Dark matter/Energy not needed alternative

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Mordred
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dark energy
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around an article proposing an alternative to dark matter and dark energy, suggesting an older universe where these concepts are not necessary. Participants explore the implications of this idea, its theoretical underpinnings, and its ability to explain various astronomical phenomena.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Debate/contested, Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant shares an article suggesting an older universe that does not require dark matter or dark energy, noting that it is still in early stages and lacks explanations for certain lensing effects.
  • Another participant expresses skepticism about the article's potential, questioning the validity of the proposed alternative involving increasing velocity over time and its applicability to stable galaxies.
  • A third participant raises concerns about the lack of a metric in the paper, indicating that without it, understanding the physical implications is challenging, and notes that the paper has not yet been refereed.
  • A fourth participant shares a similar sentiment, finding the paper initially interesting but ultimately lacking in substance.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing opinions on the validity and potential of the proposed alternative to dark matter and dark energy, with no consensus reached regarding its implications or robustness.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in the proposed model, including the absence of a metric and unresolved questions about the stability of galaxies under the suggested framework.

Space news on Phys.org
I don't think this will lead to anything interesting.

Accordingly, we may assume that an observer located inside the Universe would also measure a proper time different from the reference time t appearing in the equations of general relativity
If the observer moves quickly relative to the frame where the universe is uniform, this is the CMB frame. We do not move quickly relative to the CMB (just with ~400km/s).

In addition, an arbitrary rescaling of the time-coordinate sounds weird to begin with.

I don't think the proposed alternative to dark matter (increasing velocity with time) works on the scale of single galaxies - they are stable over billions of years or multiple rotations, if stars would gain additional velocity galaxies would have disintegrated long ago.
 
Where is the metric from which all this physical stuff should be derived? Without a metric, I can't read the paper with any understanding. Also, this paper has not yet been refereed.
 
I too reviewed this paper a couple days ago. It looked interesting at first, but, lacked substance, IMO.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K