Indeed, what passes for dark matter research these days just gets wackier and more desperate the longer they can't find DM.
Here's one of the latest theories ...
https://www.indy100.com/science-tech/da ... r-universe
But is this theory testable?In their study, published in the preprint journal arXiv, a team based at the University of Maryland propose that for every physical interaction in normal matter, there's a mirror of it in dark matter.
… snip …
Perhaps, they theorise, a special combination of physics led to the creation of protons with roughly the same mass as neutrons. But in the dark matter mirror, that combination was different – causing the "dark proton" to evaporate and leave behind "dark neutrons" — what we identify as dark matter.
Still, whilst this mirror model implies a whole range of potential interactions among dark matter particles — for example, dark atoms and a dark periodic table of dark elements — there can't be too much interaction, as Live Science points out.
If the dark matter were to interact with itself too much, it would clump together far more than it appears to in reality.
So most dark matter would need to be relatively simple — a sea of free-floating, neutral particles.
And here’s another WACKY theory just proposed …
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1 ... 12/011/pdf
Or as the mainstream media phrases it …Is the present acceleration of the Universe caused by merging with other universes?
https://www.foxnews.com/science/scienti ... -expansion
Seems to me that in this one, they’ve just changed the meaning of "universe", which according to Wikipedia is “All of the spacetime and its contents including the Earth, possibly being part of a multiverse, distinct from parallel universes if they exist”. But heck, the mainstream is busy changing all sorts of long held definitions these days in order to meet their agenda needs. Didn't they just change the definition of vaccine too?Scientists suggest our universe is merging with ‘baby universes’ as possible theory of expansion