'Dark photons' at Big Bang's cosmic dawn could shine a light on dark matter
"Cosmic dawn has been a missing chapter in our understanding of the universe."
![An illustration shows the universe expanding during cosmic dawn with its flip side the dark universe dominated by dark photons and dark matter also evolves.](https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7eQiWQPFxGUf6WJVNU98hL-1200-80.png)
Observing the interactions between dark matter and so-called "dark photons" during a period after the Big Bang called the "cosmic dawn" could help shed light on the universe's most mysterious and troubling form of matter.
Dark matter particles outnumber ordinary, everyday matter, which comprises objects like stars, planets, moons, asteroids, cosmic clouds of gas and dust, and all living things, by about five to one. That means all those things listed — and everything else we see in the universe and here on Earth — account for around 15% of stuff in the cosmos, and we have little idea what the other 85% actually is.
Part of the reason this mystery has persisted over the last nine decades or so is that dark matter is effectively invisible because it doesn't interact with particles of light, or "photons," as everyday matter composed of atoms (themselves comprising electrons, protons and neutrons) does.
However, scientists have proposed that photons may have a dark side, too. Dark matter may interact with these so-called "dark photons" just as regular photons interact with matter comprised of atoms.
Now, following this possibility, a team of scientists has proposed that interactions between dark photons and dark matter in the first 500 million years after the Big Bang, aka the cosmic dawn, may have left a "signature" in the universe.
The scientists theorize that this signature could be detected today and used to investigate the mysteries of dark matter.
"Dark photons are theoretical particles that extend the concept of electromagnetism into the 'dark sector.' They are similar to regular photons but interact mainly with dark matter rather than ordinary matter," team member and associate professor at the University of Copenhagen's Cosmic Dawn Center, Charlotte Mason, told Space.com. "Dark photon, dark matter interactions could have produced oscillations — similar to sound waves — that stopped shortly after the Big Bang."
Get the Space.com Newsletter
Breaking space news, the latest updates on rocket launches, skywatching events and more!
While the fact that dark matter doesn't interact with light or with ordinary matter may seem to suggest it is something of a cosmic ghost, observing the universe but forbidden from interfering, nothing could be further from the truth.
This form of matter played a key role in gathering the first galaxies. That means these hypothetical interactions, known as "dark acoustic oscillations," could hold the secret blueprints of the large-scale evolution of the cosmos under the influence of dark matter.
Come to the darkside... we have photons
Dark matter doesn't interact with light or ordinary matter, but it does interact with gravity, shaping the fabric of space with this influence. This leads to a warping of space, which, in turn, can influence light and ordinary matter. In modern times, this influence has allowed scientists to infer the presence of dark matter, but as Mason pointed out, it had an even more crucial role in the early universe.
That is because, during this time, the first galaxies were thought to have been assembled within a "scaffolding" of dark matter.
"Cosmic dawn is when the first stars and galaxies formed, making it a perfect time to study how dark matter affects galaxy formation," Mason explained. "The way galaxies formed when they formed, and how quickly they formed was highly sensitive to the small-scale distribution of dark matter. This makes Cosmic Dawn an ideal 'laboratory' to test how dark matter behaves and to potentially learn more about its properties.
"Cosmic dawn has been a missing chapter in our understanding of the universe."
Mason added that, thanks to new technologies like the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) and radio telescopes like the Hydrogen Epoch of Reionization Array (HERA), the Low-Frequency Array (LOFAR), and the Square Kilometer Array (SKA), scientists are finally beginning to explore this period of cosmic history. That is fortunate because cosmic dawn provides a unique insight into dark matter on small scales lost in the modern universe.
"At this early stage, the disruptive effects from galaxies — such as supernova explosions and gas blowing away — were less significant compared to later in the universe’s history," Mason said.
If dark photons existed at cosmic dawn, their interactions with dark matter could have left behind traces of the formation of galaxies.
"The dark acoustic oscillations added small ripples to the density fluctuations created after the Big Bang. This would have influenced galaxy formation by creating regions of higher and lower density, layering on top of the initial fluctuations from the Big Bang," Mason continued. "Galaxies would have formed more quickly in dense areas and more slowly in less dense ones."
That's if we can figure out how to read them. This search must occur at great distances and, thus, further back in time.
"Over time, as gravity caused these fluctuations to evolve, the subtle effects of dark acoustic oscillations are predicted to get smoothed out, so they won't be as easy to detect today," Mason explained.
The team's findings suggest that under specific criteria, despite the subtlety of these signals, one operating radio telescope could be sensitive enough to detect them or, equally importantly, their absence in the near future.
"We discovered that, even after accounting for the complex physics of galaxy formation, if dark matter has oscillations at certain scales, we should be able to detect them (or rule them out) with HERA in the coming years," Mason said. "This is a very exciting prospect!"
"HERA's radio observations are ongoing, so we'll be very excited to see these models tested in their final data analysis," Mason concluded. "Since dark matter is one of the greatest mysteries in physics, any new insights we gain into its nature would be extremely valuable."
The team's research was published at the end of 2024 in the journal Physical Review D.
Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: community@space.com.
Robert Lea is a science journalist in the U.K. whose articles have been published in Physics World, New Scientist, Astronomy Magazine, All About Space, Newsweek and ZME Science. He also writes about science communication for Elsevier and the European Journal of Physics. Rob holds a bachelor of science degree in physics and astronomy from the U.K.’s Open University. Follow him on Twitter @sciencef1rst.
-
Unclear Engineer Wouldn't "dark photons" provide the means for "dark matter" to shed energy and cool off?Reply
Doesn't that run counter to some of the explanations about why dark matter does not condense like ordinary matter, which are used to explain "dark matter halo" etc. needed to explain why it is distributed differently than regular matter in galaxies and smaller scale astronomy observables? -
Jim Franklin
I am not suggesting they are wrong, but I have my doubts they are 100% correct. There is clear evidence for galaxies to have formed within only a few hundred million years of the big bang, and we are finding evidence that supermassive black holes already existed in the heart of many of these first galaxies, having read their paper, mathematically they need to play with it and take into account research published since they submitted their paper - which was in early 2024, only being published in November 2024, about 9 months after submission.Admin said:Interactions between dark matter and dark photons during a "missing chapter" cosmic history could shed light on one of the most troubling cosmic mysteries.
Dark photons' at Big Bang's cosmic dawn could shine a light on dark matter : Read more
However, their work is elegant and the maths fit, but only with the data and assumtions they made or had available at that time, I suspect that in the coming years we will see a flury of similar work from the same team and other collaborators that will be based on the lastest data from JWST research into those first 500 million years. -
finiter Science or mythology? In mythology, one can create as many mythical characters as required. Can we do that in science? Now it is dark photon, tomorrow it will be something else. Better we leave it to creationists to explain everything in physics.Reply
Some hundred years ago, physicists opened a Pandora's box. Out came, QM and GR along with a stream of creatures namely, massless particles, mass-giving particles, virtual particles, antiparticles, spacetime, dark matter, dark energy, and so on. Let us wait for the last one, the fairy which will drive away all those mischievous creatures. -
Unclear Engineer To the extent that QM and GR are successful in quantitatively predicting observable effects, I would not call them "mythology".Reply
But, what they are not is "explanations" of why those effects occur. And, where they fall short in that regard, there are plenty of people engaging in what may turn out to be more mythology than basic understanding. -
Jim Franklin
A Scientific Theory is the "best guess" we have based on mathematics, observations, experiementation, predictions and a helpful spoonful of guestimation. Anyone that tells you that any theory is a fact does not understand science, and any person who states a hypothesis is a theory, does not under science either.Unclear Engineer said:To the extent that QM and GR are successful in quantitatively predicting observable effects, I would not call them "mythology".
But, what they are not is "explanations" of why those effects occur. And, where they fall short in that regard, there are plenty of people engaging in what may turn out to be more mythology than basic understanding.
Lets look at this shall we.
1. HypothesisA hypothesis is a tentative explanation or prediction that can be tested through observation or experimentation. It is the starting point of the scientific method. A good hypothesis is -
Testable: It can be examined through experiments or observations.
Falsifiable: There must be a potential to prove it wrong if it's incorrect.For example, "Plants grow faster when exposed to red light than blue light" is a hypothesis that can be tested by experiments.
2. TheoryA scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that -
Is based on a body of evidence collected through repeated observation and experimentation.
Incorporates facts, laws, and tested hypotheses to provide a cohesive explanation.
Has predictive power and can be used to explain and predict phenomena.Theories are not immutable; they can be refined, modified, or replaced as new evidence emerges. Importantly, a theory is not a "guess" or "hunch" in scientific terms. For example, the theory of evolution or the germ theory of disease are robust scientific theories supported by extensive evidence.
3. LawA scientific law describes a relationship or principle that consistently holds true under specific conditions, often expressed mathematically. Laws -
Describe "what" happens in nature rather than "why" it happens.
Are based on repeated experiments and observations that confirm their validity.Unlike theories, laws don't explain phenomena—they summarize patterns or behaviors observed in nature. For instance:
Newton's Laws of Motion describe how objects behave when forces act on them.
The Law of Conservation of Mass states that mass is conserved in a closed system during a chemical reaction.Key Distinctions:
Hypothesis: A proposed explanation yet to be rigorously tested.
Theory: A thoroughly tested and widely accepted explanation of phenomena.
Law: A concise statement describing consistent patterns in nature, often without explaining why. Laws are generally thought of as "immutable" in that laws consistently describe phenomena within their applicable context. However, they are not absolute; they can be superseded or modified if new evidence or broader understanding comes to light (e.g., Newtonian mechanics is a "law" that works well in most everyday contexts but is superseded by Einstein's theory of relativity in extreme conditions). -
Unclear Engineer "Jim Franklin", It seems like you just changed "finiter's" categorization of QM and RT from "mythology" to "theory".Reply
So, why quote me instead of him? I don't need the lecture on the distinctions between the words in your post.
What you should be addressing is your distinction between your "spoonful of guestimation" and his label of "mythology" for the same concepts. -
Jim Franklin
I quoted your post because of the words you used that may not have clarified the subject matter for those reading your comments. It is very clear, that many on these boards to not understand how science works and the difference between hypothesis, theory and a law within science. It was not necessarilly directed at you personally.Unclear Engineer said:"Jim Franklin", It seems like you just changed "finiter's" categorization of QM and RT from "mythology" to "theory".
So, why quote me instead of him? I don't need the lecture on the distinctions between the words in your post.
What you should be addressing is your distinction between your "spoonful of guestimation" and his label of "mythology" for the same concepts. -
Unclear Engineer OK, but where do you stand on the "spoonful of guestimation" vs "mythology"?Reply
Probably best to focus your response on the concept of "dark photons", which is supposed to be the subject of this thread. -
Jim Franklin
All science has a "spoonful of guestimation" in it when you are dealing with anything that is not an absolute, whether that be archeology, paleontology or quantum theory - there is a lot we do not know, and may never know (especially for the first two) and so some educated guesses have to be made based on the information we do have and can confirm.Unclear Engineer said:OK, but where do you stand on the "spoonful of guestimation" vs "mythology"?
Probably best to focus your response on the concept of "dark photons", which is supposed to be the subject of this thread.
My earlier response in this made my position clear.
Jim Franklin said:I am not suggesting they are wrong, but I have my doubts they are 100% correct. There is clear evidence for galaxies to have formed within only a few hundred million years of the big bang, and we are finding evidence that supermassive black holes already existed in the heart of many of these first galaxies, having read their paper, mathematically they need to play with it and take into account research published since they submitted their paper - which was in early 2024, only being published in November 2024, about 9 months after submission.
However, their work is elegant and the maths fit, but only with the data and assumtions they made or had available at that time, I suspect that in the coming years we will see a flury of similar work from the same team and other collaborators that will be based on the lastest data from JWST research into those first 500 million years. -
Unclear Engineer As I posted in reply #2Reply
Unclear Engineer said:Wouldn't "dark photons" provide the means for "dark matter" to shed energy and cool off?
Doesn't that run counter to some of the explanations about why dark matter does not condense like ordinary matter, which are used to explain "dark matter halo" etc. needed to explain why it is distributed differently than regular matter in galaxies and smaller scale astronomy observables?