'Dark Energy' debunked ??

[Nik_SpeakerToCats]

Interesting paper suggesting 'Dark Energy' is an illusion caused by gravitational time-dilation.
Translated, time runs slower within galaxies and galaxy clusters than in the vast voids between.

Dark energy 'doesn't exist' so can't be pushing 'lumpy' universe apart, physicists say
https://phys.org/news/2024-12-dark-ener ... verse.html
--

IIRC, else-where yet another hunt for 'Dark Matter' has only succeeded in further constraining the possibilities. Real soon, they're going to run out of hiding spaces for anyons, whatnions, mysterons etc etc and accept that, if 'Dark Matter' exists, there's none around here.

At which stage, I must again remind people that 'here' is not actually representative of wider galaxy, due to our current location within the super-nova blown 'thinning' of 'Local Bubble'.

[kdahm]

Except that 'Dark Matter' is postulated because it's needed to explain the rate of expansion of the universe, but it can't be seen or observed. Eliminating possibilities that could explain it is a good thing.

Of course, that leaves finding out the actual reason for the observations........

[Rocket J Squrriel]

Every time I hear about Dark Energy/Matter the classic cartoon from the New Yorker comes to mind. You know the one: A 2 sets of formula on a blackboard with 'then a miracle happens' between them. The Dark is fudge because the Standard Model of the universe won't work without it and the wish is to just paper it over and keep going. Best theory I've heard, even though I barely understand it, is that speed of light has changed from the beginning of the universe.

It also calls in question the 'Big Bang'. Although I thought that was well explained in the show 'Lucifer':

Lucifer Morningstar : In human terms, once upon a time, a boy met a girl, and they fell in love. They had sex. The only trouble was, they were celestial beings, so that moment created the universe.

Linda Martin : Mm, the Big Bang?

Lucifer Morningstar : Never knew how appropriate the name was until now, did you?

[Poohbah]

Tired: "Dark Energy"
Wired: "Big Altima Energy"

[Calder]

I see too many people mixing Dark Energy and Dark Matter together. These are two separate and very different effects.

Dark Matter is matter that doesn't emit light. We don't yet know what this is yet but we have conclusively measured it's effects. The most compelling evidence for dark matter comes from observing the gravitational effects it has on visible matter, particularly in galaxy rotation curves, the distribution of hot gas in galaxy clusters (like the "Bullet Cluster"), and gravitational lensing, which shows that the majority of mass in a cluster is not where the visible matter is located, indicating the presence of unseen dark matter. Dark Matter appears to not interact at all with normal matter except for it's gravitational effects.

Dark Energy is one proposed solution for why the universe is expanding rather than contracting. Gravity pulls things together so in theory the universe should be contracting. Except from multiple different measurement models, the universe is expanding and that expansion is accelerating the further away something is. This is the theory that recent observations appear to be disproving. We haven't reached 5 sigma yet but we are close so some major changes to the theory or dropping it in favor of MOND (Modified Newtonian Gravity).

[Nik_SpeakerToCats]

I'm sorry, the recent super-nova whose gravitational shock-wave and optical / RF / neutrino flares arrived with near-coincidence seems to have falsified most of the 'MOND' flavours, as they predicted a significantly wider time dispersion.

So, unless a plausible tweak is found, 'MOND' is out of the running.

Next best contender may be 'Teleparallel Gravity (TG)' using, IIRC, 'Twistors'.
Seems Einstein took a stab at it, but the arcane math defeated him.
With new math tools, PCs to hack mega-matrices etc etc, the field has had a modest resurgence.
The math, however, remains 'dire', no 'game trails' yet found. I'm told the two competing flavours currently contradict each other in several essential aspects. Think photons' 'particle vs wave' dichotomy.....

Whatever, IIRC, TG holds that 'EM' photons from CMB through RF to Gamma are space-time twisted *thus*, while 'gravity' is space-time twisted *so*.
Sorta 'String Theory', but with twizzles...
Which kinship offers a glimmer of hope that such may be artificially generated, controlled.

Sadly, mixing multiple metaphors, we are not at steam's 'dancing kettle-lid' stage, never mind 'Hero's Spinner'.
We cannot even draw a spark from a combed cat, or craft a 'Bagdad Battery' to accelerate surface corrosion and dissolution of base metal, progressively exposing gold to be burnished...

( The Incas did similar with acidic mountain streams. The Conquistadors, ignorant of Archimedes, thought they'd been short-changed...)