Cosmology Physics

Do we even need dark energy to explain cosmic expansion?

Spread the love
possible evidence for dark energy/NASA, CXC, SAO,A.Vikhlinin et al.

From ScienceDaily:

Three mathematicians have a different explanation for the accelerating expansion of the universe that does without theories of “dark energy.” Einstein’s original equations for General Relativity actually predict cosmic acceleration due to an “instability,” they argue in paper published recently in Proceedings of the Royal Society A. Paper. (public access) – Joel Smoller, Blake Temple, Zeke Vogler. An instability of the standard model of cosmology creates the anomalous acceleration without dark energy. Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Science, 2017; 473 (2207): 20160887 DOI: 10.1098/rspa.2016.0887 More.

Well, if we don’t need dark energy to account for cosmic expansion, isn’t that a bit like not needing Santa Claus to explain the wine, cheese, and chocolates under the tree?

See also: Cosmic inflation theory loses hangups about the scientific methodWhat if naturalism changes the role of a science program? Perhaps stubbornly contrary evidence merely shows the need for more drive and zeal in generating new naturalist theories, not more reflection and evaluation of that direction.

Supernova analysis questions dark energy cosmic acceleration

Take back Nobel prizes for accelerating expansion of universe? Dark energy might be an illusion say some researchers. But we thought only a denialist was allowed to doubt the accelerating expansion of the universe. Rules change?

Expanding space bubbles could doom dark energy? Is it possible that the sheer ability to make up theories without consequence is adding to the confusion?

Dark energy made by black holes? But do we know that dark energy actually exists? Finding some would help us decide whether to cheer on or deprecate the revolution.

String theorists losing bets? Resorting to “denialism”?


3 Replies to “Do we even need dark energy to explain cosmic expansion?

  1. 1
    FourFaces says:

    Is there even a cosmic expansion that must be explained? Isn’t the cosmic expansion itself just an explanation for the red shifting of light from distant galaxies? What if the explanation is wrong? What if there is a simpler explanation for red shifting?

    Not everybody accepts cosmic expansion. It has nasty problems such as distant matter moving away at faster than the speed of light.

  2. 2
    J-Mac says:

    Good points FourFaces!

    The consequences of matter, or anything, travelling faster than the speed of light are enormous…unless…there is something wrong with the general theory of relativity…

  3. 3
    Pearlman says:

    No see SPIRAL CR hypothesis where CR is due to past, not ongoing cosmic expansion so no we do not need any missing dark energy, and if it is non-existent, SPIRAL is the last hypothesis standing!
    SPIRAL not only matches the observations but would predict the prevalent cosmological redshift of distant starlight!

Leave a Reply