The accelerating Universe explained without dark energy.

Tldr

Now this is more like it:

quote:

---

Destin shark attack Posted by deeprig9 online on 4/4/17 at 8:11 pm Kentucky girl bitten and survived Sketchy details. Anyone else have more info?

---

It's good to see debate such as this reaching into the lay community. It prevents terminology such as "dark energy" taking root as something more than it is intended to be.

Dark energy is just a placeholder term meant to designate an unknown for which certain indirect characteristics are known. Debate is expected, the livelier the better.

quote:

---

Using a computer simulation to model the effect of gravity on the distribution of millions of particles of dark matter, the scientists reconstructed the evolution of the universe, including the early clumping of matter, and the formation of large scale structure.

Unlike conventional simulations with a smoothly expanding universe, taking the structure into account led to a model where different regions of the cosmos expand at different rate. The average expansion rate though is consistent with present observations, which suggest an overall acceleration.

---

The above quote from the article seems to highlight the point of contention for the new idea; i.e., the cosmological constant designated as dark energy is variable in its effect. I don't find this objectionable at all.

I find it analogous to the Second Law of Thermodynamics which states: The total entropy of an isolated system can only increase over time. This is true only for the overall effect, not for local effects necessarily, at least in the short term.

For example, our sun is undergoing a process that is taking it from a state of order to disorder. As it is becoming disordered it is expelling energy. Counter to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, this energy is creating high order in the biosphere we call earth. Overall, however, the net entropy is far higher than the net order that is created.

Now, taking this example as an analogy to the topic at hand, it is reasonable to expect that the structure that is made of matter and dark matter is influencing dark energy and causing different rates of expansion in different locales of the Universe. However, the net or average expansion rate is probably close to that of a uniform expansion if the structures weren't present.

You are misinformed. Regarding dark matter and dark energy, scientists routinely say "we have no fricking clue." There is not a smidgen of direct evidence for either. There is, of course, indirect evidence. The word "dark" will be used until and if direct evidence can be discovered for either/both.

Scientists don't believe anything. To believe is to accept without evidence. Beliefs are for religion and philosophy, not science which is evidence based.

quote:

---

This may be what scientists are supposed to do, I do not believe that they all live up to it.

---

Well, they're people just like the rest of us and are subject to the same foibles of course. However, if their belief systems interfere with their research projects they're going to go off-course very quickly. Science isn't about visions, it's about observations. If something can't be observed, it remains in the realm of philosophy.

Good post.