Quantcast
issue
Read articles, including Science News stories written for ages 9-14, on the SNK website.
Hunting dark matter with DNA
Particle physicists propose a new way to detect dark matter using the molecule of life
A+ A- Text Size

Particle physicists propose a new way to detect dark matter using the molecule of life

By Tanya Lewis

Web edition: October 31, 2012
Print edition: December 1, 2012; Vol.182 #11 (p. 9)

Enlarge
SLICE OF LIFE
In a proposed method for detecting dark matter, particles of dark matter would smack into gold, kicking off atomic nuclei that would sever strands of DNA in their paths.
A. Drukier et al./arXiv.org 2012

RALEIGH, N.C. — Physicists racing to detect the mysterious substance known as dark matter are thinking outside the box by looking inside the cell. A new proposal for tracking dark matter particles relies on strands of DNA.

All the ordinary stuff in the universe, from the atoms in people to the hot plasma in stars, makes up only about 5 percent of the universe’s mass and energy. Nearly one-quarter of the universe is composed of dark matter. (The rest is an even more puzzling entity known as dark energy.) Though several experiments claim to have detected dark matter, the results don’t agree and aren’t definitive.

Katherine Freese, a theoretical physicist at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, proposed October 28 at the New Horizons in Science meeting that a new kind of DNA-based detector could not only spot a leading candidate for dark matter, called WIMPs, but could also determine incoming particles’ direction of flight. The proposal also appeared online earlier this year at arXiv.org.

“It’s a very smart way to apply technology developed from biology to a fundamental particle physics problem,” says Jocelyn Monroe, a dark matter physicist at MIT and the University of London.

A halo of WIMPs, short for weakly interacting massive particles, is thought to encircle the galaxy. As the sun orbits the galaxy’s center, it should encounter a “wind” of WIMPs from the direction of the constellation Cygnus. At any point on Earth, such a wind should strengthen and weaken daily as the planet rotates.

Freese and her colleagues’ proposed detector, which would be sensitive to these fluctuations, consists of a stack of thin gold sheets with single-stranded pieces of DNA hanging from them. When a WIMP smacked into the nucleus of a gold atom, the nucleus would whiz off, cutting through the DNA at specific locations in the strands. 

Scientists would then collect and sequence the DNA to reconstruct the path traveled by the nucleus, and by extrapolation, that of the WIMP. If the detector spotted the daily fluctuation and the particles’ paths proved consistent with the WIMP wind’s direction, it would be compelling evidence that the signals came from dark matter.

“The advantage of these detectors is that the difference between DNA bases is a nanometer, so it’s much better resolution,” says Freese — about a thousand times better than current detectors.

The device could be a fraction of existing detectors’ size, as well as cheaper.

Still, the technique has yet to be demonstrated, says Joel Schnur, a biomolecular scientist at George Mason University in Fairfax, Va. “What is the real sensitivity to cleavage of DNA? How many particles will come down over time? And, can it detect them?” he asks.

If the project goes forward, Freese and colleagues could begin to answer some of these questions.

Comment
Print Friendly and PDF

K. Freese. Dark Matter in the Universe and the ssDNA Tracker. Talk at New Horizons in Science meeting, October 28, 2012.


R. Cowen. Signs of dark matter from Minnesota mine. Science News, Vol.179, No. 12, June 4, 2011, p. 10. Available online: [Go to]

R. Cowen. XENON100 fails to find dark matter. Science News, Vol.179, No. 10, May 7, 2011, p. 12. Available online: [Go to]

N. Drake. Dark matter search turns up empty. Science News, Vol.181, No. 10, May 19, 2012, p. 5. Available online: [Go to]

Comments (6)

Please alert Science News to any inappropriate posts by clicking the REPORT SPAM link within the post. Comments will be reviewed before posting.


  • "WIMP wind"? Sounds a bit like the 19th century "ether wind" to me.

    Theoretical physicists have been on a 40-year snipe hunt for "WIMPs" and nature has clearly said "No!" in every experiment so far.

    At what point will they give up on the hype and the fruitless searches, and admit that they are probably wrong in their obsession with "WIMPs"?

    Sumi et al reported [Nature, 19 May, 2011] on the order of A TRILLION unbound planetary-mass objects roaming free throughout our Galaxy. That ain't chopped liver. The ARCADE-2 experiment reported a factor of 6 excess in the radio background radiation that may be due to primordial black holes. The X-ray background and the Gamma-ray background also have significant components that are not accounted for by known sources but could be due to primordial black holes.

    When, for nature's sake, will theoretical physicists give equal time and consideration to astrophysical candidates for the dark matter?.

    It is time for 40 years of "ignore-ance" to be brought to a halt. It's well past time to retire the obsession with "WIMPs". It is an excellent time for NEW ideas regarding the dark matter, such as planetary-mass and stellar-mass black holes.

    Robert L. Oldershaw
    Discrete Scale Relativity
    Discrete Fractal Cosmology
    knecht knecht
    Nov. 2, 2012 at 1:51pm
  • Fascinating stuff, but I have a question. I've read that both dark matter and dark energy exist literally everywhere, even in our buildings and our own bodies. How, then, will they determine the dark matter is originating in one location or region in space? Couldn't those particles be coming from virtually anywhere? The article seems to equate WIMPS with a halo of dark matter encircling the galaxy, but I'm sure I remember reading that dark matter exists everywhere, permeates everything, but that we have no way as yet to detect it. Is it that there seems to BE a halo, but that dark matter also exists everywhere, but is more concentrated in the halo?

