Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19

Thread: Nobel Discovery Challenged: No Dark Energy?

  1. #1
    Traveler

    Jack Hays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Williamsburg, Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    84,043
    Blog Entries
    3

    Nobel Discovery Challenged: No Dark Energy?

    Meanwhile, at the deep end of the pool . . .

    In 2011 a Nobel Prize was awarded for the discovery of dark energy. Now there's a recent paper that claims dark energy does not exist. Yikes!

    Dark Energy Might Not Exist After All
    Sabine Hossenfelder, Backreaction

    . . . What they found is that the best fit to the data is that the redshift of supernovae is not the same in all directions, but that it depends on the direction. This direction is aligned with the direction in which we move through the cosmic microwave background. And – most importantly – you do not need further redshift to explain the observations. . . .

    This paper, I have to emphasize, has been peer reviewed, is published in a high quality journal, and the analysis meets the current scientific standard of the field. It is not a result that can be easily dismissed and it deserves to be taken very seriously, especially because it calls into question a Nobel Prize winning discovery. This analysis has of course to be checked by other groups and I am sure we will hear about this again, so stay tuned.
    "Above all, not too much zeal." --Prince Talleyrand

  2. #2
    Professor
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:34 AM
    Gender
    Posts
    1,851

    Re: Nobel Discovery Challenged: No Dark Energy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hays View Post
    Meanwhile, at the deep end of the pool . . .

    In 2011 a Nobel Prize was awarded for the discovery of dark energy. Now there's a recent paper that claims dark energy does not exist. Yikes!

    Dark Energy Might Not Exist After All
    Sabine Hossenfelder, Backreaction

    . . . What they found is that the best fit to the data is that the redshift of supernovae is not the same in all directions, but that it depends on the direction. This direction is aligned with the direction in which we move through the cosmic microwave background. And – most importantly – you do not need further redshift to explain the observations. . . .

    This paper, I have to emphasize, has been peer reviewed, is published in a high quality journal, and the analysis meets the current scientific standard of the field. It is not a result that can be easily dismissed and it deserves to be taken very seriously, especially because it calls into question a Nobel Prize winning discovery. This analysis has of course to be checked by other groups and I am sure we will hear about this again, so stay tuned.
    I can't claim to be familiar with dark energy or it's properties. It's difficult to prove the existence of things that you can't see. But I believe dark matter can be shown to exist by its effects. Perhaps dark energy is the same?

  3. #3
    Sporadic insanity normal.

    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    24,449

    Re: Nobel Discovery Challenged: No Dark Energy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hays View Post
    Meanwhile, at the deep end of the pool . . .

    In 2011 a Nobel Prize was awarded for the discovery of dark energy. Now there's a recent paper that claims dark energy does not exist. Yikes!

    Dark Energy Might Not Exist After All
    Sabine Hossenfelder, Backreaction

    . . . What they found is that the best fit to the data is that the redshift of supernovae is not the same in all directions, but that it depends on the direction. This direction is aligned with the direction in which we move through the cosmic microwave background. And – most importantly – you do not need further redshift to explain the observations. . . .

    This paper, I have to emphasize, has been peer reviewed, is published in a high quality journal, and the analysis meets the current scientific standard of the field. It is not a result that can be easily dismissed and it deserves to be taken very seriously, especially because it calls into question a Nobel Prize winning discovery. This analysis has of course to be checked by other groups and I am sure we will hear about this again, so stay tuned.
    I'm fairly sure a single paper does not automatically negate prior efforts that it counters.

    Others duplicating the same results might.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  4. #4
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    8,084

    Re: Nobel Discovery Challenged: No Dark Energy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Irredentist View Post
    I can't claim to be familiar with dark energy or it's properties. It's difficult to prove the existence of things that you can't see. But I believe dark matter can be shown to exist by its effects. Perhaps dark energy is the same?
    “Dark matter” is really just a fill-in-the-blank phrase used to describe an excess of gravitational force that cannot be explained by the volume of normal matter in conventional physics. It has been suggested the physics are just wrong or incomplete on galactic scales and it wouldn’t be the first time that scale necessitated a change in physics. Unfortunately a very large number of physicists refuse to entertain the idea that their math is wrong and instead chose to invent the idea of invisible matter and forces in the universe that there is no direct evidence of. Sound familiar?

