Dark matter or gravity

[andro]

Which one is more dominant dark matter or gravity??

[Cougar]

Which one is more dominant dark matter or gravity??

I imagine you mean dark matter or mass (specifically, baryonic mass), since the reason we infer dark matter exists is through its gravitational effect.

But the answer to that question is, it depends on how much dark matter you have compared to how much baryonic mass.

[caveman1917]

I imagine you mean dark matter or mass (specifically, baryonic mass), since the reason we infer dark matter exists is through its gravitational effect.

Dark matter has mass too, at least relativistic mass. And since many things point to cold dark matter, it would have rest mass too.
Mass is a property of something, like velocity or momentum.

More to the OP, it is currently thought the energy content of the universe is about 70% dark energy, 25% dark matter and 5% 'normal' matter.
So dark matter would be winning by a factor of about 5.

[forrest noble]

andro,

Dark matter or gravity --
Which one is more dominant dark matter or gravity??

As Cougar pointed out there is ambiguity in your question. Accordingly dark matter is thought to be the major cause of gravity concerning gravitational influences at galactic distances. Most presently believe that WIMPS (weak interacting massive particles, hypothetical small dark matter particles) are the primary massive (have mass) constituent of dark matter and therefore would be the primary cause of gravitational influences because of their theoretical large numbers. Another possibility is that such hypothetical WIMPS have no rest mass in the classical sense (like photons) but would have inertial mass which is equivalent to gravitational mass based upon their relative motion such as galaxies orbiting each other in a cluster.

Dark matter, however, may not be a single entity. Some researchers have asserted based upon their research and observations that as much a 20% of the needed dark matter could be accounted for by MACHOS (massive compact halo objects) with solar masses up to .5 suns. Some observational researchers have asserted that cold molecular hydrogen H2 surrounding galaxies could represent more than half the needed dark matter to explain orbital rates of disc stars in spiral galaxies.

If all of these dark matter constituents do not add up to the required mass, which would be the simplest explanation to explain completely orbital rates of disc stars in a spiral galaxies, then maybe General Relativity would need to be tweaking concerning gravitational influences at galactic distances, to make up the difference.