    How can both of these be true? I'm sure it's something I have yet to grasp, or perhaps my memory isn't accurate here. But if my memory is correct, the question must arise. Either the particles of dark matter are everywhere or they exist in that halo around the galaxy. Which, then, is it?

    In addition, is the object to determine where dark matter's particles originate or to prove they exist at all? I'd like to know their sources and trajectories, but shouldn't we be proving their existence, and their nature, first? Is it possible that we might be able to detect their sources and trajectories and still not have proof that they are real? You'd think it would be proof, but there is also the possibility that what they are detecting isn't dark matter at all, but something else.

    Since I have none of the physics knowledge needed, I can't do more than ponder and hypothesize on articles like this, but I wish the experts who DO have the knowledge would share more of it, the kind that might forestall questions like these.

    I'd like to know more about how something that can't be detected yet became known in the first place! Something brought it to scientist's attention, but I don't know what it was.
    Holly Bergeim Holly Bergeim
    Nov. 2, 2012 at 1:51pm
  • "I'd like to know more about how something that can't be detected yet became known in the first place! Something brought it to scientist's attention, but I don't know what it was."

    Might I suggest, in this instance, checking the wiki entry for "Dark matter#observational evidence" for a good overview of the current evidence for dark matter (and the history behind DM studies).
    Jon Hanford Jon Hanford
    Nov. 6, 2012 at 10:39am
  • Hi Holly,

    Dark matter is readily detected via gravitational lensing. Other types of experiments have also shown that it exists.

    It cannot be baryonic, and so it must be some unusual type of objects. Unspecified "WIMP" particles [with masses somewhere between 10 and 10,000 GeV, give or take a few fat tooth fairies] and primordial black holes [which are not created in supernovae, but are fundamental objects, as are protons] are two major candidates.

    This is a complex and contentious subject.

    To bring yourself up to speed on the basics try Wikipedia, or a general search on "dark matter" with Google. But in the latter case, let the reader beware. There is more disinformation on the dark matter topic out there on the internet than solid and careful analysis.

    Robert L. Oldershaw
    Discrete Fractal Cosmology
    Discrete Scale Relativity
    knecht knecht
    Nov. 7, 2012 at 12:08pm
  • if galaxy rotation curves had not showed any anonally then DM would NOT have been postulated.there would have been no need .
    This just points to a miss interpretation of observation. MOND has no need for DM ... but it puts another problem... it cannot say why gravity should be strong enough to cause the high rotation speeds.

    so if we understood Big G ...and therefore gravity better we would account for all galaxy rotation curves with or without MOND or Dark Matter.

    the hunt should focus on G ond the true nature of gravity.
    put the cosmos back in the real world . learn something at same time.

    the universe has to expand because all the energy put in from stars & galaxies .etc. cannot raise spaces temperature because it cannot have its pressure raised. it has no container.
    so all the heat ..radiation .. high speed particles push space appart.
    DE.. when a massive body is bomdarded by this energy it is absorbed .causing a differential . just like water going down hill. the energy Differential manifests as gravity
    between TWO bodies there is a cylinder of low energy caused by shading and or absorption.

    As the radiations arrive from every direction the cylinder is divided into cones of low energy.

    the volume of a cone is 1/3.. cyl.vol.....so 2/3 is the amount represented by big G as the universal gravitational constant. 0.666 or .667 inacurate due to leakage and experimental errors.

    we need radiation to cause newtons ...apparent attraction... between two masses and to cause Ensteins spacetime curvature. hence the postulated graviton particle . gravity comes naturally from radiation being shaded and or absorbed by matter. big G tells us what strength of force we have here in the system for this mass that mass and this spacetime energy.
    there is no reason to think the energy around each galaxy will always be the same ...so Big G can change. the physics is still the same just the parrameters change.




    but the ene
    robert price robert price
    Nov. 19, 2012 at 10:13am
  • correction to above ...the differential energy across the mass ( galaxy) will be bigger as more mass absorbs more radiation. as G will be changed by the geometry . you can see why gravity will be stronger here.

    so speeds will be in acordance and no need to postulate dark matter

    at the center of the galaxy the DP will be maximum and who knows what it does to incomming radiation and particles
    but hihg speed collisions expected and lots of gamma rays.

    maybe no black hole as we are led to think of one. but a high energy radiation factory . spewing x.& gamma rays ..

    gust find the reason for big G and use it to point the way.
    Newton and Enstein will be very pleased. ...a push is as good as a pull.


    Question ...does the electro magnetic spectrum fold and meet at the ends. ...how high is high frequency ...can it be so high it ends up as too high to detect. ..
    robert price robert price
    Nov. 19, 2012 at 10:13am
Registered readers are invited to post a comment. To encourage fruitful discussion, please keep your comments relevant, brief and courteous. Offensive, irrelevant, nonsensical and commercial posts will not be published. (All links will be removed from comments.)

You must register with Science News to add a comment. To log-in click here. To register as a new user, follow this link.

Follow Us