Science topic

Dark Energy - Science topic

Explore the latest questions and answers in Dark Energy, and find Dark Energy experts.
Questions related to Dark Energy
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
2 answers
Would any such transition have occurred in increments locally, or all at once globally?
Is the idea of the transition from one era to the next designed to save an unlikely or incomplete theory?
Are there articles discussing these questions?
Relevant answer
Answer
It doesn't ``know''-it's the other way around: When the scale factor evolves with time like t1/2, one observes that radiation ``dominates'' and when it evolves with time like t2/3, one observes that matter can, indeed, start to form and this is as expected.
The theory is complete with respect to these issues and it would be a good idea to read a textbook, where these issues are explained-or, these days, also, on-line lectures, for instance: https://theoreticalminimum.com/courses/cosmology/2013/winter/lecture-2
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
3 answers
In the context of the current energy crisis, should local governments continue their environmental and pro-climate policies, support the development of clean renewable and zero-emission energy or should they pursue ad hoc, short-term social support policies, abolish existing anti-smog standards and contribute to the renewed development of dirty combustion energy?
I ask because there are different strategies on this issue being pursued by the various local government units in the country in which I operate. Local authorities in Łódź want to suspend the operation of anti-smog resolutions for a year and allow residents to use low-quality, high-emission coal-fired boilers for at least another heating season and another year. This is an offshoot of years of ignorance on the part of central and local government authorities regarding the development of renewable and zero-emission energy sources and the building of regional and national energy security. It is also ignorance in the face of the energy crisis that is growing year by year, the increasing amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, the progressive process of global warming, the growing risk and scale of the negative effects of a future climate catastrophe that may occur even in this 21st century. The energy crisis is medium-term in nature and the climate crisis develops over the long term, over many years. On the other hand, considering energy security, environmental security, climate security, civilisation security, livelihood security, these two crises are increasingly correlated The central government in Poland over the last three decades, pursuing a specific environmental and climate policy, has limited the scale of development and hampered the development of renewable energy sources. On the other hand, the authorities of local self-government units either start implementing specific solutions of the local environmental and pro-climate policy, i.e. they implement and carry out long-term strategies of sustainable, pro-environmental social and economic development of the region, city, commune, etc., or they have not decided on such strategies yet and carry out only current, short-sighted, classic social and economic policy of the region.
In view of the above, I address the following question to the esteemed community of researchers and scientists:
In the context of the current energy crisis, should local government units continue with their ongoing environmental and pro-climate policies, support the development of clean renewable and emission-free energy or should they pursue ad hoc, short-term social support policies, abolish existing anti-smog standards and contribute to the renewed development of dirty combustion energy?
What is your opinion on this topic?
Please answer with reasons.
I invite you all to discuss,
Thank you very much,
Warm regards,
Dariusz Prokopowicz
Relevant answer
Answer
The answer is in the Question itself. Clean energy, anytime.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
6 answers
Due to the energy crisis, the government's promotion of dirty combustion energy and the restriction of the development of emission-free green energy, will air quality in the heating season significantly decrease and the incidence of respiratory diseases and Covid-19 increase?
Various types of hard coal, lignite, pellets and firewood are allowed as fuel in Poland. However, even before the current energy crisis, in previous years it happened that some citizens threw various types of waste, including, for example, tyres, into the cookers heating their homes. As a result, air quality in Poland during the heating season (autumn and winter) was very poor in many cities and towns, failing to meet European Union standards. In many towns and cities there are no municipal guards or other services to control what is thrown into the heating cookers. However, there are already efficient systems in place in many countries to control what people heat their homes with. As part of the construction of such a control system, drones may be used, for example, which fly up to the chimney of a house and examine the composition of the fumes contained in the smoke coming out of the chimney. In Poland, only in a small number of cities, towns and villages are such modern methods used to control what citizens heat their homes with, i.e. what is thrown into the heating cookers. Because the current government, which has done almost nothing about this for the last seven years, so the state of the air in many cities is bad. This results in the deterioration of the health of citizens who inhale toxic substances contained in the fume-polluted air. Many citizens are dying prematurely due to respiratory diseases and other diseases resulting from inhaling carcinogenic toxins in the air. Due to the fact that the present government has impeded the development of renewable and emission-free sources of energy and financially supported the coal-based power industry, at present still 3/4 of the electricity and heat generated in Poland comes from dirty exhaust gas power. In order to make such statistics submitted to the EU authorities look a little better, the government-controlled Central Statistical Office has classified firewood as a renewable energy source. From an ecological, environmental and climate point of view, this is absurd and the government's treatment of citizens as mindless lemmings. The wood approved for firewood is untreated and unpainted wood. But even such wood burned in cookers releases harmful substances, including particulate matter PM2.5 etc. The absorption of these particulates reduces the body's resistance to allergens, to pathogenic viruses. The development of allergies and the incidence of respiratory diseases and Covid-19 increases significantly. Research shows a correlation between the level of PM2.5 etc. and a decrease in the human body's resistance to disease, a decrease in the efficiency of the immune system and the incidence of viral and other diseases. An election campaign is currently underway in Poland in connection with the parliamentary and local elections to be held in 2023. In connection with the election campaign, the main activists of the ruling PIS monoparty are carrying out pro-government propaganda at election rallies in various cities. Analogous pro-government propaganda is carried out in the government-controlled meanstream media. As part of this propaganda, the government is trying to shape the consciousness of citizens by suggesting that Poland is well prepared for an energy crisis, that the government is efficiently pursuing an anti-inflation policy and that the climate crisis is an environmentalist fantasy. Citizens who also listen to and read the existing independent media know that all that is reported in government propaganda is not factually correct. And besides, it happens that members of the government and/or the president of the currently ruling government monoparty PIS suggest to citizens the kinds of actions that are harmful to citizens. For example, at one of the press conferences, at one of the election rallies, the chairman of the currently reigning government monoparty PIS suggested to citizens that they can throw anything into their cookers except tyres, that they can heat their homes with anything except tyres. So that if someone runs out of coal, they can throw in, for example, plastic waste, the burning of which generates carcinogenic toxins. The current government has failed to ensure that there is no shortage of environmentally and air quality compliant fuel during the current energy crisis. The government has failed to implement a pro-environment and pro-climate transformation of the energy sector. The government has blocked the development of renewable and zero-carbon energy sources for 7 years by financially supporting the unprofitable, dirty coal power industry. Inflation is rising and, according to economists' forecasts, real core inflation in Poland will be the highest in Europe in 2023. And the government is introducing further subsidies and handouts for the purchase of fossil fuels, which are becoming additional pro-inflationary factors. Therefore, by the anti-environmental and anti-climate measures of energy policy in Poland, the currently developing energy crisis will be deeper, fossil fuel prices will be higher, air quality will be bad during the heating season. The scale of respiratory diseases and Covid-19 may increase significantly in the next heating season. Besides, the level of diversification of energy sources and the development of green, pro-environmental and pro-climate energy is low. Consequently, the level of energy security is also low. The question that arises is why a large proportion of citizens, estimated to be around a third of the population, still accept this kind of policy. This is how it looks in the country where I operate. And how do these issues look in your country?
In view of the above, I address the following research question to the esteemed community of researchers and scientists:
Due to the energy crisis, the government's support of dirty combustion energy and the restriction of the development of emission-free green energy, will the air quality during the heating season significantly decrease and the incidence of respiratory diseases and Covid-19 increase?
Please reply,
I invite you all to discuss,
Thank you very much,
Warm regards,
Dariusz Prokopowicz
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Abdelhafid Jabri,
I don't know what it is like in other countries, but in Poland, studies have been carried out on the subject. These studies show that in areas where the air quality was poorer, the air was more polluted with toxins emitted from chimneys, the incidence of respiratory and other diseases was higher and life expectancy was shorter. The study also found that the incidence and mortality of Covid-19 was higher in areas with higher levels of air pollution and smog. Data reported by the Ministry of Health shows that more than 90 per cent of people who died from Covid-19 had various co-morbidities, including various respiratory conditions. In view of the above, the correlation that I wrote about above (in my comment on the above question) is confirmed by the results of the study and is related to the fact that most people who died from Covid-19 also had comorbidities resulting from years of exposure to various negative factors of civilisation, including environmental pollution. We do not know what the correlation is between air quality and deaths caused by Covid-19 alone after subtracting the factor of co-morbidities, as there is no sufficiently precise and reliable data to confirm such a correlation. Besides, in the Polish health care system, the qualification of deaths caused by Covid-19 and various comorbidities at the same time is highly imprecise and may be intentional. We do not know exactly what the impact of Covid-19 alone is in terms of deaths after subtracting the negative health effects of various comorbidities. We do not know how many people who died from Covid-19 with co-morbidities would have died at the same time from co-morbidities but without Covid-19, i.e. if the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus had never appeared. But this could be a significant proportion of these people, as they were also predominantly elderly.
Thank you very much,
Best regards,
Dariusz
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
4 answers
If the pro-environmental and pro-climate green transformation of the energy sector had been fully implemented in previous years, would there not be the current (2022) energy crisis caused indirectly by the war in Ukraine?
In the country in which I operate, electricity and heat is still generated 3/4 on the basis of burning fossil fuels. However, if the current government had taken the pro-environmental transformation of the economy seriously, including the pro-climate transformation of the energy sector, and had been developing renewable and emission-free energy sources instead of blocking them for the past 7 years, then the current energy crisis would probably not be such a serious problem as it already is. Unfortunately, this has not been done. As a result, the energy sector in Poland is mainly dirty, combustion-intensive, high-emission, non-diversified. There is bad air in many cities. Coal-fired power plants use outdated technologies, coal is in short supply and imported. Similarly, other fossil fuels. Power grids not adapted to the current needs of the economy, etc. The development of renewable energy has been slow to materialise, as it has mainly been driven by grassroots initiatives of citizens who have, for example, installed photovoltaic panels on the roofs of their houses, solar water heating systems and heat pumps in their homes. Unfortunately, the scale of development of renewable and emission-free energy sources is still low due to barriers imposed by the government and the low level of subsidies supporting the green energy transition. The result is a low level of energy security and a high risk of a major energy crisis in the heating season, autumn/winter 2022.
What does this look like in your country?
In view of the above, I address the following question to the esteemed community of researchers and scientists:
If the pro-climate energy transition had been fully implemented in previous years, would there not be a current energy crisis?
What is your opinion on this?
What is your opinion on this subject?
Please reply,
I invite you all to discuss,
Thank you very much,
Warm regards,
Dariusz Prokopowicz
Relevant answer
Answer
Dariusz Prokopowicz,
It needs to be seen from two aspects. First, how to meet the gradual increasing demand for energy with the alternative (Alternative because we are talking about global energy needs to be replaced. Because of economics of scale for any new technology to mature and economic inequality amongst the countries to allocate a substantial part of their respective budgets towards the development of new technology it is not possible to implement any plan uniformly across the globe) source of energy capable of replacing the fossil fuel by the next century so the pace of development can be maintained. Second, while exploring the first there is a need to balance the carbon space availability which is steadily decreasing in the world and de-forestation needs to be arrested immediately. Now coming to your question, as Anna said, the situation would have been much easier but certainly not eliminated. And in all of these what is the most important around the world is the understanding the seriousness of the problem by the politicians who are clothed with all the authorities to draw the long-term plans. Now the biggest question is whether this political class is willing to learn and understand what is right for human existence in this world.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
5 answers
How will you reduce electricity consumption in a situation where electricity prices would rise by several dozen percent due to the development of the energy crisis?
