/sci/ - Science & Math

Everyone who says dark matter doesn't exist, explain picrel.
>X-ray image (pink) superimposed over a visible light image (galaxies), with matter distribution calculated from gravitational lensing (blue)

We have found odd stuff.
>X-ray image (pink) superimposed over a visible light image (galaxies), with matter distribution calculated from gravitational lensing (blue)

>>7473296
fuck I forgot the pic

>>7371256
Then explain this, "scientists"

>>7360822
I dont know if you can split up one black hole into two black holes, but would something like pic related be possible? could a black hole be torn apart by approaching another blackhole at a high speed, without either of them entering the other's even horizon? I know that this in practice already occurs with the accretion disc, but theoretically could the singularity itself be torn apart (or at least lose mass)?

>>7294423
pic related, it's an OBSERVED effect of dark matter when two galaxies collide. Also, we can only see galaxies that far away because they emit their own light, and we use long ass exposure times. This is possible because for all intents and purposed they are stationary to us, while pluto is a tiny rock orbiting our sun at high speeds.

(first post on /sci/)
When it comes to dark matter, is it possible that instead of there actually being another particle or class of particles, our understanding of gravity over long distances is flawed? What I mean is that could the gravity equation be F=G*m1*m2/g(x) where g(x) is something other than r^2, and simply grows more slowly at large values of r?