Dark energy might not be constant after all
First results from the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument offer hints of new physics.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2024/04/dark-energy-might-not-be-constant-after-all/
On 05/04/2024 06:17, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Dark energy might not be constant after all
First results from the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument offer hints of new physics.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2024/04/dark-energy-might-not-be-constant-after-all/
"Dark energy" is the constant that Einstein had to introduce into his >equations for the Universe to make a "Steady State Universe" model work.
The default solution to Einstein-Lemaitre was an exponentially expanding
one which he didn't much like. He described it as his greatest mistake
since reality was much more like his original equation solution as
Hubble later proved by observation.
It is ironic that with improved observational data the same constant now >seems to be making the universe fly apart at beyond exponential rate.
I'm no great fan of "dark energy" but I am told by my friends still in
the field that it is the least worst option now.
It means matter and radiation in the universe will eventually become
very very thin indeed as spacetime rips apart ever more rapidly with time.
TBH I'd prefer there to be something wrong with the Type Ia supernovae >standard candles in the early universe (making them overly bright).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_Ia_supernova
I understand that possibility has been ruled out but I don't know any
more details. They are very handy since when they go off they can
outshine an entire galaxy and are visible over huge distances.
You can measure the light curve and determine absolute brightness from
it provided that you catch it early. Amateur astronomers help the >professionals by monitoring galaxies and reporting events in realtime.
Pro scopes only divert to look at them if there is something to see. >(although there are some professional supernova systems as well)
The idea that the fundamental constants of nature might not be quite
constant dates back to Dirac who was the first to make that conjecture.
On 05/04/2024 06:17, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Dark energy might not be constant after all
First results from the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument offer hints of new physics.
https://arstechnica.com/science/2024/04/dark-energy-might-not-be-constant-after-all/
"Dark energy" is the constant that Einstein had to introduce into his >equations for the Universe to make a "Steady State Universe" model work.
The default solution to Einstein-Lemaitre was an exponentially expanding
one which he didn't much like. He described it as his greatest mistake
since reality was much more like his original equation solution as
Hubble later proved by observation.
It is ironic that with improved observational data the same constant now >seems to be making the universe fly apart at beyond exponential rate.
I'm no great fan of "dark energy" but I am told by my friends still in
the field that it is the least worst option now.
It means matter and radiation in the universe will eventually become
very very thin indeed as spacetime rips apart ever more rapidly with time.
TBH I'd prefer there to be something wrong with the Type Ia supernovae >standard candles in the early universe (making them overly bright).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_Ia_supernova
I understand that possibility has been ruled out but I don't know any
more details. They are very handy since when they go off they can
outshine an entire galaxy and are visible over huge distances.
On Fri, 5 Apr 2024 09:17:23 +0100, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
On 05/04/2024 06:17, Jan Panteltje wrote:
10^44 joules could fry a thousand civilizations. We're lucky to live
in a boring suburb of the universe.
Are those things the sources of our heavy elements?
On Fri, 5 Apr 2024 09:17:23 +0100, Martin Brown
<'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
TBH I'd prefer there to be something wrong with the Type Ia supernovae
standard candles in the early universe (making them overly bright).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_Ia_supernova
I understand that possibility has been ruled out but I don't know any
more details. They are very handy since when they go off they can
outshine an entire galaxy and are visible over huge distances.
10^44 joules could fry a thousand civilizations. We're lucky to live
in a boring suburb of the universe.
Are those things the sources of our heavy elements?
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 415 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 109:06:50 |
Calls: | 8,692 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 13,259 |
Messages: | 5,948,434 |