It is already known that energy prices will rise due to the energy crisis. It is not yet known to what extent energy prices will increase. The question of this increase is determined by a number of factors.
On the one hand, there are objective factors such as changes in the price level of energy commodities on commodity exchanges. On the other hand, it is determined by the long-term national energy policy pursued to date (e.g. types of energy sources, development of renewable energy sources, diversification of energy sources and energy security) and by current social policy (subsidies and grants for citizens with the lowest incomes). A lot of data supports the thesis that the development of renewable energy and the abolition of dirty combustion energy monopolies are key ways of solving the energy crisis.
In view of the above, I address the following question to the esteemed community of researchers and scientists:
How will you reduce your electricity consumption in a situation where electricity prices would increase by several tens of percent due to the development of the energy crisis?
Or would you still have time in the near future, before the next heating season, to install new, renewable sources of electricity at home, etc.?
Please reply,
I invite you all to discuss,
Thank you very much,
Regards,
Dariusz Prokopowicz
Relevant answer
Answer
Increase in energy costs also effects other costs like groceries, education, and so on. Therefore, it would be useful to look at overall cost of living and identifying components which affect one's lifestyle.
Of course, adopting Gandhian philosophy and way of life could be the answer but is it feasible, given the pressures of living in the present day society?
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
9 answers
You can read my response here:
this is a short response. There are links that lead you to other responses and more support to my ideas and theory.
Here I also presented my objections to three models:
a) Banerjee et all
b) Tuomo's Suntola
c) Markolf H. Niemz.
If you read my response you will realize that I respect Dr. Suntola's dedication and precise reasoning but I disagree with the basic assumptions. That said, I think it is worthwhile to read it carefully, have my theory as the basis, and check the validity of conclusions that weren't based upon the problematic hypotheses. The work was detailed and might hide valuable contributions. I didn't have the time to work on both theories. My theory keeps me busy. I suppose that is Dr. Suntola's problem also.
I consider replacing Dark Matter and Dark energy with a negative surface tension of a m-brane not a contribution to Physics.
Dr. Neimz preprint article leaves a lot to be desired - not to mention the lack of any prediction of, or compliance with ANY observation.
Relevant answer
Answer
I say your video. The 10 minute length is too short but is a good goal.
Perhaps we could modify you game. Go for the simplest model to explain Cosmology, and the small (I did light interference) and be Machian.
Scalar Theory of Everything (STOE) unites the big, the small, and the four forces (GUT) by extending Newton's model
Perhaps the first 10 minutes of the video would be a once over lightly.
STOE has 1 force, in 3 spacial, Euclidian dimensions.
Musings - seeking next application.
I think STOE is simpler and describes more actual observations (data).
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
6 answers
In the past, energy crises have initiated significant changes in the economy. For example, the commodity crisis (fossil fuel raw materials) of the 1970s resulted in changes in car manufacturing by replacing existing internal combustion engines with more fuel-efficient versions. At that time, the first media reports about climate change, the greenhouse effect, the progressive process of global warming and the crucial role of a civilisation based on classic, brown, combustion, unsustainable economics in this issue were deliberately ignored in the world of politics and business. Today, the level of society-wide pro-environmental awareness among citizens is already much higher. Much more airtime and publishing space is devoted to green economics and sustainability issues in various media. As a result, the current and future climate crises will perhaps become another motivating factor for accelerating the development of renewable and carbon-free energy sources.
What do you think about this?
Are energy crises becoming important drivers for the development of renewable and carbon-free energy sources?
What do you think about this topic?
Please reply,
I invite you all to discuss,
Thank you very much,
Regards,
Dariusz Prokopowicz
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
22 answers
Dark matter and dark energy are two of the most mysterious and least understood phenomena in the universe. Dark matter is an invisible form of matter that makes up approximately 27% of the universe, while dark energy is an invisible form of energy that makes up approximately 68% of the universe. Both dark matter and dark energy are thought to be responsible for the accelerated expansion of the universe. The exact nature of dark matter and dark energy is still unknown, but their existence has profound implications for the fate of the universe.
Relevant answer
Answer
“…We know that, whatever the particle content of dark matter, its gravitational interactions are independent of it…”
- yeah, that is, of course, so; though that
“…. Current experiments are trying to establish what other interactions, with ordinary matter, dark matter has….”
- is also correct, but this aim in these current experiments look as rather questionable, from cosmological observations no any other than gravitational dark matter interactions are observed.
However that
“….Dark energy, for the moment, seems to be perfectly well described by the cosmological constant, whose numerical value was measured in 1998.So we know everything about it, if this is enough. The question here is, whether additional fields, beyond the metric, are necessary, that can’t be redefined as matter fields. The most general case is that of supergravity. …..”
- really is some transcendent claim about some really transcendent purely non-physical “dark energy”, which really by any means doesn’t reveal itself in all physics, besides that “expands space” , where Matter is placed,
- and, besides, what is more essential, that in mainstream cosmology exists because of in the mainstream really the transcendent GR is the standard theory of gravitational objects/events/effects/processes, which is based on really completely ad hoc illusory postulate that some really fundamentally impossible interactions in systems “mass-spacetime-mass” are real.
That in the mainstream happens because of in the mainstream all really fundamental phenomena/notions, first of all in this case “Matter”– and so everything in Matter, i.e. “particles”, “fields”, etc., “Space”, “Time”, “Energy”, are fundamentally completely transcendent/uncertain/irrational; and so in every case, when some fundamental theory by some way – in the GR that are its postulates, addresses to some fundamental phenomena/notion – the GR addresses to all ones above, the result completely obligatorily logically is nothing else than some transcendent mental construction.
Any/every really fundamental phenomenon/notion can be, and practically all are, scientifically defined only in framework of the Shevchenko-Tokarevsky’s “The Information as Absolute” conception
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260930711_the_Information_as_Absolute, and more concretely in the informational physical model, which is based on the conception, more see
Including in the model it is rigorously shown that Matter’s spacetime is the fundamentally absolute, fundamentally flat, and fundamentally “Cartesian”, [5]4D spacetime with metrics (cτ,X,Y,Z,ct), which fundamentally cannot be impacted by anything in Matter, i.e. “contracted”, “dilated”, “curved”, etc., and fundamentally the spacetime by no means can impact anything in Matter; Gravity fundamentally is nothing else than some fundamental Nature force, which is similar in a few traits to other fundamental Electric Force, there cannot be, of course, some mystic “supergravity”, etc.
Now there exist only one really rational cosmological model, where all observed cosmological objects/events/effects/processes obtain rational explanations, see the last link, section “Cosmology”, including in this model the both, rather probably real, expansions of Matter are explained, including the first one – the “inflation epoch”, which has in the mainstream no any, even transcendent, elaboration, including in this case both, the GR and “dark energy” disappear:
- really that are expansions of Matter’s ultimately fundamental base – the [5]4D dense lattice of [5]4D binary reversible fundamental logical elements [FLE], which is placed in the spacetime above, and practically everything in Matter is determined by the logical construction and properties of FLEs.
Including in the model the problem what is “dark matter” rationally, and with well non-zero probability correctly, clarified, whereas the “matter-antimatter asymmetry” problem is practically for sure is solved.
Cheers
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
21 answers
How it was calculated
Relevant answer
Answer
If we want to describe the nature of vacuum, then we first must consider the energy density E of gravitational fields. This energy density is given by E=-g²/(8πG),g=MG/r². G is the gravitational constant, r is the distance to the centre of mass M, which generates the gravitational acceleration g.
If we inspect the content of a high-end vacuum chamber at sea level, we find some rest gas, some photons and the gravitational energy density. The energy density value then is about E=-57.408.000.000 J/m³ or -5.7408 1010J/m³ (rounded to five digits).
If we then doubt that an absolute negative energy density exists, we must assume that a homogenous cosmic energy density exists, which everywhere overcompensates the negative gravitational energy density. The cosmic gravitational field must have an energy density of about 5.0E24 J/m³ to compensate neutron star gravity.
If we again inspect the content of the vacuum chamber, we can assume that cosmic energy is inside the chamber and as well omnipresent everywhere. This energy density is of gravitational nature. Because it is homogenous, it does not exert any force. We do not have any sensor, which is capable to detect this energy density.
The only thing we know is that it must be present if an absolute negative energy density cannot exist.
We could enter in a discussion about the possibility of the existence of negative energy and a negative mass equivalent. But this discussion leads to nowhere.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
5 answers
The content of the universe is divided into 4 as matter, antimatter, dark matter and dark energy. What if the Four traditionally accepted fundamental interactions in the universe are related to them respectively? These are gravitational, electromagnetic, strong nuclear and weak nuclear interactions. In other words, can matter be gravitationally related, antimatter electromagnetically related, dark matter weak nuclear force and dark energy strong nuclear force? If so, how does it happen? Let's see. We already know that matter is naturally related to the gravitational force. But how can antimatter be associated with the electromagnetic force, dark matter with the weak nuclear force and dark energy with the strong nuclear force? To find this out, we must first know the properties of antimatter, dark matter and dark energy? Let's look first: The amount of matter in the universe is more than the amount of antimatter. Well, matter is proton + ,electron - and antimatter is proton - electron + and why is the amount of matter more in the universe although they are equally affected by gravity in the universe. If this means that electrons are mobile for standard matter, and even atomos, that is, indivisible, meaning that protons and electrons cannot be separated, this can only happen by interacting with the proton - electron + in antimatter. In other words, there is the possibility of creating antimatter. Now let's consider this: how can antimatter interact with the electromagnetic force? This is exactly why it interacts with a light-like structure, namely the electromagnetic structure. Because antimatter is the structure that makes up standard matter. According to Einstein, an increase in the speed of light means an increase in matter. antimatter and standard matter work with gravity and electromagnetic theory. Presumably, the weak nuclear force and the strong nuclear force will work with dark matter and dark energy. Dark matter, on the other hand, consists of the weak nuclear force, since it does not interact with light. Dark energy, on the other hand, is the strongest nuclear force in my opinion, since it interacts with light and is a combination of standard matter and antimatter. DARK ENERGY. THANKS.
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Hakan,
''The content of the universe is divided into 4 as matter, antimatter, dark matter and dark energy.''
Dark matter particles have never been obsrved and we do not know what kind of particle it is. It is not certain that it even exist. It is at this point a scientific speculation based on the assumption that galaxies have much more masse in their periphery than we can observe. This assumption has to be made if we assume that General Relativity is a valid theory of gravitation at this scale. But if it is'nt valid at this scale then there would be no need to assume the existence of a missing mass currently called dark matter. The attraction in between galaxies is not well described by GR if there is no missing mass. All experimental attempts to detect dark matter have so far failed. So we can'nt be sure of the reality of dark matter.
''Dark matter, on the other hand, consists of the weak nuclear force, since it does not interact with light.''
If dark matter exist, it does not interact with light which means that it has no electrical charge. Weak nuclear force has nothing to do with the other electromagnetic force which is about interaction with light.
Dark energy may not exist. It is assumed to exist in order to explain the accelerated rate of expansion of the Universe which cannot be explain otherwise within the confine of General Relativity. Both dark matter and dark energy may not exist and only be epicycle added to General Relativity in order to explain away its failures. So we should not confidently speak of them as facts or even experimentally supported theoretical realities. At this point they are unsupported theoretical possibilities.
''antimatter electromagnetically related""
YES
''antimatter: substance composed of subatomic particles that have the mass, electric charge, and magnetic moment of the electrons, protons, and neutrons of ordinary matter but for which the electric charge and magnetic moment are opposite in sign.''
Any particle that has an electrical charge , that it is anti-matter or not,
interact with the electromagnetic fields.
''nd why is the amount of matter more in the universe although they are equally affected by gravity in the universe''
The current Big Bang theory of cosmic evolution assumes that there were initially the same amount of matter and anti matter earlier in the Universe but they gradually anihilate each other although with a little assymetry in this process which explain why there is this current imbalanced between the two.
Regards,
- Louis
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
3 answers
Yes. Proof given in pages : 83 , 84 of my Theory. The link to the theory :
Relevant answer
Answer
Muhsin Aljaf , we used to think that gravitational waves travel at the speed of light, but the new research by my Theory of Universality shows that they actually travel at the speed of dark energy which 9.887x10^12m/s.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
4 answers
In a research publication from 2019 cosmic acceleration was found to correlate reasonably well with the dipole in CMB as viewed from our solar system. There was an offset angle in the dipole alignment of 23 degrees between acceleration and CMB dipole, within measurement uncertainties, close enough for a conclusion, but leaving room for a modified view of Dark Energy or other stress energy field to give a better explanation.
One possible interpretation is that the conventional wisdom needs to be changed to align a dipole of Dark Energy closely with the dipole of CMB. Then the research article could correlate acceleration with Dark Energy.
An equilibrium is proposed between CMB and curl free stress energy to explain why all of CMB does not disappear into the stress field. The stress quanta must collide occasionally to regenerate the microwaves.
With a slow reverse reaction in the equilibrium, most of the energy could be in the curl free component. It could lag behind the evolution of CMB by some temperature difference and by some offset angle in the dipole orientation. The temperature difference is easy to explain because of higher CMB temperature in the past. Offset angle is harder to explain in absence of historical data about evolution of CMB dipole orientation.
Can CMB Make A Destructive Interference Pattern Of Stress Energy With Dipole Angle Offset From CMB?
Relevant answer
Answer
Angles are probably the same for real time events in the frame of reference, but viewed differently for different frames sampled at different relative ages.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
9 answers
In another question I proposed an equilibrium between Dark Energy and CMB. These are the only known fields that are the same everywhere. Known science predicts a destructive interference of CMB in which the result energy field can be decomposed into components one of which is a curl free stress energy. Dark energy has properties identical to the average of this curl free field. Without an equilibrium the CMB should disappear from destructive interference.
CMB has a small but measurable dipole feature when measured from our Earth because of the small relative velocity our sun has with isotropic CMB. Dark energy in harder to measure, but a tiny gradient might be detectable with mathematic modeling.
A test is proposed for uniformity of Dark Energy and any possible gradient related to isotropic CMB.
Physics World magazine has published an article in 2011 finding Dark energy associated with CMB.
Colin, Malayalee, Rameez, Sarkar, Astronomy & Astrophysics 631, L13, 2019 found evidence for isotropic acceleration of galaxy clusters aligned with isotropic CMB, but not for anisotropic Dark Energy.
One interpretation is that my null hypothesis could be rejected, not necessarily the intent of this publication, in favor of isotropic Dark Energy.
In the same publication CMB was suggested to have been created before Dark Energy became dominant, in agreement with my proposal that Dark energy was derived from CMB reaching an equilibrium level.
The question is asking if researchers have data and methods sufficient to draw a conclusion about uniformity of Dark Energy. A null hypothesis would be no dipole feature in Dark Energy distribution, asking 95% chance of being correct before discarding the null hypothesis.
Does Dark Energy Have A Dipole Feature Related To Isotropic CMB?
Relevant answer
Answer
Dark Energy is reported to oppose gravity, which makes the curvature of Dark Energy convex in the Lagrangian and more related to kinetic energy than to gravity.
Conventional thinking is that Dark Energy is the same everywhere and the same for all observers, a result of cosmological constant, but predating CMB and the dipole anisotropy of CMB, which bring conventional wisdom into question.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
11 answers
The maximum thrust depends on the power of a field generator and the isotropic speed of Dark Energy.
Dark energy is published to be 3970 eV per cubic centimeter. 2.396 e-16 joule/ cm^3
Solar system has velocity 371±1 km/s in the direction (l=264.14±0.3∘, b=48.26±0.3∘) 3.71 e7 cm/sec
Maximum flux is 8.89 e-9 watts/ cm^2.
Suppose the vehicle has 10 meters cross section. 1000 cm, 7.854 e5 cm^2
Maximum flux is 6.9 e-3 watts from isotropic Dark Energy.
Suppose the vehicle has field generator of 371 kilowatts. 3.71 e5 watts.
The minimum thrust is 100,000 Newtons. 2.25 e4 pounds of thrust. 0.127 nt/cm^2 or joule/cm^3
Suppose the vehicle has 100 e3 kilograms of mass.
Minimum acceleration is 1.0 meter/ second squared.
Depth of field 5.30 e9 km interacting in 17.7 seconds
For one Earth gravity acceleration the field generator would need 3.64 megawatts reaching relativistic speed in about a year, and opening a wormhole of kinetic energy in about two years. Depth of field 5.19 e10 km interacting in 170 seconds
Power ratio 3.64 kw per kg..
How Much Thrust Can Be Produced By Interaction With Isotropic Dark Energy?
Relevant answer
Answer
@Vladimir A. Lebedev
No, it's not the same idea. Completely different, we interpret dark energy according to a logical law that can happen. We made two scientific predictions. The ether to rush inward. This inward flow of ether is what causes gravity. But our theory. Universe is not created as a result of the Big Bang, but as a result of a leakage of energy from the inner universe, (the center), that led to the emergence of a new external universe, which is our current universe. This inner universe is currently the center of the universe and causing the acceleration of the universe expansion. This can be explained in details as follows:
First of all, the leakage of the energy from the center, (inner universe), has created the current universe. Due to this leakage, the speed of the center's rotation is increasing at a fixed point with time as a result of the decrease of its energy and mass, and due to the lack of the friction and resistance. Increasing rotation leads to increasing the leakage of the dark energy as a wave that forms acceleration, causing an increment in its outer perimeter, which leads to an increase in the universe expansion. The decreased energy from the center causes a reduction in the mass, which leads to more rotation and so on. This rotation causes expansion in space-time, which leads to a direct proportional relationship between the expansion acceleration of the outer universe and the increased rotation of the center of the universe around itself in a fixed point.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
166 answers
Several attempts at modifying the EFE to include the effects of Dark Matter and Dark energy have been done in the last 40 years.
One of the latest attempts comes from Gary Nash who modified the Stress Tensor of the EFE including a quantity which takes account of the gravitational energy avoiding the Pseudo tensors.
The introduction of the Line element field, first studied by Hawking is the entity which made a difference in this study
Let's see what are the comments and alternatives...
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Gary,
<<Therefore the corresponding gravitational energy-density is negative: -c4Φαβ/8πG.>>
I would provide a picture to MGR:
A negative definite energy density is admitted, as in Newtonian gravitation in which such quantity is calculated by considering a 0 energy density wherever far from ponderabile matter.
Considering that no energy density can be admitted in GR.
By using a line element field, intrinsic in a Lorentzian metrics, with the due modifications of the Einstein Stress tensor, it becomes possible to account for phenomena which GR is not able to give account of.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
12 answers
Dark energy was associated in other threads with Isotropic CMB as a consequence of interfering microwaves. In this context Dark energy is a kinetic type energy expressed as a curl free field that has no electric or magnetic components. Interfering microwaves can produce this field. It will repell potential energy like gravity, but have no other interactions except collision of Dark Energy quanta with themselves releasing microwaves to conserve the CMB.
Quantum thrusters can be constructed to produce a directional field of Dark Energy quanta that might interact with the naturally occurring curl free field. The destruction interaction rate constant is small in curl free fields as shown from other threads, suggesting that the generated field will survive long enough to transfer momentum.
An advantage is that velocity differences v are small in the momentum transfer, allowing a large momentum change dp for a small energy input dE in the dot product..
v*dp = dE
Can Dark Energy Interact With Quantum Thrusters For Break Through Propulsion?
Relevant answer
Answer
No, the properties of the CMB don't require anything new. And its existence isn't ``continued''-the CMB existed until some time in the evolution of the Universe-it doesn't exist anymore. Its fluctuations gave rise to galaxies. Our existence isn't compatible with that of the CMB.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
7 answers
(For me: the most.)
Arguments in favor of this proposition include:
In animals, 3/4 scaling applies over many orders of magnitude.
Historically, the applicable mathematical approach depends on dimension: Galileo’s 1638 work on weight-bearing animal bones; Sarrus and Rameaux 1838 on the scaled rate of mammalian breathing; Max Rubner’s and Max Kleiber’s measurements, and the geometric approach in 1997 by West Brown and Enquist.
If the underlying physical relationship prevails at all scales (sizes), then it applies to quanta, to metabolism, to cosmology, and to dark energy.
Or not?
Your views?
Relevant answer
Answer
‬‏
Metabolic scaling is the relationship between organismal metabolic rate and body mass. Understanding the patterns and causes of metabolic scaling provides a powerful foundation for predicting biological processes at the level of individuals, populations, communities, and ecosystems. Kleiber's law, named after Max Kleiber for his biology work in the early 1930s, is the observation that, for the vast majority of animals, an animal's metabolic rate scales to the 3⁄4 power of the animal's mass. Symbolically: if is the animal's metabolic rate, and the animal's mass, then Kleiber's law states that. On the other hand,allometric scaling is one of the tools that drug developers use to predict human PK based upon animal data. Prediction methods, like allometric scaling, provide a “sneak peek” at how a drug might behave in humans before any clinical studies are conducted.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
3 answers
Do such measurements make sense? Do they exist?
Comparing redshift and luminosity distances, if that is a sensible question, may bear on the 4/3 scaling hypothesis as it relates to dark energy.
Relevant answer
Answer
Cepheid and RR Lyrae variables are well known standard candles, and important tools in the cosmological distance ladder. For example, Cepheid variables, which were discovered by Henrietta Swan Leavitt, have the property that their luminosities can be directly inferred by observing their pulsation period, which then allows one to calculate their luminosity distance, given that the observing instrument (telescope) also measures their flux.
However, although nothing stops you from making redshift measurements of relatively nearby objects, this will induce an error in any cosmological parameters inferred from these measurements (such as the luminosity distance), because the peculiar velocities of these objects would be comparable to their Hubble flow, giving you highly inconsistent results. Luminosity distances calculated by interpreting the measured redshifts as cosmological redshifts, become more reliable at larger distances, where the Hubble flow dominates over the peculiar velocities.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
236 answers
Cosmological explanations for our apparently fine-tuned universe are basically divided between a) a vastly huge multiverse of universes with varying fundamental force and mass constants, including the cosmological constant (where our apparently fine-tuned universe is just one universe in this multiverse), or b) a cosmic intelligence that fine-tuned our universe at its beginning to evolve stable galaxies, life and developed minds. In scientific terms, which explanation is preferable? Are there other options? Is a cosmic mind a viable scientific hypothesis for explaining our universe's origin?
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Dr Richard Gauthier . I agree with Dr Joseph Badir ,
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
4 answers
The 4/3 laws imply that a SN1A’s luminosity distance is 4/3 of its redshift distance.
From a naive point of view, this could be consistent with Big Bang cosmology but also with a steady state cosmology.
If the 4/3 laws were valid, and if they were consistent with both cosmologies, what would that imply?
If the 4/3 laws do not distinguish between the two cosmologies, is that a logical flaw in the 4/3 laws or is it a logical flaw with one or both of the two cosmologies?
For the 4/3 laws, I refer to my projects on the 4/3 laws, and to a recent article Dark energy modeled by scaling
Relevant answer
Answer
It would be actually useful to study where the value of this exponent comes from. Cf. here: https://sites.astro.caltech.edu/~george/ay21/Ay21_Lec03.pdf, for instance.
IF the value of the exponent is the same in more than one cosmological model, that, simply, would mean that it's not possible to distinguish them just by measuring that exponent; other quantities, that are different, must be measured.
So, no, there isn't any ``logical flaw''.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
3 answers
Could this be the wave collapse in a quantized field with a dynamic curvature of expansion and attraction? This is a mathematical simulation of a quantum superposition field through moiré patterns, but one can also find the single moiré pattern in an experiment. For this purpose, a photon field is quantized a million times, instead of photons being quantized by a two-slit experiment.
Relevant answer
Answer
Hadi Jabbar Alagealy The first document is a mathematical simulation of a field, but one can find the single pattern also in a physical experiment. Instead of the double-slit experiment, no single photons are quantized by 2 slits, but a photon field is quantized millions of times. I have added the result of the experiment to the appendix.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
13 answers
Possibly: 4/3 scaling is a fundamental universal principle. Nothing underlies it. Why? It accounts for expanding cosmological space. Since 4/3 scaling brings 3 dimensional space, and hence everything else, into existence, it must be fundamental.
Can that be right? What favors and disfavors this notion?
Relevant answer
Answer
The ratio between the whole volume of the universe and the dynamical part of the same volume is about 1 : 0,74... (both quantities are determined by a different irrational number). In quantum field theory it means that the ratio between the volume of the Higgs field and the volume of the electric field in vacuum space is about 0,74 : 0,26 (total = 1,0).
Vector fields like the magnetic field and the field of Newtonian gravitation have no spatial dimension on their own. Einstein’s theory of general relativity describes the dynamical part of the volume of our universe – otherwise space cannot curve – thus the consequence is that the model of spacetime is restricted to 26% of the whole volume of the universe. The consequence is that gravity is an emergent force field (like Eric Verlinde proves for Newtonian gravity).
We may expect that ratios at the lowest scale size of reality that are present everywhere in the universe will “multiply” their ratio at larger scale sizes (like fractals do).
With kind regards, Sydney
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
1 answer
This is an addition to my 12,000-word article “A New Paradigm Of An Artificially Intelligent, Augmented-Reality Universe Based On Electronics And Topology Gives Insights Into The Dimensions Of Dark Matter And Dark Energy, Newton's Theology In The 21st Century, And Relativistic Ocean Tides” - and its sections on mathematical topology and what I call vector-tensor-scalar geometry. (https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.31659.67360)
PROPOSAL - extract the electromagnetic force from the gravitational force by dividing the figure-8 Klein bottles I propose as components of gravitons into the Mobius strips proposed to compose photons (thanks to Konrad Polthier's article "Imaging maths - Inside the Klein bottle" [http://plus.maths.org/content/os/issue26/features/mathart/index]). Then I arrived at the nuclear forces by interacting the gravitational and electromagnetic forces, and proposing combination of 10^2 gravitons with each photon to achieve the strong nuclear force's magnitude (100 times stronger than electromagnetism) … and combination of 10^11 anti-gravitons with each photon to achieve the weak nuclear force's magnitude (100 billion times weaker than electromagnetism).
The difficulty of physically combining so many gravitons and antigravitons with a photon implies the necessity of quantum entanglement. “Physicists now believe that entanglement between particles exists everywhere, all the time, and have recently found shocking evidence that it affects the wider, ‘macroscopic’ world that we inhabit.” (New Scientist, “The Weirdest Link”, vol. 181, issue 2440 - 27 March 2004, 32, http://www.biophysica.com/QUANTUM.HTM) Though the effect is measured for distances in space, the inseparability of space and time means that moments of time can become entangled too. (Caslav Brukner, Samuel Taylor, Sancho Cheung, Vlatko Vedral, “Quantum Entanglement in Time”, http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0402127)
An antigraviton would actually be a particle of dark energy, which is viewed by today's science as the force opposing gravity and causing the universe to expand. The antigravitons I propose do not contribute to expansion, but to a universe that's static at the largest scale. They oppose gravity as we understand it by existing in another large-scale dimension that's composed of dark matter, and they only interact with this dimension gravitationally. Equations have always confused me - so I only used mathematical topology and what I call vector-tensor-scalar geometry to describe this.
Relevant answer
Answer
Gravity is an action-at-a-distance force. Gravitational waves caused by the revolution of the sun affect the orbits of planets and provide some planetary precession data. The chasing effect of gravitational waves also causes the planetary orbital mechanical energy to continue to increase slowly until the planet escapes from the solar system. Gravitational waves exist; the gravitational model under the influence of gravitational waves that we constructed was a physical model. Through the calculation of planetary orbital precession, the correctness of the gravitational equation under the influence of gravitational waves is verified
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
9 answers
Among the many forms of Mathematics, which forms are particularly useful in the study of baryonic matter, dark matter and dark energy?
For example, the nabla and partial derivatives are an important part of
Chuck Keeton, How can mathematics reveal dark matter?
Lattice theory is used in
Craig McNeile , Meson and Baryon Spectroscopy on a Lattice
Homology is used in
Gregory S. Novak, Patrik Jonsson, Joel R. Primack, Thomas J. Cox, and Avishai Dekel, On Galaxies and Homology
Relevant answer
Answer
I think, when describing any object, it is advisable to try several mathematical approaches. From the point of view of physics and technology, of course, the most adequate of them will be the one that best matches the data of observations and experiments. And from the point of view of mathematics - each investigated object will open new, non-trivial connections between various mathematical theories.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
6 answers
Hello everyone ,
Dark energy which is the opposite of gravity. So the direction of this can be found.
#darkenergy
Relevant answer
Answer
When you consider that the hypothesis of dark energy is based on the observation of the recession velocity of distant galaxies it is entirely possible that there is a completely different explanation for these observations.
The motion of any galaxy is affected by the expansion of space and by gravitational acceleration. It is proposed that the unexpected recession velocity of distant galaxies is caused by gravitational acceleration and not dark energy.
Dark energy does not exist.
Richard
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
64 answers
Black Holes out of a galaxy: do they exist??? ➣➣The question is as follow.
Are there black holes outside the confines of a galaxy{*}, in the spaces between one galaxy and another??? 
{*}Galaxy is not meant only the Milky Way but any type of galaxy. In what way can be identified and/or measured these hypothetical extragalactic black holes???
➢➢Il quesito è il seguente. 
Esistono buchi neri al di fuori dei confini di una galassia{*}, negli spazi tra una galassia e l'altra??? 
{*}Galassia non viene intesa la sola Via Lattea ma qualsiasi tipo di galassia.
in che modo possono essere individuati e/o misurati questi ipotetici buchi neri extragalattici???
Previous POSTS:
►https://www.facebook.com/SalVi.SalvatoreVicidomini/posts/2378526012179048
Relevant answer
Answer
Is dark matter real, or have we misunderstood gravity? PHYS June 22 2021.
For many years now, astronomers and physicists have been in a conflict. Is the mysterious dark matter that we observe deep in the Universe real, or is what we see the result of subtle deviations from the laws of gravity as we know them? In 2016, Dutch physicist Erik Verlinde proposed a theory of the second kind: emergent gravity. New research, published in Astronomy & Astrophysics this week, pushes the limits of dark matter observations to the unknown outer regions of galaxies, and in doing so re-evaluates several dark matter models and alternative theories of gravity. Measurements of the gravity of 259,000 isolated galaxies show a very close relation between the contributions of dark matter and those of ordinary matter, as predicted in Verlinde's theory of emergent gravity and an alternative model called Modified Newtonian Dynamics. However, the results also appear to agree with a computer simulation of the Universe that assumes that dark matter is 'real stuff'.
The new research was carried out by an international team of astronomers, led by Margot Brouwer (RUG and UvA). Further important roles were played by Kyle Oman (RUG and Durham University) and Edwin Valentijn (RUG). In 2016, Brouwer also performed a first test of Verlinde's ideas; this time, Verlinde himself also joined the research team.
Matter or gravity?
So far, dark matter has never been observed directly—hence the name. What astronomers observe in the night sky are the consequences of matter that is potentially present: bending of starlight, stars that move faster than expected, and even effects on the motion of entire galaxies. Without a doubt all of these effects are caused by gravity, but the question is: are we truly observing additional gravity, caused by invisible matter, or are the laws of gravity themselves the thing that we haven't fully understood yet?
To answer this question, the new research uses a similar method to the one used in the original test in 2016. Brouwer and her colleagues make use of an ongoing series of photographic measurements that started ten years ago: the KiloDegree Survey (KiDS), performed using ESO's VLT Survey Telescope in Chile. In these observations one measures how starlight from far away galaxies is bent by gravity on its way to our telescopes. Whereas in 2016 the measurements of such 'lens effects' only covered an area of about 180 square degrees on the night sky, in the mean time this has been extended to about 1000 square degrees—allowing the researchers to measure the distribution of gravity in around a million different galaxies.
Comparative testing
Brouwer and her colleagues selected over 259,000 isolated galaxies, for which they were able to measure the so-called 'Radial Acceleration Relation' (RAR). This RAR compares the amount of gravity expected based on the visible matter in the galaxy, to the amount of gravity that is actually present—in other words: the result shows how much 'extra' gravity there is, in addition to that due to normal matter. Until now, the amount of extra gravity had only been determined in the outer regions of galaxies by observing the motions of stars, and in a region about five times larger by measuring the rotational velocity of cold gas. Using the lensing effects of gravity, the researchers were now able to determine the RAR at gravitational strengths which were one hundred times smaller, allowing them to penetrate much deeper into the regions far outside the individual galaxies.
This made it possible to measure the extra gravity extremely precisely—but is this gravity the result of invisible dark matter, or do we need to improve our understanding of gravity itself? Author Kyle Oman indicates that the assumption of 'real stuff' at least partially appears to work: "In our research, we compare the measurements to four different theoretical models: two that assume the existence of dark matter and form the base of computer simulations of our universe, and two that modify the laws of gravity—Erik Verlinde's model of emergent gravity and the so-called 'Modified Newtonian Dynamics' or MOND. One of the two dark matter simulations, MICE, makes predictions that match our measurements very nicely. It came as a surprise to us that the other simulation, BAHAMAS, led to very different predictions. That the predictions of the two models differed at all was already surprising, since the models are so similar. But moreover, we would have expected that if a difference would show up, BAHAMAS was going to perform best. BAHAMAS is a much more detailed model than MICE, approaching our current understanding of how galaxies form in a universe with dark matter much closer. Still, MICE performs better if we compare its predictions to our measurements. In the future, based on our findings, we want to further investigate what causes the differences between the simulations."
Young and old galaxies
Thus it seems that, at least one dark matter model does appear to work. However, the alternative models of gravity also predict the measured RAR. A standoff, it seems—so how do we find out which model is correct? Margot Brouwer, who led the research team, continues: "Based on our tests, our original conclusion was that the two alternative gravity models and MICE matched the observations reasonably well. However, the most exciting part was yet to come: because we had access to over 259,000 galaxies, we could divide them into several types—relatively young, blue spiral galaxies versus relatively old, red elliptical galaxies." Those two types of galaxies come about in very different ways: red elliptical galaxies form when different galaxies interact, for example when two blue spiral galaxies pass by each other closely, or even collide. As a result, the expectation within the particle theory of dark matter is that the ratio between regular and dark matter in the different types of galaxies can vary. Models such as Verlinde's theory and MOND on the other hand do not make use of dark matter particles, and therefore predict a fixed ratio between the expected and measured gravity in the two types of galaxies—that is, independent of their type. Brouwer: "We discovered that the RARs for the two types of galaxies differed significantly. That would be a strong hint towards the existence of dark matter as a particle."
However, there is a caveat: gas. Many galaxies are probably surrounded by a diffuse cloud of hot gas, which is very difficult to observe. If it were the case that there is hardly any gas around young blue spiral galaxies, but that old red elliptical galaxies live in a large cloud of gas—of roughly the same mass as the stars themselves—then that could explain the difference in the RAR between the two types. To reach a final judgement on the measured difference, one would therefore also need to measure the amounts of diffuse gas—and this is exactly what is not possible using the KiDS telescopes. Other measurements have been done for a small group of around one hundred galaxies, and these measurements indeed found more gas around elliptical galaxies, but it is still unclear how representative those measurements are for the 259,000 galaxies that were studied in the current research.
Dark matter for the win?
If it turns out that extra gas cannot explain the difference between the two types of galaxies, then the results of the measurements are easier to understand in terms of dark matter particles than in terms of alternative models of gravity. But even then, the matter is not settled yet. While the measured differences are hard to explain using MOND, Erik Verlinde still sees a way out for his own model. Verlinde: "My current model only applies to static, isolated, spherical galaxies, so it cannot be expected to distinguish the different types of galaxies. I view these results as a challenge and inspiration to develop an asymmetric, dynamical version of my theory, in which galaxies with a different shape and history can have a different amount of 'apparent dark matter'."
Therefore, even after the new measurements, the dispute between dark matter and alternative gravity theories is not settled yet. Still, the new results are a major step forward: if the measured difference in gravity between the two types of galaxies is correct, then the ultimate model, whichever one that is, will have to be precise enough to explain this difference. This means in particular that many existing models can be discarded, which considerably thins out the landscape of possible explanations. On top of that, the new research shows that systematic measurements of the hot gas around galaxies are necessary. Edwin Valentijn formulates is as follows: "As observational astronomers, we have reached the point where we are able to measure the extra gravity around galaxies more precisely than we can measure the amount of visible matter. The counterintuitive conclusion is that we must first measure the presence of ordinary matter in the form of hot gas around galaxies, before future telescopes such as Euclid can finally solve the mystery of dark matter."
More information: Margot M. Brouwer et al, The weak lensing radial acceleration relation: Constraining modified gravity and cold dark matter theories with KiDS-1000, Astronomy & Astrophysics (2021). DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361/202040108 ----- ABSTRACT. We present measurements of the radial gravitational acceleration around isolated galaxies, comparing the expected gravitational acceleration given the baryonic matter (gbar) with the observed gravitational acceleration (gobs), using weak lensing measurements from the fourth data release of the Kilo-Degree Survey (KiDS-1000). These measurements extend the radial acceleration relation (RAR), traditionally measured using galaxy rotation curves, by 2 decades in gobs into the low-acceleration regime beyond the outskirts of the observable galaxy. We compare our RAR measurements to the predictions of two modified gravity (MG) theories: modified Newtonian dynamics and Verlinde’s emergent gravity (EG). We find that the measured relation between gobs and gbar agrees well with the MG predictions. In addition, we find a difference of at least 6σ between the RARs of early- and late-type galaxies (split by Sérsic index and u − r colour) with the same stellar mass. Current MG theories involve a gravity modification that is independent of other galaxy properties, which would be unable to explain this behaviour, although the EG theory is still limited to spherically symmetric static mass models. The difference might be explained if only the early-type galaxies have significant (Mgas ≈ M⋆) circumgalactic gaseous haloes. The observed behaviour is also expected in Λ-cold dark matter (ΛCDM) models where the galaxy-to-halo mass relation depends on the galaxy formation history. We find that MICE, a ΛCDM simulation with hybrid halo occupation distribution modelling and abundance matching, reproduces the observed RAR but significantly differs from BAHAMAS, a hydrodynamical cosmological galaxy formation simulation. Our results are sensitive to the amount of circumgalactic gas; current observational constraints indicate that the resulting corrections are likely moderate. Measurements of the lensing RAR with future cosmological surveys (such as Euclid) will be able to further distinguish between MG and ΛCDM models if systematic uncertainties in the baryonic mass distribution around galaxies are reduced.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
11 answers
Many conservation laws are found in references, also selection rules and exclusion rules. Time passage is taken for granted, but I don't find any law that compels time to pass.
Discussions in other threads explored that possibility that passage of time is started by creating particle pairs with mass out of a swarm of photons. Mass experiences the passage of time while photons do not.
Consider an end of time. In theory all the mass would convert to photons including black holes. Entropy the arrow of time would go to zero. Distances could not be measured, and might not continue to exist. This begins to sound much like descriptions of our early universe many researchers have given, which is the reason for this question.
Roger Penrose in the book Cycles of Time and in many speeches has a dilemma that enormous length of time is required for black holes to evaporate in the manner of Stephen Hawking. A remedy might be found in some other mechanism for time to stop passing sooner.
Comparing other laws, it seems likely that time should continue to pass unless something causal occurs or a permissive is lost in physical cosmos.
In other threads topics were explored about possible ways time might stop by natural processes, and other possibilities that human activities working with extreme high energy densities might cause time to stop locally in a bubble of quantum modified space.
Researchers debate what might happen to a modified bubble, and how large it would need to be before it could begin to expand uncontrollably to fill the cosmos. Also they make theories about how a bubble might be stopped. A few researchers look to such bubbles as a source of dark energy.
The question is asking if researchers have other information or theories about passage of time.
Does Any Law Of Science Require Time To Continue Passing?
Relevant answer
Answer
This question is closely related to Hume's paradox (David Hume, Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding). Hume asks: How do we know the future resembles the past? Because it always has in the past? That is assuming the very point in question!
Hume decided there was no rational argument for assuming the future resembles the past. The same could be said about the assumption time will continue. Schroedinger answered Hume's paradox by stating that we assume the future resembles the past because, if we hadn't, we would not have survived natural selection.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
304 answers
According to the principle of the general relativity theory, the gravity field equation should contain the field energy as a source of the field itself. Including the field energy-momentum tensor into the Einstein’s equation brings extra unknown quantities to the equation. Such equation is not suitable for a metric finding; however it allows – based on the known metric – calculating the whole energy-momentum tensor of both matter and gravitational field. As the gravity field metric, the metric of continuous field can be used, parameters of which are found from the generally covariant one-parametric equation. Here, the solutions are given of the equation for the spherically symmetric stationary problem. One of the solutions coincides practically with that by Schwarzschild for weak fields, while the other one describes an expulsive field.
Relevant answer
Answer
The theory explains the behavior of objects in space and time, and it can be used to predict everything from the existence of black holes, to light bending due to gravity, to the behavior of the planet Mercury in its orbit. The implications of Einstein's most famous theory are profound.
8 Ways You Can See Einstein's Theory of Relativity in Real Life
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
4 answers
Dr. Hans-Otto Carmesin is a prolific theoretician who wrote among other things, these two books:
Modeling SN1a data:
That said, he leads a field where a lot of unsupported claims are tossed around without anything to support it. That is why they are unsupported..:)
As Dr. Carmesin professed, scientists should follow the teachings of Aristotle and always use the simplest possible model that is consistent with Reality.
Dr. Carmesin's model has nonlocality, dimensional transitions, the usual suspects (Dark Matter and Dark Energy), and an epoch-dependent Dark Energy (figure 8.15 on the first book above).
It is a fantastic work and from my point of view, unnecessary and incorrect.
Unnecessary because there is HU which is capable to explain everything Dr. Carmesin explained without the need for a Big Bang, Dark Energy, Dark Matter, epoch-dependent Dark Matter, Polychromatic Vacuum. Because of that, Aristotle and Occam's Razor would support HU and rebut Dr. Carmesin's work.
Attached is my summary of the problems I found on Dr. Carmesin's claims that SN1a distances support his work.
#########################################
#########################################
#########################################
This is an ongoing discussion.
Dr. Carmesin provided a reply to my objections and confirmed that he is not sure if his model can predict the SN1a distances.
In fact, he said: "My theory does not fail to predict these distances. I just did not calculate these distances yet for a good reason: I tested my full theory by calculating the measured Hubble constants of the Hubble tension."
First, that is not a good reason. Second, I calculated the distances according to his model and the model failed. See the plot and the attached python script.
#########################################
My plot of his model showcases that the model fails to predict the observed distances.
I also drive home the fact that Dr. Carmesin's model modifies the meaning of H0 (the Hubble Constant). Because of that comparison of results are not straightforward and seems to not have been considered before.
The plots also show that HU model predicts the observed distances without any parameters.
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Hans-Otto,
I thank you, in the name of all the readers, for your books and wisdom.
I also derived Quantum Gravity and offered everyone these articles.
I remind you that my work has no parameters and that my prediction for the G-dependence of the Absolute Luminosity yielded a G-factor that was off just by 11% from the observed.
My Quantum Gravity theory predicts the maximum density inside a Black Hole and creates Matter directly from deformed space.
Here is the maximum density inside a Black Hole:
I also predicted the position of Earth in the Hyperspherical Universe and replicated the CMB observations (together with the spherical harmonic spectral decomposition). I did that using interdimensional hyperspherical harmonic spectral decomposition, after a grid search for the best location. Here is the grid search:
Here is Planck's CMB observation:
and here is the hyperspherical harmonic acoustic spectral simulation of the same:
at Earth's position:
χ= 339.46 degrees
θ = 341.1 degrees
ϕ= 104.08 degrees
More details here:
Here is the Equation of State of the Universe:
Here is the 3D Map of the Observable Universe:
CENSORSHIP
My theory has been published since 2007 and it has been censored at Los Alamos archives and mainstream journals (including the one where Dr. Amendola is the editor)!
You have your voice. You are allowed to publish your work. I am not.
I have a story to tell, one that is distinct from the story you tell and that everyone wants to hear.
Can Scientists handle that? Science should be able to do so.
I would like you to offer to be my endorser at Los Alamos Archives.
Best Regards,
Marco Pereira
PS- Please confirm that your theory failed to predict the SN1a distances and please provide me with its E(z).
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
3 answers
A. Bejan, A. Almerbati and S. Lorente have concluded that `the economies of scale phenomenon is a fundamental feature of all flow (moving) systems, animate, inanimate, and human made’ (https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4974962).