  5. #5
    Traveler

    Jack Hays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Williamsburg, Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    84,043
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Nobel Discovery Challenged: No Dark Energy?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    I'm fairly sure a single paper does not automatically negate prior efforts that it counters.

    Others duplicating the same results might.
    Yup. That's how the OP excerpt concludes.
    "Above all, not too much zeal." --Prince Talleyrand

  6. #6
    Sporadic insanity normal.

    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    24,449

    Re: Nobel Discovery Challenged: No Dark Energy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hays View Post
    Yup. That's how the OP excerpt concludes.
    Excellent.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  7. #7
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:47 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    14,748

    Re: Nobel Discovery Challenged: No Dark Energy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Hays View Post
    Meanwhile, at the deep end of the pool . . .

    In 2011 a Nobel Prize was awarded for the discovery of dark energy. Now there's a recent paper that claims dark energy does not exist. Yikes!

    Dark Energy Might Not Exist After All
    Sabine Hossenfelder, Backreaction

    . . . What they found is that the best fit to the data is that the redshift of supernovae is not the same in all directions, but that it depends on the direction. This direction is aligned with the direction in which we move through the cosmic microwave background. And – most importantly – you do not need further redshift to explain the observations. . . .

    This paper, I have to emphasize, has been peer reviewed, is published in a high quality journal, and the analysis meets the current scientific standard of the field. It is not a result that can be easily dismissed and it deserves to be taken very seriously, especially because it calls into question a Nobel Prize winning discovery. This analysis has of course to be checked by other groups and I am sure we will hear about this again, so stay tuned.
    That's what science does: Use the best available information and evidence to try and make a good model of the natural world. And if new information comes along that disproves a long held theory, any scientist worth their weight will drop that old theory and move on to the better theory immediately.

    That's what makes it so much better than ideas based on faith, such as creationism and flat earth, or religion. No matter how much evidence to the contrary is presented, those people just keep on believing
    Supporting Trump, but claiming you are against racism...is like eating a Banana Split every day, but claiming you are against ice cream.

  8. #8
    Sage

    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:47 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    14,748

    Re: Nobel Discovery Challenged: No Dark Energy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Napoleon View Post
    “Dark matter” is really just a fill-in-the-blank phrase used to describe an excess of gravitational force that cannot be explained by the volume of normal matter in conventional physics. It has been suggested the physics are just wrong or incomplete on galactic scales and it wouldn’t be the first time that scale necessitated a change in physics. Unfortunately a very large number of physicists refuse to entertain the idea that their math is wrong and instead chose to invent the idea of invisible matter and forces in the universe that there is no direct evidence of. Sound familiar?
    No, that doesn't sound familiar. Their math isn't demonstrably wrong. If it was, they wouldn't use it.
    Supporting Trump, but claiming you are against racism...is like eating a Banana Split every day, but claiming you are against ice cream.

  9. #9
    Traveler

    Jack Hays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Williamsburg, Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    84,043
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Nobel Discovery Challenged: No Dark Energy?

    Quote Originally Posted by JustHanging View Post
    That's what science does: Use the best available information and evidence to try and make a good model of the natural world. And if new information comes along that disproves a long held theory, any scientist worth their weight will drop that old theory and move on to the better theory immediately.

    That's what makes it so much better than ideas based on faith, such as creationism and flat earth, or religion. No matter how much evidence to the contrary is presented, those people just keep on believing
    You might enjoy Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions if you have not already read it.
    "Above all, not too much zeal." --Prince Talleyrand

  10. #10
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    8,084

    Re: Nobel Discovery Challenged: No Dark Energy?

    Quote Originally Posted by JustHanging View Post
    No, that doesn't sound familiar. Their math isn't demonstrably wrong. If it was, they wouldn't use it.
    Of course they would and they do. Newton's law of universal gravitation was used for over 200 years until Einstein replaced it with general relativity. This is no different. That galaxies aren’t flying apart based on current equations of gravitational force demonstrates that the current physics are wrong on galactic scales. You don’t just get to make up non-scientific concepts of invisible things out in the cosmos in an attempt to explain away the fact that your equations have been falsified by the observable state of the universe.
    Last edited by Napoleon; 12-03-19 at 11:52 PM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •