Two new October papers. the first is notable because of the reputation of some of the authors. Sean Carroll and Michael Turner are among a handful of the most prominent mainstream cosmologists. here they are trying to see if one can avoid the need for dark energy by a modification of the Einstein-Hilbert action. A slight modification of the law of gravity in General Relativity which is only noticeable over very long distances. Sean M. Carroll, Antonio De Felice, Vikram Duvvuri, Damien A. Easson, Mark Trodden, Michael S. Turner The Cosmology of Generalized Modified Gravity Models 27 pages, 7 figures http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0410031 "We consider general curvature-invariant modifications of the Einstein-Hilbert action that become important only in regions of extremely low space-time curvature. We investigate the far future evolution of the universe in such models, examining the possibilities for cosmic acceleration and other ultimate destinies. The models generically possess de Sitter space as an unstable solution and exhibit an interesting set of attractor solutions which, in some cases, provide alternatives to dark energy models." The next paper, though not about obviating dark energy is similarly off-beat. It is noteworthy partly because it is by Ted Jacobson and David Mattingly, both prominent in testing quantum gravity---it was their paper on Crab Nebula synchrotron radiation that effectively disposed of "preferred-frame" approaches. Or so we thought. Here they are probing what looks like yet another possible avenue to violate or distort Lorentz symmetry. C. Eling, T. Jacobson, D. Mattingly Einstein-Aether Theory 17 pages, to appear in the Deserfest proceedings (World Scientific) http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0410001 BTW, for those who like guessing-games with pretend money here http://nobelpreisboerse.de/stocks.aspx?stc=1 is a NOBEL PRIZE STOCK MARKET you can see who is ranked highly as a prospect, in the opinion of the players.