Positions of distant supernova explosions false?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter kiki_danc
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Explosions Supernova
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the validity of arguments presented by David Wiltshire regarding the interpretation of distant supernova measurements and their implications for dark energy and the expansion of the universe. Participants explore the theoretical underpinnings of Wiltshire's claims, particularly in relation to general relativity and the concept of time, as well as the implications of alternative models such as those proposed by Julian Barbour.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants summarize Wiltshire's argument that the perceived acceleration of the universe may be an illusion due to the varying rates of time in different regions of space, suggesting that time near galaxies could be slower than in empty space.
  • Others express skepticism about Wiltshire's assumptions, noting that mainstream cosmological assumptions are well-supported by observational evidence, implying that if Wiltshire's assumptions are incorrect, his conclusions may also be flawed.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of time dilation near massive objects, with some participants asserting that while time does slow near galaxies, the effect is minimal over cosmic timescales.
  • Some participants question the validity of Wiltshire's claims regarding the age of the universe in different regions, seeking clarification on the assumptions that lead to his conclusions.
  • One participant references Barbour's theory, which posits that time is emergent rather than fundamental, and questions whether there is experimental evidence supporting this view over standard cosmological models.
  • Several participants analyze a preprint related to Barbour's model, noting potential discrepancies with current observational data, particularly concerning high-redshift supernova observations and Baryon Acoustic Oscillation data.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with some supporting Wiltshire's perspective and others challenging it based on established cosmological principles. There is no consensus on the validity of Wiltshire's arguments or Barbour's model, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the dependence on specific assumptions in cosmological models and the potential limitations of current observational data in validating alternative theories. The discussion reflects ongoing uncertainties in the interpretation of supernova measurements and the nature of dark energy.

  • #31
kiki_danc said:
If space-time has a third ingredient say space-time-kiki

Please review the PF rules on personal speculation. This is speculation and is out of bounds for discussion here.
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #32
Thread closed for moderation, to review whether further discussion that is not speculative is likely.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
6K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
5K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
4K
  • · Replies 103 ·
4
Replies
103
Views
12K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K