A Gravity has finite reach? (per Claudia de Rahm)

[rolnor]

TL;DR

If so, there is no need for dark energy to explain the accelerated expansion of the universe?

I heard Claudia talking in a lecture about the possibility of gravity having finite reach. This could possibly explain observations of the universe expansion and "rule out" dark energy. How controversial is this? She mentions that another force has finite reach, the weak force.
https://profiles.imperial.ac.uk/c.de-rham/publications?respub-action=search.html

 

[phinds]

TL;DR Summary: If so, there is no need for dark energy to explain the accelerated expansion of the universe?

I heard Claudia talking in a lecture about the possibility of gravity having finite reach. This could possibly explain observations of the universe expansion and "rule out" dark energy. How controversial is this? She mentions that another force has finite reach, the weak force.
https://profiles.imperial.ac.uk/c.de-rham/publications?respub-action=search.html

Sounds like nonsense to me. Certainly a finite reach of gravity could not possibly explain dark energy. Do you even understand what dark energy DOES?

 

[Vanadium 50]

(1) "Claudia"? Like Cher or Madonna? Prince or Fabio?
(2) Do you have a reference? "I heard a lecture" is not something we can check.
(3) This is not GR. Now, people are free to propose another theory, but see point (2).
(4) In no world, is this QM, the section you posted it in.
(5) I am highly skeptical that this can simultaneously fit all the observational data, unless by "finite range" one means "I invert the data we have to find a force law that matches it", and even then it is tough.

 

[PeterDonis]

https://profiles.imperial.ac.uk/c.de-rham/publications?respub-action=search.html

This link is to a list of publications. Please link to the specific one you are referencing.

 

[PeterDonis]

I heard Claudia talking in a lecture

What lecture? Please give a specific reference.

 

[rolnor]

I dont think anyone "knows" what dark energy does, its not proven science fact, its a theory. Do you have to be so agressive? Its just a humble question? I will try to find the lecture ref.

 

[rolnor]

Her name is Claudia de Rham, was not that clear from the title of the topic? Why all this drama?

 

[ohwilleke]

Sounds like nonsense to me. Certainly a finite reach of gravity could not possibly explain dark energy. Do you even understand what dark energy DOES?

This thread belongs in BSM (or maybe cosmology) and not quantum.

But if gravity did have finite range (e.g. due to a massive graviton), then this would reduce the pull of gravity over very long (cosmological) distances.

This wouldn't be mathematically equivalent to dark energy, but it would impact some of the observables from which dark energy (and the magnitude of dark energy) is inferred.

Depending upon the range in question, it could conceivably impact those observables to such a degree that the evidence for a non-zero cosmological constant could be less than five sigma, because it would be increase the uncertainty in the separate components behind the observables in this model, and because the dark energy contribution would be smaller relative to the uncertainty.

 

[rolnor]

Can anyone move this to the correct part of the forum? Its perhaps not QM as pointed out. Please keep a less aggressive tone.

 

[PeterDonis]

Do you have to be so agressive? Its just a humble question?

Her name is Claudia de Rham, was not that clear from the title of the topic? Why all this drama?

Please keep a less aggressive tone.

These comments are not appropriate. You are in no position to complain about anyone else unless and until you do this:

I will try to find the lecture ref.

Once you do, PM me the ref and I will take a look at it. Until then, this thread is closed for moderation.

Can anyone move this to the correct part of the forum?

Not unless and until you provide a valid, specific reference.

 

[PeterDonis]

This thread belongs in BSM (or maybe cosmology) and not quantum.

Until we have a valid reference from the OP, it's impossible to tell where the thread belongs. That's why I have closed it for moderation pending the OP providing such a reference.

 

[PeterDonis]

The OP has told me via PM that he cannot find a reference to the lecture. Therefore, this thread will remain closed.