A dramatic Einstein ring seen by Webb
This is a great podcast, with episode 6 concentrating specifically on Dark Matter and the evidence for it: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/crash-course-pods-the-...
in any case, you can't say it's support for dark matter in this specific case without actually running the numbers (what are the rotational speeds and what is the bending curvature)
dark matter halos must have a somewhat specific distribution that goes beyond the perimeter of the visible galaxy itself.
however the more that i think about it this example is likely to be unhelpful. the closer galaxy looks elliptical and most dense elliptical galaxies "have no dark matter" (in basic MOND this is a phenomenon that falls out if the gravity law). We'd really need lensing from a more "normal" looking galaxy.
I regret that now.
I regret that now.
I, on the other hand, am thankful for it. I love watching Anton Petrov, PBS Space Time, and various other experts and communicators in anything space-related. This looks like a great podcast that slipped me by, so I appreciate the link.
(I do agree with Angela Collier, youtuber nee physicst, Dark Matter is not a theory, it's an observation. We've looked out into the universe and have seen something that we call Dark Matter that our current theories don't match up with.)
They could be two different reasons.
I do prefer Occom's razor for these things. We've seen a bunch extremely large celestial objects move in ways that our models cannot account for with the things that we can see. Sure, there could be more than one thing out there causing all of those extremely similar effects. But that's far less likely than there just being one reason.
I'll confess the paper is a bit over my head. Astrophysics was never my passion and I became a software engineer right out of college anyways, so I'm a little rusty. However, in the 2005 paper they state that the BAO, specifically the way that the BAO has propagated, can't be explained by baryonic matter alone, which in their words would show a much larger effect than observed. This seems to be yet another observation that is consistent with dark matter.
However, since you must be a working astrophysicist, could you enlighten me with what you think is wrong with the interpretation of those observations? Do you think the >3 sigma confidence isn't enough for astrophysics?
I am genuinely curious.
Here’s what I mean: https://webbtelescope.org/contents/media/images/01G529MX46J7...
While all stars can create these patterns, we only see spikes with the brightest stars when a telescope takes an image.
These distant galaxies are incredibly faint, so I imagine that's the reason there are no obvious diffraction effects.
https://www.esa.int/ESA_Multimedia/Images/2025/03/Webb_spies... ("Webb spies a spiral through a cosmic lens")
Some clarifying context not present in this OP (phys.org): this is a composite of Hubble visible-light images with Webb data.