The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Science is questioning Dark Energy,what is causing expansion of Universe?  (Read 4539 times)

Offline Joe L. Ogan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 476
    • View Profile
Now that the scientific world is questioning the existence of Dark Energy, what is causing acceleration of expansion of the Universe.  Perhaps there is no expansion of the universe?  Thanks for comments.  Joe L. Ogan


 

Offline tommya300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
The science community has calculated the expansion of the universe and they found someting was missing. Visible matter was found to be a small percentage, the remainder, they claim to be was dark matter.
The jury is still out on the nature of this matter, what is it made of.
Personally? I think it is made up of less energetic photon like particle, but that is me dreaming.
 

Offline JP

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3366
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • View Profile
Now that the scientific world is questioning the existence of Dark Energy, what is causing acceleration of expansion of the Universe. 

Your question makes it sound like the dark energy hypothesis has been thrown out because it doesn't work.  As far as I know, that's not the case.  Can you cite some mainstream scientific sources?  Until dark energy fails to model what's observed or until a more substantial hypothesis surpasses it, dark energy is the best explanation for what we see.
 

Offline tommya300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
Now that the scientific world is questioning the existence of Dark Energy, what is causing acceleration of expansion of the Universe. 

Your question makes it sound like the dark energy hypothesis has been thrown out because it doesn't work.  As far as I know, that's not the case.  Can you cite some mainstream scientific sources?  Until dark energy fails to model what's observed or until a more substantial hypothesis surpasses it, dark energy is the best explanation for what we see.

Odd that this topic popped up!

Oh boy JP! Here is the latest news flash, is this real or am I going bonkers?
 They may find that someone has fudged the Big Bang calculations?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1286668/Dark-energy-matter-exist-claim-scientists.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
« Last Edit: 16/06/2010 05:25:11 by tommya300 »
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Ah yes! The Daily Mail. An erudite scientific periodical, and purveyor of lady's brassieres ;D
 

Offline JP

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3366
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • View Profile
This isn't my area of expertise, but it looks like that research is actually questioning whether the measurements of the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR) is being measured properly.  This is the radiation left over from the big bang.  (See: http://www.astronomynow.com/news/n1006/15dark/)  Dark matter and energy were proposed because they seem to be the best model that supports all the observed data, including the CMBR measurements.  If the CMBR measurements turn out to be wrong, it might mean the model has to be tweaked.  It probably doesn't mean the model has to be thrown out, because there are other observations that also are well-explained by the current model of dark matter and energy. 

The headlines on the matter seem a bit sensationalistic.  This is just one publication and it has to be double checked.  There are many scientists on the other side saying that this paper is wrong. 
« Last Edit: 16/06/2010 06:48:15 by JP »
 

Offline tommya300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
It is not my expertise either, I look for different things relating to the topics. Just asking, I bumped into it scanning the internet on this topic. That is why I asked to see if it were valid .

 Now Geezerrrr, ladies brassieres?
 
« Last Edit: 16/06/2010 15:36:56 by tommya300 »
 

Offline Soul Surfer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3345
  • keep banging the rocks together
    • View Profile
    • ian kimber's web workspace
Typical useless daily mail article.  It sensationalises the standard story and then fails to explain what any new evidence is.  This article is total rubbish even if the scientists behind the original papers have done good work.  I am sure it would have been possible to write a clear, simply worded article giving clear explanations within the size of  the article presented.
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
I am sure it would have been possible to write a clear, simply worded article giving clear explanations within the size of  the article presented.

True, but I suspect it would make no difference to many of the readers ;D

The readers might even resent it if they felt the article was talking down to them. The editorial content of a newspaper is determined more by the readership than by the editors.
 

Offline Soul Surfer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3345
  • keep banging the rocks together
    • View Profile
    • ian kimber's web workspace
My experience is that the most of general public are a lot less stupid than the tabloid press seems to believe that they are.  A clearly worded non sensational article would be properly understood.  The problem is that we live in such a world of "verbal inflation" that unless something is spectacular or a disaster or the greatest ever (which most things are not) it gets lost in the general screaming.
 

Offline tommya300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
My experience is that the most of general public are a lot less stupid than the tabloid press seems to believe that they are.  A clearly worded non sensational article would be properly understood.  The problem is that we live in such a world of "verbal inflation" that unless something is spectacular or a disaster or the greatest ever (which most things are not) it gets lost in the general screaming.

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?action=printpage;topic=174998.0

Suggests the error and this article posts contacts.
Is this also a selling come on? I am just asking not contending.

http://www.ras.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1773&Itemid=2
« Last Edit: 20/06/2010 01:03:36 by tommya300 »
 

Offline LeeE

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3382
    • View Profile
    • Spatial
Rather than being answers for anything, both dark matter and dark energy are really just descriptions of a perceived problem.  Neither of them 'answers' anything, as they've not actually been defined beyond being that which is needed to solve the anomalies.
 

Offline Andrew P

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
The article this press release is based on first appeared in December, and can be found here: newbielink:http://arxiv.org/pdf/0912.0524v2 [nonactive]

The claim of Tom Shanks and his student is that the WMAP data has been miscalibrated, in particular that the 'beam shapes' -- that's shorthand for imperfections in the way the satellite picks up the microwave background radiation -- are not correctly accounted for.  Although I work on the CMB, I'm not an expert on the WMAP calibration. However, other people have looked in much more detail than the Durham authors have at these beam shapes. They have not found the effects claimed by the Durham group.

In fact, other completely independent CMB missions like SPT (south pole telescope) and ACT (atacama cosmology telescope) have measured small scale results which agree well with the WMAP results in their region of overlap. Therefore it is highly implausible that there would be such a major systematic error in the WMAP data.

Plus, the evidence for dark energy and dark matter comes from loads of sources, not just the CMB; so the claims that the whole paradigm is in doubt start to look very weak indeed.

Don't blame the newspapers alone, blame the authors for putting out an over-egged press release. (Although it would be nice if the newspapers and the RAS checked with other scientists before reproducing press releases verbatim!)

Rather than being answers for anything, both dark matter and dark energy are really just descriptions of a perceived problem.  Neither of them 'answers' anything, as they've not actually been defined beyond being that which is needed to solve the anomalies.

Dark matter is probably on a firmer theoretical footing than dark energy, but they are both work in progress for sure. As phenomenological descriptions, however, they work spectacularly well.

Monthly astronomy podcasts - newbielink:http://www.thenakedscientists.com/astronomy [nonactive]
 

Offline razatlaby

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Just a thought of something ″everything″ accelerating with no noticeable cause or reason,only solution to conciliate that unquestionable observation with common sense is that everything, all matter black or shiny is just getting smaller by the same rate or let mi say, loosing its grip to existence, correct me, but that supposition does not oppose any other originate fact. All matter−energy is echo−flash from Big Bang−source so it′s inevitable to disperse in entropy, until the new momentum.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum


 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums