Talk:Intracluster medium

message: It states an absurdity and the 1 source given provides no support for same. Possible purposeful hoax/attempt to discredit wiki. Lycurgus (talk) 05:28, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Suppose it may not be malicious but if there is no proof/evidence, say comparable to that that is taken as substantiating extrasolar planets and black holes, then at a very minimum the matter must be presented as a hypothesis. Even then it must be stated as such in a primary source. Instead it is presented as a known fact of nature without any substantiation. 72.228.150.44 (talk) 05:34, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Also looked at the "Theoretical Progress" section of the reference the editor was told to "sink his teeth into" after which he sheepishly turned tail, and nowhere did I see what is stated in detail in current body of the article stated there as, as I say, as a known fact of nature (or for that matter one inferable in the way the aforementioned phenomena are). Why was that not given as a source for the article if it is in fact substantive proof of what it asserts as known fact? 72.228.150.44 (talk) 08:15, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  And finally, black holes, are mere virtual certainties, not known facts as no probes nor communications with first hand witnesses of such phenomena have yet occurred. The optical evidence of the extrasolar planets is perhaps close enough to it perhaps not (it is for me might reasonably not be for some others awaiting direct observations). 72.228.150.44 (talk) 08:29, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm probably ready to retract much/most/all of the above except for the essential matter: the distinction between known fact and scientific/likely conjecture. 71.186.172.73 (talk) 20:33, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Finally, I suppose this is purposeless as it would already be an advance to have science taken at its (philosophically weak) word and asking for the distinction above to be recognized is asking too much. 72.228.150.44 (talk) 09:27, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why I PRODed It 

message: The line: "However, most of the mass in a galaxy cluster consists of dark matter." is written as if dark matter is a proven fact. It is not, it is just a theory. Maybe change it to: "..may consists of dark matter." ?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerard.van.Dorst (talk • contribs) 07:56, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dark Matter 

message: *Could we add eg notable clusters that have had the ICM (spectra, density, and temp) measured ? Is any detected in the local group ? 
*How do the characteristics of the ICM vary with size, density and nature of the galactic clusters ? - Rod57 (talk) 02:26, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  What data 

message: I was assigned this article for a wiki edu project. I have reworded most of the article for clarity and flow, added citations to important information, and updated a section with more current information. The Heating section could still use some work as I ran out of time and in my opinion the cooling flows section could be a little more fleshed out with properties of the flow including models of the inhomogeneities, multi-phase gas models, and entropy models. I also would like to include a bit more about the heating mechanisms as the section is very brief and not particularly enlightening.  Drbingbing (talk) 21:45, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikiedu Changes

message: I went ahead and removed the "Shockingly unsubstantiated material" after backing up some claims and reworking others. I'll be keeping an eye on this page and updating as semi-regularly as new Chandra studies are done. Drbingbing (talk) 18:29, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updated Page 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:59, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: How does Warm–hot intergalactic medium relate? Subset? Disjoint? Competing concept? --JWB (talk) 16:59, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warm-hot intergalactic medium