Uncovering the Truth About Dark Energy: XMM-Newton's Surprising Findings

AI Thread Summary
ESA's X-ray observatory, XMM-Newton, has revealed significant discrepancies in the evolution of galaxy clusters over the past seven billion years, raising questions about the existence of dark energy. Some scientists argue that these findings challenge the prevailing view that dark energy constitutes 73% of the Universe, suggesting it may instead be dark matter. The work by researchers Vauclair, Blanchard, and Bartlett is presented as a credible challenge to the established concordance model. While this new data prompts a reevaluation of current theories, the debate remains ongoing, with further observations needed to reach a definitive conclusion. The discussion highlights the dynamic nature of scientific inquiry and the importance of questioning established models.
wolram
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Messages
4,410
Reaction score
555
http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish/dark_energy_doubts.html

ESA's X-ray observatory, XMM-Newton, has returned tantalising new data about the nature of the Universe. In a survey of distant clusters of galaxies, XMM-Newton has found puzzling differences between today's clusters of galaxies and those present in the Universe around seven thousand million years ago. Some scientists claim that this can be interpreted to mean that the 'dark energy' which most astronomers now believe dominates the Universe simply does not exist…
----------------------------------------------------------------------
so could galaxy evolution be hiding the truth about dark
energy?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Originally posted by wolram
http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish/dark_energy_doubts.html

ESA's X-ray observatory, XMM-Newton, has returned tantalising new data about the nature of the Universe. ...
Wolram, you have pointed us to work by these people before, if I remember.

Alain Blanchard, Vauclair, Bartlett.

It is respectable work IMHO and deserves to make people stop and reconsider whether the 73 percent dark energy is not just dark matter instead. The paper that this news item refers to is, I believe,

http://www.arxiv.org/astro-ph/0311381

this is a closely reasoned thoroughly referenced 5-page paper by Vauclair, Blanchard, Bartlett and several others.

If anyone wants they can read it. I don't think they will find anything fringey or flakey---tho that's just one persons impression.

So IMHO this constitudes a substantive challenge to the "concordance" model with its 73 percent dark energy.

However is it not true that models get challenged from time to time and this is just part of the sport. Just because Blanchard's side looks like making a strong case doesn't mean the question is settled. There will most likely be a lot more observations and a lot more evidence broght in before one can even guess how it may turn out.

For my part, in the mean time I will just go on assuming that the concordance model is the best fit and that the apparent contradiction from the XMM-Newton data will eventually be resolved somehow and that dark energy will survive this challenge.
I will just be a little less confident, having seen this article.

thanks for finding this.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
i think it makes science a bit more exiting and stimulates
the old brain cells, for me the less strange thing the
better, but who knows what the end result will be? its not
over till the fat lady sings.:smile:
 
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top