The universe’s space everywhere flows — expands — outwards from its beginning. Economies of scale appear to arise in flowing systems. Is cosmogenesis an economy of scale phenomenon for the entire universe?
Are the physics of cosmogenesis and economies of scale the same?
Relevant answer
Answer
According to piling evidence, the cosmos driving forces are based on electromagnetic forces besides gravity. I recommend to watch videos on the following YouTube channel. Scientifically, the work of people behind those discoveries is very rigorous.
The task will be to find out what is the medium facilitating interactions among economic subjects. Similarly to electromagneti forcess among stars.
Definitely, cosmological processes are affecting economy at many scales. One example would be earthquakes & volcanoes that are triggered according to the latest research by activity of the sun (it is better to say that they are correlated.)
Your idea can bring a lot of interesting results when studied sufficiently in depth. That paper about correlation of solar activity and volcanic activity is probably shared in the project '"Complexity Digests ..." If not then ask me, I will find it for you.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
5 answers
The preponderance of mass in nucleons is gluon binding energy. From this we see that protons and neutrons both have positive mass. Is there a potential relationship between gluon biding energy and the virtual particles in quantum foam? Consider this in the context of dark matter and dark energy.
Relevant answer
Answer
In principle, I agree with Stam Nicolis, but I would like to add something.
The cosmological constant can be understood as a property of spacetime or as the vacuum energy. The quantum fluctuations in the vacuum are subtracted in quantum field theory because they have no effect, but they do contribute when we consider gravity.
The quantum fluctuations of quarks and gluons can produce vacuum instability. Indeed, the perturbative QCD vacuum is only stable inside hadrons and decays outside into the standard QCD vacuum (a condensate of quark-antiquark pairs). In this sense, there is negative mass in QCD.
I think that the QCD vacuum instability has been related to the cosmological constant, but I cannot recall the references. Sorry.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
13 answers
It is commonly accepted that General Relativity has its own 'bare' cosmological constant that contributes together with the cosmological constant resulting from vacuum energy density for an effective cosmological constant. Are there any candidates for this 'bare' cosmological constant?
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Stefan Ruster,
"quantum theory is correct."
Quantum theory in general is no more than a bad joke. Every one of these so-called theories is almost completely wrong. Quantum Mechanics, on the other hand, Is the best mathematical system that we have to make predictions in the quantum world. But the logic of it is no better than 'woo' physics.
Advocates of the logic and theories believe that local hidden variables have been dis-proved, but they are wrong. Einstein believed there was no such thing as an aether based upon his proposal of Special Relativity. For this reason, he proposed warped space in General Relativity. But he too was wrong for the same reason.
Since Einstein's proposals we have observed the Zero-Point-Field for more than 70 years now. We have proposed the Higgs field, dark matter, dark energy, gravitons, quantum foam etc. Even if some of these fields are pure fantasy, there are proven background fields that could rightfully be called an aether.
For the theory of quantum mechanics to be correct none of these fields could be involved with the quantum world. For General Relativity to be correct, none of these fields could be involved with gravity. Since both of these theories require the non-existence of these fields at solar-system scales they can be mathematically correct, but both theoretically wrong for the same reason. That's why IMO they don't and cannot agree with each other, and why no theory of everything could ever be correct without the inclusion of at least one background field that interacts at all scales to explain reality, mathematics aside.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
13 answers
The dark matter candidate that I have been working on is the di-neutron and the reasons are explained here:
It occurs to me that, given the abundance of dark matter in the universe at least 5 times greater than hydrogen and helium combed then we would expect the star forming gas clouds of hydrogen and helium to contain an abundance of di-neutrons.
We have to consider the di-neutrons present at the time that nuclear fusion starts and also the di-neutrons that subsequently accrete onto the star. Would the di-neutrons (which are at least a thousand times smaller than the hydrogen atoms) tend to fall intact into the core of the star? Would the temperature inside the star be sufficient to cause the di-neutron bond to break so that we have a source of free neutrons? Would there be a tendency for the di-neutrons to be involved directly in nucleosynthesis adding two neutrons to a chemical element? This is a lot of questions rolled into one so apologies for that.
I would be interested to know if there is anything in the observation of stars or the nucleosynthesis models that supports the hypothesis that the di-neutron is the correct choice of dark matter candidate.
Richard
Relevant answer
Answer
Stefan Bernhard Rüster Dear Stephan. I see you have a completely different world view to me so we are probably not going to agree - just argue from our own personal understanding without resolving anything. Best to stop now don't you think?
All the best
Richard
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
1 answer
I’m working on research and reminded of a base tenant of Measurement Quantization (MQ), but would like more feedback about how astronomers interpret observation. The perceived view differs from that of MQ (Eqs. 57-80).
I will explain. When we look to the universe we may classically describe certain classes of observation. In an expanding universe they are
  • what you see (visible Ωb/Ωvis),
  • all that can be seen (observable Ωc+Ωb/Ωobs),
  • the presently unobserved (dark matter Ωc/Ωuobs) and
  • that which you will never see due to the expansion of space (dark energy ΩΛ/Ωdkm).
Now, there is considerable argument as to the rate of expansion and coincidence with critical density. Let’s avoid that and go with the premise that we are at critical. This is an area that MQ has covered well. Then, we take the temporal presentation and work out the distributions.
Amazing! The same. I am very familiar with the ΛCDM calculations. That said, maybe others have observed the correspondence to the temporal interpretation and wrote it off as coincidence because of the insufficient connection to critical density. Is that the only missing link? Or, maybe everyone is focused on the other properties, the oddness of star velocities in a galaxy, the energy properties of dark energy and correlation to the cosmological constant.
With respect to MQ, the temporal cannot be ignored. It is a property of observation. So, it seems confusing why the temporal approach is never mentioned nor accommodated. Outsider interpretations as to how the temporal properties of observation are resolved are valuable. Papers that directly address the coincidence of temporal classes in comparison to the human groupings to which we allocate all variety of properties (i.e. dark matter) are highly valued. Research not in a major journal is not particularly useful.
Relevant answer
Answer
Imagine that the universe is a closed, ever-evolving environment that began with the Big Bang. More importantly, space-time is shrunk by the gravitational force of celestial bodies. Two results are expected as a result of the expansion of a wrinkled closed space:
1. Space-time are flexible and are stretched under this force, and this tension creates a positive curvature in the structure of space-time.
2. The expansion of the wrinkled space finally causes the space-time break.
As a result, dark matter and dark energy can be explained by this assumption.
Dark matter and energy are the results of the positive shrinkage, fracture, and positive curvature of closed and expanding space.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
5 answers
Do the quantization of gravity is required or the gravity it self the in quantizated forms can the dark energy is chaotic analogue of classical energy and dark matter is chaotic analogue of classical matter
Relevant answer
Answer
Thank you for you valuable answer
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
13 answers
After WMAP observational results we have seen that 71.4% of universal energy budget is acquired by Dark Energy while 24% is under Dark matter. So every part in our universe must contain Dark Energy or Dark Matter. If a black hole is situated in the centre of a galaxy is it possible that dark energy accreted towards the black hole? If it is accreted then in which circumstances we can identify it?
Relevant answer
Answer
I think, there exist energies of different kinds. We call energy of unknown kind as "dark energy". It is possible, energies of different kinds act on different objects. We know until one kind of gravitation as energy of attraction. It is possible, there exist energy of repulsion linked with rotation of objects. Planets, stars, galaxies and others rotate because rotates spaces, surrounding these objects. Then "dark energy" is the energy of surrounding spaces. Assume that the rotation is linked with gravitation of repulsion. Stars and others rotating objects absorb this energy. It is possible to construct the model, which radiates energy of repulsion (with our point of view, for example, this is de Sitter bubble, fulled by matter in the state of inflation p =- rho c^2). This model is applicable for pulsars, quasars, quickly rotating. It is possible, accreted by these objects energy is the source of energy for them.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
15 answers
General Relativity. Can the strength of gravity reduce for dense masses?
New discussion
Is there anything in Einstein’s Field Equations that allows the strength of gravity to reduce for regions of high mass/radius ratio? It could be desirable for two reasons.
Reason 1) From Newtonian considerations. The flatness problem is equivalent to (for each mass m).
mc^2-GMm/R=0 (1)
G=Rc^2/M (2)
Where M and R represent the mass and radius of the rest of the universe up to the Hubble radius. Small numerical constants omitted for simplicity.
For a larger mass, with the self-potential energy term included
mc^2-GMm/R-(Gm^2)/r=0 (3)
r is the radius of mass m , leading to
G_reduced = c^2/(M/R+m/r) = G/(1+Gm/(rc^2 )) (4)
i.e. a reduction in G for masses of high m/r ratio, approaching c^2/G
Reason 2)
It would allow bounces or explosions form galactic centres and avoid a situation of infinite density and pressure. It could account for the ‘foam’ like large scale structure.
It's part of a new cosmology
that predicts an apparent omega(m) of between 0.25 and 0.333 and matches supernovae data without a cosmological constant.
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi John,
Instead of "reducing gravity", what about "reducing the mass of matter" once neutron degeneracy pressure is exceeded? For example, in a collapsing neutron star, what if the mass of those neutrons were to be reduced during the collapse?
Recall that a neutron is thought to get 99% of its mass from (1) a cloud of virtual gluons, and (2) the momentum of its quarks. Only 1% of the mass of a normal neutron is thought to come from its quarks interacting with a Higgs type field.
Which makes me wonder: if the quarks in each neutron can be "confined" by gravity instead of by gluons, there'd be no need for all that glue (and the associated mc^2). Also, as gravity confines the range for those quarks to move, their momentum might also be reduced (asymptotic freedom).
Which raises the question: in a collapsing neutron star, as all those neutrons become increasingly compressed by gravity, as the mass each neutron gets from gluons and momentum disappears, does this mean that the mass of a collapsing neutron star reduces as it shrinks?
Nigel
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
4 answers
Suppose there is a static 3 dim space and a dynamic changing 4 dim space. Without that supposition, lots of problems in physics remain puzzles. With it, lots of puzzles are easily resolved.
Energy in 4 dimensional space, where the fourth dim is proportional to the distance light travels or the time it takes for light to travel that distance, has 4/3 as much energy per dimension as does 3 dim static space. Hence, dim space a 4/3 length L when 4 dim space has a distance of length L. This appears to account for space expanding. A supernova’s distance from Earth measured in the 4 dim space where light moves, using redshift, should appear to be 3/4 as luminous when comparing type 1A supernovas, because in static 3 dim space the supernova is 4/3 as far. Other data is consistent. Energy density for dark energy (so called) compared to matter energy density is in the ratio [ E/ L^3] : [ E/ {(4/3)L}^3, which is 4^3/3^3 which is about 0.7033/ 0.2967, as has been observed in astronomy.
There are numerous examples of this 4:3 ratio occurring a variety of different natural phenomena, as set out in various article in my projects dealing with the 4/3 laws and DE.
Or maybe not?
