowledge and engage in scientific discussions.


Rule 9: Source required for answers.Provide credible sources for answers. Failure to include a source may result in the removal of the answer to ensure information reliability.


By adhering to these rules, we create a welcoming and informative environment where science-related questions receive accurate and credible answers. Thank you for your cooperation in making the Ask Science community a valuable resource for scientific knowledge.

We retain the discretion to modify the rules as we deem necessary.


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I had a random idea pop in my head while watching a video describing the relationship between radiation's energy density and entropy. And I'd like to run it past some people who have a deeper understanding of physics than I.

What if dark matter follows an inverted curve? What if we can't see it because while energetic it emits less radiation and then will become brighter and hotter as it loses energy? Perhaps it even has reversed entropy too and becomes more energetic over time.

This might be crazy, but dark matter is pretty crazy itself. Am I completely off base, or could that line up with any real theories? Maybe it could work with antimatter instead of dark matter?

Worst case I'm just curious and wrong, best case I inspire someone to discover something new. Thanks

top 4 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] OwOarchist@pawb.social 13 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

What if we can’t see it because while energetic it emits less radiation and then will become brighter and hotter as it loses energy? Perhaps it even has reversed entropy too and becomes more energetic over time.

I don't think this would fit the evidence we currently have for dark matter. If it absorbed energy, then it would be much more visible and detectable, as it would often be blocking light and other radiation from objects behind it (at least slightly) and even a slight drop in brightness when dark matter passes in front of something would be fairly easily detectable. (Unless the effect was extremely tiny, I suppose.)

Since that's very similar to methods already in widespread use to search for exoplanets, I think we probably would have noticed variations in star brightness as the amount of dark matter between us and the star varied over time.

As far as we can currently tell, dark matter only interacts with the rest of the universe through the gravitational force. It doesn't absorb or emit any energy. (Except, perhaps, gravitational wave energy.)

Maybe it could work with antimatter instead of dark matter?

Involving antimatter really doesn't help make anything here more plausible.

[–] vivalapivo@lemmy.today 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

It could be. But then again, if it is like this, it sure means the dark matter could not be described using the current physics.

Your idea is not that off, but it can't be glued with the rest of physics

[–] essell@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I suspect that's a good definition of Dark Matter based on current understanding. Something that doesn't fit in the current laws.

That's what's so exciting, if we can find some way, any way, to interact with it other than gravity, we'll have something to base a new definition on, along with new laws of physics! 😃

Sadly as it only seems to interact via gravity, that might not happen and best we might get is a good mathematical model to describe it.

[–] vivalapivo@lemmy.today 3 points 3 weeks ago

It's not that it doesn't fit. You can write whatever math you like.

But then you'll need to match it with observations. That's where the problem is. You can write a thousand of dozens theories that match the current observations, but they all will be wrong.

Here, for example, a pretty neat paper by an educated author that connects negative temperature with dark matter:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/360324627_Dark_Energy_is_Dark_Matter_below_Absolute_Zero_in_Black_Holes .

What of it? It doesn't help humanity. Just another page in the almanac of what dark matter could potentially be