Is Dark Energy the Cause of the Universe's Accelerating Expansion?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter phy_freak
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Gravity
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the concept of dark energy and its role in the universe's accelerating expansion, contrasting it with Einstein's theory of gravity. It highlights that while traditional gravity is attractive, dark energy operates through negative pressure, which is repulsive at cosmological scales. The findings support Einstein's cosmological constant theory, indicating that dark energy uniformly affects the universe's expansion. The evidence for dark energy remains indirect, but its necessity is established to explain the observed acceleration in cosmic expansion.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Einstein's General Relativity
  • Familiarity with the concept of dark energy
  • Knowledge of negative pressure in cosmology
  • Basic grasp of cosmological expansion principles
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implications of Einstein's cosmological constant on modern cosmology
  • Study the role of negative pressure in the context of dark energy
  • Explore the evidence supporting dark energy through observational cosmology
  • Investigate alternative theories to dark energy and their implications
USEFUL FOR

Astronomers, physicists, and students of cosmology interested in understanding the dynamics of the universe's expansion and the role of dark energy in contemporary astrophysics.

phy_freak
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
What do they mean by this: "Albert Einstein's concept of gravity is wrong, and gravity becomes repulsive instead of attractive when acting at great distances."

I found it here: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2011-149
in the second paragraph.

could anyone explain this with examples, if possible, please thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
They state that this is an alternate theory, different from Einstein's theory of gravity from general relativity. And notice that, in the sentence just before, they state that the evidence gained contradicts that alternate theory.
 
Your question is really about cosmological expansion caused by negative pressure...not GRAVITY...traditional gravity is a separate entity. Empty space has no gravity, but does have negative pressure!

The paper also says this:

The findings offer new support for the favored theory [meaning Einstein's general thweory] of how dark energy works -- as a constant force, uniformly affecting the universe and propelling its runaway expansion... "The results tell us that dark energy is a cosmological constant, as Einstein proposed. If [regular,typical] gravity were the culprit, then we wouldn't be seeing these constant effects of dark energy throughout time."

So what is being said is that the force IS in accord with Einstein's concept of a cosmological 'constant' and the force is 'constant' as Einstein proposed.

Wikipedia explains:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy#Negative_pressure
Nature

The nature of this dark energy is a matter of speculation. The evidence for dark energy is only indirect...

Independently from its actual nature, dark energy would need to have a strong negative pressure (acting repulsively) in order to explain the observed acceleration in the expansion rate of the universe.

According to General Relativity, the [positive] pressure within a substance contributes to its gravitational attraction for other things just as its mass density does. ...
[negative pressure is repulsive]

This accelerating expansion effect is sometimes labeled "gravitational repulsion", which is a colorful but possibly confusing expression. In fact a negative pressure does not influence the gravitational interaction between masses—which remains attractive—but rather alters the overall evolution of the universe at the cosmological scale, typically resulting in the accelerating expansion of the universe despite the attraction among the masses present in the universe...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K