Relevant answer
Answer
The history of science shows that the universe does include two reference frames, (1) one static three-dimensional space and (2) the other dynamic containing four-dimensional space. The classic mechanical physics of Isaac Newton's three Laws of Motion is a locus classicus for (1), and Albert Einstein's discovery of the photoelectric effect exemplifies a dynamic inroad in our understanding of the physical laws of our cosmos. Thus, the mathematically formulated proof for (1) F = MA; and for (2) e = mc2 will have to be followed by yet a third (3) discovery of (A) a formula, with (B) mathematical proof, of the next step, if any, that improves on the revolutionary advances made by the scientific community that culminated in the breakthrough discoveries of Newton & Einstein.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
3 answers
I am not a professional physicist or cosmologist as the phrasing of my question may imply. Something I recently was thinking about was how the velocity of galaxies increases with distance from our own position. This got me thinking about dark matter/energy (forgive me I don't fully understand the parameters very deeply) and how it counters gravitational effects. I am aware that Higgs bosons (and bosons in general?) are their own anti-particle. That is to say they neutral. So, it seems fair to assume then that dark matter/energy does not couple to the Higgs field through anti-particle. My question then is this: is it possible for there to be a dark matter/energy "field" which has "anti-Higgs" properties? The idea that galaxies are racing away from us at faster and faster speeds relative to distance makes me imagine an activation energy curve in which areas around black holes are gravity wells sitting on a dark matter/energy potential energy curve. The farther down the curve the well falls the more the stored potential energy is converted to velocity similar to something gaining velocity falling into an area of high gravity.
This may seem like hogwash to well trained professionals and by all means, tear apart my conjecture if there are obvious flaws. In fact, I am hoping that someone can dispel any misconceptions I have and set me on the right track to understand these concepts. Thank you in advance to anyone who responds!
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Preston Guynn One of the mistake that we are carrying is perception of matter. The smallest complete unit of universe is atom. Particle is considered fraction of an atom. Anything smaller than an atom does not have any character, and it would have any relation with an atom, i.e. electron can not be free out of an atom and still call it electron. Also, We must take this in consideration that one of the most important part of an atom is space inside of atom with character. Yet I am admire you for information that you provide on galaxy.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
5 answers
Because current theories are missing an essential concept?
Suppose, for example, that applied to the enigma in our time called dark energy, characterized as accelerating space. If current theories do not avail in accounting for dark energy (so called) then neither can efforts at insight using those theories however persistently and strenuously applied, avail. The astronomical observations were made in 1997 and 1998. A convincing theoretical account has not yet emerged in over twenty years. What is needed perhaps (I think this the case) is a bit of luck that connects something sort of known (metabolic scaling, black body radiation) to something that seems mysterious, dark energy. What is needed is noticing a pattern found terrestrially to a pattern found cosmologically. What is needed is a fortuitous event. Perhaps, 4/3 scaling?
Are there historical examples of luck in physics?
Relevant answer
Answer
If your "theoretical physics breakthroughs" are so great then of coarse, you can answer questions like;
Why do the constants have the value they have; dielectric, light speed, gravitation,..
What is energy-mass?
What is charge-potential?
What is force-field?
Some humility would be at its place, I think.
JES
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
3 answers
An article I posted March 5, 2020 is called The Theory of constant cosmic expansion. The idea is that there is a general and universal law of dimensional capacity. In particular the ratio of dimensions 4 (space plus moving light) compared to dimension 3 (empty space) occurs in a variety of Earth-bound phenomena and provides a simple explanation for space stretching 4:3 in 3 dim space.
Via RG, I noticed (thank you RG) today an article Dark energy without fine tuning by José Eliel Camargo Molina Tommi Markkanen Pat Scott. The abstract says they present a two field model, which almost, kind of, seems possibly connected to the two reference frame model in The Theory of constant cosmic expansion.
Even more intriguingly, just after their equation 4.4 they mention two cases for energy density of the quintessence field, one where e has exponent -3N and one where e has exponent -4N (subject to a constant b^2 in the denominator of the exponent).
Their reasoning is based on a connection they notice between electro-weak theory and inflation, and knowledge about the Higgs boson, about which I am at sea (among other physics regrets). The likeliest scenario is that 3 and 4 as exponents in their paper has no relation at all to the ideas in The theory of constant cosmic expansion. Still, the ideas of two alternative reference frames and 3 and 4 in the exponents of the scale factors are curious coincidences. Do you know the physics enough to see if there is a connection?
Relevant answer
Answer
Constant expansion means a scale factor that doesn't accelerate; dark energy implies a scale factor that does. A positive cosmological constant is one way of describing dark energy and, for the moment, assigning a value to the cosmological constant is sufficient to describe all measurements. It isn't possible to predict the value of the cosmological constant any more than it is possible to predict the value of Newton's constant. Both are necessary to describe spacetime and how matter affects it and is affected by it.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
8 answers
No consensus account for dark energy exists. No account of what underlies energy itself exists. Dark energy is applied to cosmological scales. Energy applies at all scales. Is it possible that the same physical mechanism underlies both? In that case, it would be ironic, if instead of distinguishing dark energy from other energy, dark energy instead reveals the nature of all energy at all scales. Is it possible?
Relevant answer
Answer
For the moment, all effects of dark energy can be described by the cosmological constant, that's as much a part of general relativity as is Planck's constant.
Energy is the quantity, whose conservation describes time translation invariance.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
4 answers
Likely it is too early to say. There must have been some aspects of caloric theory that gave it an aura of plausibility. Unfortunately, a 1971 book by Robert Fox, The Caloric Theory of Gases from Lavoisier to Regnault, which might help illuminate the question is out of print and rare as a used book. Suppose (as one may reasonably suspect.) that dark energy is the wrong way of looking at things. So was caloric fluid as the basis for a theory of heat the wrong way of looking at things, though successful for a while. Will epistemology find parallels in the future between caloric and dark energy? I suspect yes. What do you think?
Relevant answer
Answer
Hypothesizing a special "fluid" to explain physical/chemical phenomena seems to be a standard meta-scientific strategy. The "ether" is another example.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
4 answers
Science moves very rapidly sometimes. Current astrophysics courses are built on the nearly-century-old tradition of interpreting quantum mechanics in terms of probability. However, in 2019 it was demonstrated by Zlatko Minev in an experiment that the evolution of each completed quantum jump - transition of an electron between the ground state and a higher orbital, and vice versa - is continuous and deterministic. [Minev, Z. K.; Mundhada, S. O.; Shankar, S.; Reinhold, P.; Gutiérrez-Jáuregui, R.; Schoelkopf, R. J..; Mirrahimi, M.; Carmichael, H. J.; Devoret, M. H. (June 3, 2019). "To catch and reverse a quantum jump mid-flight". Nature. 570 (7760): 200–204 and https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.00545] According to Wikipedia, "This result calls for a full reassessment of the standard interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, which is built on the assumption that there is no hidden variable".
Many thanks to the authors for confirming my hypothesis of the deterministic nature of quantum mechanics. I've been exploring this idea in published paperbacks since 2006, and on the Internet since 2011 - early articles at
My most comprehensive article pre-dating the Nature Letter's publication is "Producing Warp Speed Throughout Space-Time By Unifying Gravity With Electromagnetism, Mathematics, Supersymmetry, Matter, Dark Matter, Dark Energy and the Supposedly Unrelated Higgs Boson" (May 4, 2019 - cite
Bartlett, Rodney (2019): Producing Warp Speed Throughout Space-Time By Unifying Gravity With Electromagnetism, Mathematics, Supersymmetry, Matter, Dark Matter, Dark Energy and the Supposedly Unrelated Higgs Boson. figshare. Preprint. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.7558358.v2
My article doesn't use equations or jargon but does refer to binary digits as hidden variables, the basics of my vector-tensor-scalar geometry, as well as the topology of Mobius strips and figure-8 Klein bottles (electronically modified to be simply-connected), plus Wick rotation, in the universe's fundamental structure.
Relevant answer
Answer
I tried to follow your good advice. Unfortunately (and predictably), it was rejected. I can't get anything published anywhere. I've been trying for years but have never had any success at all. I have no idea why.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
5 answers
D-Gravity is an hypothetical force at the level of quantum foam in a superposition of Gravitation and Dark Energy. Don't confuse D with dimension. It is Dark-Gravity.
Relevant answer
Answer
Can Quintessence be replaced by force of D-Gravity, a fifth fundamental force?
IMO we seem to be always looking for more complicated answers than simple ones. The proposal of Quintessence is based upon the dark energy proposal. Dark Energy is based upon up to a 10% increase in calculated distances up to a redshift of z=.6. The error then reduces to zero at a redshift of z=1.3, where it then starts decreasing in calculated distances over brightness determinations and type 1a supernova thereafter.
Instead of dark energy where 68% percent of the universe is made up of an unknown force, the extremely simple answer is that the Hubble distance formula is somewhat inaccurate at greater distances. In a related paper I and an associate proposed a different distance formula that matches type 1a supernova observations without the existence of dark energy or an expanding universe.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
8 answers
Hubble constant estimates from collaborations: Planck’s mission, SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey, DES Collaboration, H0LiCOW, Riess et al, Hubble Space Telescope are objective and not in doubt. It means that the Hubble constant describes two similar, but different physical processes, therefore objectively have at least two meanings. An estimate of the Hubble constant based on relict radiation describes the process of rotation of the space of the observed Universe, and an estimate of the Hubble constant which based on measuring changes in the distance to distant objects of the observed Universe (quasars, Cepheids, red giants ...) describes the process of rotation of substance in the space of the observed Universe. The Hubble constant with equal success presents two mutually exclusive hypotheses: the hypothesis about of the dark energy and the hypothesis of rotation of the space of the observable Universe. The hypothesis of the dark energy admits only one value of the Hubble constant and the hypothesis of rotation of the space of the observed Universe admits a multi-valued Hubble constant. Forecast: all estimates of the Hubble constant based on relic radiation will be grouped around its analytical estimate 1) 67.5577 (km / s) / Mpc, and estimates of the Hubble constant based on measurements of distances from distant objects of the observable Universe will be grouped around its second analytical value 2) 74.15 (km / s) / Mpc.
It can be assumed that the rotation speed of a substance with a mass density that is substantially lower than that of quasars, Cepheids, and red giants will be between 1) and 2).
Relevant answer
Answer
At any given time, the Hubble Constant has only a single value. However, that value has changed with time, due to the changing ratio between the mass in the Universe (which is constant) and the volume of space (which is constantly increasing).
And of course if you read different papers, there are several values, because none of them are correct. Why they are not correct is a matter of considerable debate; but there is some sort of error in the assumptions that go into interpreting the data used to calculate the value of the Constant, and no group that has obtained one value has been able to convince any group that obtained a different value that they are wrong, or tell them where they made their error. I'm sure that the value is close to 70 km/sec/Mpc, but the value quoted in any paper can be 3 or 4 km/sec larger or smaller than that, and any average used by someone should be taken with a very large grain of salt (I myself use 70 and have done so for the last 50 years for a number of reasons, and am pleased to see that it is still as good an estimate of the value as any other; but that doesn't mean that the number really is 70; just that it is close to that value).
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
1 answer
Hubble constant estimates from collaborations: Planck’s mission, SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey, DES Collaboration, H0LiCOW, Riess et al, Hubble Space Telescope are objective and not in doubt. It means that the Hubble constant describes two similar, but different physical processes, therefore objectively have at least two meanings. An estimate of the Hubble constant based on relict radiation describes the process of rotation of the space of the observed Universe, and an estimate of the Hubble constant which based on measuring changes in the distance to distant objects of the observed Universe (quasars, Cepheids, red giants ...) describes the process of rotation of substance in the space of the observed Universe. The Hubble constant with equal success presents two mutually exclusive hypotheses: the hypothesis about of the dark energy and the hypothesis of rotation of the space of the observable Universe. The hypothesis of the dark energy admits only one value of the Hubble constant and the hypothesis of rotation of the space of the observed Universe admits a multi-valued Hubble constant. Forecast: all estimates of the Hubble constant based on relic radiation will be grouped around its analytical estimate 1) 67.5577 (km / s) / Mpc, and estimates of the Hubble constant based on measurements of distances from distant objects of the observable Universe will be grouped around its second analytical value 2) 74.15 (km / s) / Mpc.
