That’s a very nice piece of text. And it contains correct statements, in contrast to many readings I found on the web with respect to this news. I am planning to write about this news later this week, as I didn’t find the time yet, busy with the duties associated with my job). I aim at giving more details on which signal has been exactly observed and what is meant by "getting a hint of a new phenomenon".
Concerning your text, I have a few remarks. Feel free to further comment them!
They will either find its components or determine the path they are on will not lead them to that finding
Dark matter may be elementary or composite. So that there is no clear definition of what a “dark matter component” could be.
Moreover, dark matter is not only explaining the motion of the stars in the galaxies, and the motion of the galaxies among themselves, but also a plethora of other cosmological observations. Therefore, the motivation behind it is very strong. This being said, modified gravity theories (the best alternative to dark matter) are still not excluded.
While scientists mean to utilize the detector to identify dark matter particles, it is certainly able to measure other things as a result of particle interaction with the stable electron field inside.
Initially, the Xenon1T experiment was targeting nuclear recoils (as this is what is mainly expected as a WIMP signal), and not electron recoils. The extension to electron recoils is more recent (and is connected with an improvement in the sensitivity of the experiment).
No human observations were made during the detection process to eliminate the potential adverse impact of human behavior.
I don’t understand the above sentence. Measurements were made all along the data taking process.
Thank you very much @lemouth. Concerning the period of time for data collection it appears I incorrectly assume they let the detector and system monitor interactions blindly. I assumed they didn’t check the results until two years later. Perhaps I misled myself.
Aaah this is what you meant. Data acquisition was indeed controlled during the course of the experiment. See for instance here.
Nice! Thanks and apologies for the confusing statement. I appreciate the clarifications.
There is no need to apology. I was very happy to help :)