I'm sure it's just me since I've never seen this opinion anywhere, but has it occurred to anyone else that when type 1a supernovæ are dimmer than you expect, the proper response is "Gee, let's find out why the type 1a supernovæ are dimmer than we expect", rather than "Let's explain it by inventing a mysterious invisible entity about which we know nothing"? They've been doing THAT for thousands of years. Dark energy is more of a problem than what it (supposedly) explains. It's like saying "the big bang was caused by an invisible god". Not only do we then have the far larger problem of explaining where the invisible"god" came from, but far worse, that answer doesn't actually tell us how the big bang happened, either. Same with dark energy. I predict that when the source of the 1a attenuation is found, "dark energy" will be next to "Eoanthropus Dawsoni" in the footnotes of science history. --faye kane homeless brain PS Don't EVEN get me started on "dark matter"!