It can be assumed that the rotation speed of a substance with a mass density that is substantially lower than that of quasars, Cepheids, and red giants will be between 1) and 2).
Relevant answer
Answer
After the Big Bang, the space of the observable Universe made one incomplete revolution of at 345 degrees, and the substance in it made one complete revolution of approximately 379 degrees. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02045149
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
9 answers
Hello Stanford team!
Anyone is ready/looking for Extra Spacial Dimensions?
Motley String Theory is based on two simple Postulates:
Postulate 1: Every spacial dimension of String has a unique intrinsic property which we call "color".
Postulate 2: There is force between spacial dimensions of string such that it makes dimensions of complementary colors (Red_i , Green_i, Blue_i) interact and unite in a colorless threads perceived as observable dimensions.
As a result, Motley String theory solves ALL SIX Major Problems the Standard Model
could not explain:
1. Number of elementary particles (6 quarks + 6 leptons)
2. Quarks Fractional Charges
3. Quarks Confinement
4. Quarks Oscillations
5. Neutrinos Oscillations
6. Dark Energy/Mass problem
One web page overview of the Motley String theory is on my web site:
Moreover, in August 2019 I created a W Z bosons Scatter Experiment Proposal (see attached document Matveev-WZScatterExperiment.pdf with details) for CERN SPS or LHC.
The Proposed Experiment is somewhat similar to the one conducted by SPS team in 1983,
but one needs to use BOSONS instead of Hadrons.
The Expected RESULT and GOAL of the Experiment is to identifying the UNIQUE String Theory (Motley Heterotic String) as our Leading Candidate for ToE (Theory of Everything).
Major reason for such Experiment Result is the FACT that Motley String Model is EQUALLY APPLICABLE to BOTH Superstring model and Bosonic string model and thus to Heterotic String model for reasons explained in the attached document.
As far as I can see there is NOTHING that prevents Stanford Accelerator team from conducting the proposed Experiment and Discovering TRUE Dimensionalit{y,ies} of the Universe we live in.
Also Motley String offers Plausible Explanation for “Dark Energy/Mass” problem of modern Astrophysics.
My first book “Motley String or What Everything is made of” was first published by German Scholars Press in June 2018.
Third extended Edition (with New Chapter on Elliptic Curve – Hydrogen Atom Link) was published in April 2019.
The book is available on Publishers web shop:
as well as on about a dozen of other web shops: Adlibris, Amazon, etc.
Your Constructive EXPERIMENTALIST Feedback would be Much Appreciated!
Best regards,
George Yury Matveev
P.S. other Particle Accelerators with comparable to SPS/LHC characteristics could possibly try to carry out the Proposed Experiment as well.
Relevant answer
Answer
"Spatial" , or "spacelike", not 'spacial'. Just sayin'.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
25 answers
I created a theory that tells us that it does. There is a lot of research in the field and I evaluate two seminal papers;
a) Lunar Ranging Data Analysis
b) SN1a Data Analysis
Both tells us that there isn't any real epoch-dependence on the Gravitational Constant.
Here I rebut those articles and show that glaring mistakes (assuming as a hypothesis something that forces the conclusion). That would be ok is the hypothesis made any sense, but in this case it does not.
Please, if you are a real astronomer, professor of astronomy (as opposed to self-described specialist on astronomy and cosmology), please defend this article:
I say that because, only the opinion of real experts are relevant. Opinions of other people will not change this debate.
Relevant answer
Answer
I skimmed through your article and couldn't find a single equation. So, I don't know exactly where are you trying to get.
In my theory single charges sense no Gravity.
Neutral Matter (made of neutrons/protons/electrons) will induce a stronger Gravitational Force on a probe, given that the other parameters are maintained constant.
He Law (a formula) is shown below:
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
4 answers
Muller & Biskupek 2007
#########################################################
I proposed a theory where I derived an epoch-dependent Law of Gravitation. This and other measurements would collide with my theory.
My claim is that these analyses suffer from Confirmation Bias and are incorrect.
In simple terms, the Moon is receding with 4 cm/year and has an average orbit radius of 384,400,000 meters.
This means that
1/r*dr/dt=1.04E-10/yr
My theory predicts 1/G*dG/dt=c/R0=H0=0.74E-10/yr
where R0 is the 4D radius (13.58 GLY) of the Universe and H0=Hubble Constant of 72 km/s/mpc.
Leaving 41% of the observed receding velocity to be explained by tidal interactions, frame dragging and the use of incorrect Laws of Gravitation and Dynamics.
The Lunar Ranging results are equivalent to saying that we know the dynamics and can explain receding velocity with a 1:1000 precision. The effect of a variable G is supposed to be below 2E-13/year.
So, I think it is ludicrous and no conclusion about epoch-dependent G can be derived from this paper.
Later I will explain why this other article is wrong:
Constraining a possible variation of G with Type Ia supernovae
Jeremy Mould & Syed A. Uddin
Relevant answer
Answer
Javad Fardaei
By the way, Javad. How do you know that you know something about Gravity if your article does not have a single equation?
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
49 answers
I demonstrated that all astronomical observations refute General Relativity.
Since I did that, somehow, not a single scientist came to refute that conclusion.
Here is the argument:
Feel free to rebut it.
############################################
############################################
############################################
Relevant answer
Answer
Bigger than Einstein's equations not describing the Universe?
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
17 answers
A body thrown up, stalling and falling back in Earth’s gravitational field accelerates towards Earth. No new energy is created, it is potential energy converted into kinetic energy.
Space expansion accelerating seems to be not quite analogical. Where is the potential energy converting to kinetic energy expanding space? Is space falling back to where it started father out? It seems that space expanding is more analogical to a ball being thrown into the air, out it goes. Muscle potential energy sends the ball on its way. What potential energy has that effect on space? Is space in rebound mode, expanding outward, like a compressed spring? If potential energy does not account for expanding space, then could it be energy is being added to the universe resulting in space expanding? The expansion is accelerating constantly, so that would seem to require a constant addition of energy. But if our universe is self contained, there is no external source of energy to create a force to accelerate space.
These considerations suggest that so called accelerating space might instead be space expanding inertially, like a rocket gliding after fuel has run out. Suppose space plus (light) motion is 4 dimensions and empty space is 3 dimensions. Then an unchanging (invariant) ratio of dimensions, 4 : 3, would nor require adding energy to the universe. Three dimensional space would grow radially by 4/3 L when 4 dimensions grow by L.
Where does the energy for DE come from?
Relevant answer
Answer
The source of energy is gravitational force of repulsion. It acts on energy of photon so, that frequencies photons are decreasing. Observer explains this phenomena as redshift which is due to expansion of 3-space. Redshift is explained as Doppler effect. These conclusions follow from Robertson-Whaker mode, which follows from Friedman models of expanding Universe (non-static model). It follows from the model of non-stationary (expanding) that 3-space is non-rotating, non-gravitating^ it deforms only. The value g_00 = 1 in this case. It means that he Universe is not gravitating. It s shown in frames of physical observed values of Zelmanow that in non-rotating space the interval of the observed time tau is: d/tau = (1 - w/c^2)dt, where t flows uniformly and w is 3-dimensional gravitational potential: w = c^2[1 - (g_00)^1/2]. It is evidently that w = 0 by g_00 = 1 (no gravitation!) Nature o gravitation (attraction or repulsion) is determined by structure of g_00. Gravitational force of repulsion exists in the de Sitter space-time with positive lambda-term. These results are given in detail in the book ""Spectral colour flows of Time. Chapter 2. http://www.geocities/ws/borissva/
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
13 answers
Dark Energy is invoked to explain unexplained dimness of Type Ia Supernovae. It seems to be highly unsatisfying explanation.
Relevant answer
Answer
Basically no, but maybe. Either dark energy is the cosmological constant - understanding its value is a real problem in physics. Or dark energy is something else like a scalar field like quintessence or moduli fields, again these are not really well-understood. A cosmological constant would be something constant and uniform throughout the Universe. Scalar fields would be dynamical and change in space and time. They could lead to more interesting phenomena than a cosmological constant.
Another possibility is that general relativity does not work on cosmological scales. I think this is a less popular potential solution. For one general relativity works so well at other scales. Secondly, I am not aware of any theory that removes this dark energy problem and reduced to general relativity at the scales we know it works well.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
1018 answers
I RETRACTED THE SDSS DATA ANALYSIS AFTER @GEORGE DISHMAN ASKED ENOUGH PERTINENT QUESTIONS THAT MY MISTAKE BECAME EVIDENT. THE REASON IS THAT THE SDSS DATA WAS COLLECTED WITH A BIAS. THE PROTOCOL IS CALLED CMASS AND FOR A GIVEN Z, THEY ONLY COLLECTED DATA FROM GALAXIES OF THE SAME MASS.
THAT CREATED THE RECURRENCES AND THE SPHERICAL MASS DISTRIBUTION.
I AM WRITING THIS BECAUSE SOMEONE JUST ADDED ANOTHER COMMENT AND MISSED MY LAST ONE (WHERE I RETRACTED THE ANALYSIS).
SO, I WAS WRONG ABOUT THE SDSS.
THAT SAID, THE THEORY HAS PLENTY OF SUPPORT FROM EVERYTHING ELSE.
Here is the support from the Supernova Cosmology Project:
The posting refutes General Relativity by showing that the Universe is a lightspeed expanding hyperspherical hypersurface.
Here is the posting refuting L-CDM.
Here is the demonstration that HU Laws of Nature satisfies all SR and GR tests:
Here is the HU prediction of Tulley-Fisher Law:
Here is how I located Earth in a map that is impossible to even conceive in the current view: a map of the hyperspherical Universe.
Here is the 3D map of the Observable Universe:
I also created a replacement to the Big Bang and to Particle Physics...(so I created a replacement for the whole Physics):
and here is how the Universe started moving at c:
Relevant answer
Answer
I was sick. I owe you a reply. Will do soon. Still recovering.
Marco
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
13 answers
Follow the link below to understand the discussion subject:
Relevant answer
Answer
This post is obviously a bait and snatch when the answers provided bear no relation to the question posed.
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
18 answers
As per my idea and rough calculations, 5.8% of total dark matter&energy is ordinary matter. This is a consequence of a new fundamental force.
It is a vague and speculative idea only. My next paper will be ready on it. Any useful information is welcome on this subject.
Relevant answer
Answer
I have read the paper.Then only I commented...No more discussion please..Keep your feelings and opinions with you....
  • asked a question related to Dark Energy
Question
4 answers
How can we only account for Atoms to be 4.6% of Total Energy? How can we account for Dark Energy to be about 68% and Dark Matter to be about 27%?
Relevant answer
Answer
I am not an expert in Radio Astronomy and not read about R being used instead of L in studies of expanding universe, standard candle, and Cipher's model, etc.