Theory Posits Early Stars Powered By Dark Matter

ethericalzen writes "A BBC article highlights a theory that the first stars may have been powered by dark matter. A group of US scientists published a paper in Physical Review Letters speculating that, unlike the stars of today, which are powered by nuclear fusion, early stars might have been powered by the abundant dark matter crowding the universe after the Big Bang. The theory suggests that these stars would have collided and destroyed one another before nuclear fusion had a chance take hold." The BBC perhaps overstates the certainty with which the dark-matter theory is held, and doesn't mention that the postulated properties of such particles are completely speculative.

Dark Stars?

[ArcherB]

Maybe that's where all that Dark Energy came from.

Thanks, kdawson

[NereusRen]

The BBC perhaps overstates the certainty with which the dark-matter theory is held, and doesn't mention that the postulated properties of such particles are completely speculative.

Aside from the actual topic, I want to say that I was pleasantly surprised to see the summary correcting for the improper journalism of the article. Overzealous interpretation of scientific results by journalists is a common complaint around here, and our editors who know that (and can easily recognize it when they review the submission) are the perfect ones to catch the inaccuracy and notify us in advance, so we aren't mislead about the actual claims of the scientific paper. Thanks, kdawson, for the excellent editorial addition to this story.

sure they were

[pha7boy]

everything is explained by dark matter. Universe heavier then we think it should be? dark matter. can't figure out the big bang? dark matter. I bet soon enought someone will figure out a way to tie dark matter to the cables in the middle east that got cut the other day.

I figured this out several years ago...

[3waygeek]

after all:
1. Nibblonian civilization [wikipedia.org] predates the Big Bang by 17 years.
2. Nibblonians poop dark matter.

Ergo, the first stars were made of Nibblonian poop.

Re:Overstates?

[_KiTA_]

Or, perhaps, modifications to theory regarding the nature of space itself.

But why muck up a perfectly good theory based on observation of reality? Seems counterproductive to me.

Re:Light from nothing?

[SlashWombat]

Dark matter stars make BLACK LIGHT?

Re:Maybe a better word

[dgatwood]

PC Guy: Hi, I'm a hypothesis.

Mac Guy: And I'm a theory.

PC Guy: Wait a second, how did you become a theory all of a sudden? What, you think you're special now?

Mac Guy: No, it's not that, P.C. I just got promoted because so many new people like me.

PC Guy: So because a lot of people like you...

Mac Guy: Well, and it also helps that I've been subject to a lot of scrutiny and they've concluded I'm not full of holes...

PC Guy: I resemble that remark....

Mac Guy: I know you do, P.C. And, of course, a preponderance of evidence confirms my correctness and robustness. That's one more reason that they made me a theory.

PC Guy: Preponderance of evidence... kind of like the O.J. Civil Trial, then?

Mac Guy: ...

PC Guy: ...

Mac Guy: Okay, I'm just going to have to go with "yes" and we'll call that your best hypothesis....

[Apple logo]

Re:Your tax dollars funded this, but no article

[moderatorrater]

Physical Review is edited and typeset by elves

And that's just the beginning. Care to see how far down the rabbit hole goes?

Re:Light from nothing?

[thrillseeker]

Actually.. methane and oxygen are colourless... My physics teacher practically beat us to death with that one.

Didn't see it coming?