Re: Fw: more controversy

[Leigh Palmer <palmer@SFU.CA>]

> There are papers and proposed experiments on dark matter in the solar
> system.  They are easy enough to find.  Has Hewitt done his library
> research before proposing his "new" idea?

He doesn't realize that any "dark matter" which is attached to light
(or lit) matter is no longer dark. "Dark" really means "unobserved".
Any matter that sinkes to the center of the Sun or a planet is already
accounted for as part of the mass of the object in question. Dark
matter isn't necessarily unobservable; it just hasn't been observed
yet. My favorite new candidate for the missing galactic dark matter is
white dwarfs in the halo of the Galaxy. These have been observed by
perhaps two techniques, The MACHO project (which detects microlensing
events, well publicized) and a relatively new report which is in the
very accessible literature: preprint astro-ph/9908270 at xxx.lanl.gov.
It would be an excellent exercise for any group member who has never
used this archive to do so now, so I won't divulge the nature of this
observation here. This is how I now do much of my own library research
now. It is a marvelous resource.

(Incidentally, I know of no observation calling for the existence of
dark matter in the solar system. The solar system is thought to be
well understood in terms of known objects. Charles Kowal pretty much
put to rest any idea that there were unexplained discrepancies in the
orbit of Neptune two decades ago.)

Leigh