Dark matter and dark energy: Do they really exist?

From the University of Geneva and the “soon we’ll have ‘dark climate’ as a way of explaining the pause” department comes this bit of science which is fascinating, but like future climate predictions, is only as good as the assumptions and input to the model he created. Still, I trust astronomers more than I trust climate scientists, because they don’t have that “save the planet” paradigm going on.


A University of Geneva researcher has recently shown that the accelerating expansion of the universe and the movement of the stars in the galaxies can be explained without drawing on the concepts of dark matter and dark energy

For close on a century, researchers have hypothesised that the universe contains more matter than can be directly observed, known as “dark matter”. They have also posited the existence of a “dark energy” that is more powerful than gravitational attraction. These two hypotheses, it has been argued, account for the movement of stars in galaxies and for the accelerating expansion of the universe respectively. But – according to a researcher at the University of Geneva (UNIGE), Switzerland – these concepts may be no longer valid: the phenomena they are supposed to describe can be demonstrated without them. This research, which is published in The Astrophysical Journal, exploits a new theoretical model based on the scale invariance of the empty space, potentially solving two of astronomy’s greatest mysteries.

In 1933, the Swiss astronomer Fritz Zwicky made a discovery that left the world speechless: there was, claimed Zwicky, substantially more matter in the universe than we can actually see. Astronomers called this unknown matter “dark matter”, a concept that was to take on yet more importance in the 1970s, when the US astronomer Vera Rubin called on this enigmatic matter to explain the movements and speed of the stars. Scientists have subsequently devoted considerable resources to identifying dark matter – in space, on the ground and even at CERN – but without success. In 1998 there was a second thunderclap: a team of Australian and US astrophysicists discovered the acceleration of the expansion of the universe, earning them the Nobel Prize for physics in 2011. However, in spite of the enormous resources that have been implemented, no theory or observation has been able to define this black energy that is allegedly stronger than Newton’s gravitational attraction. In short, black matter and dark energy are two mysteries that have had astronomers stumped for over 80 years and 20 years respectively.

A new model based on the scale invariance of the empty space

The way we represent the universe and its history are described by Einstein’s equations of general relativity, Newton’s universal gravitation and quantum mechanics. The model-consensus at present is that of a big bang followed by an expansion. “In this model, there is a starting hypothesis that hasn’t been taken into account, in my opinion”, says André Maeder, honorary professor in the Department of Astronomy in UNIGE’s Faculty of Science. “By that I mean the scale invariance of the empty space; in other words, the empty space and its properties do not change following a dilatation or contraction.” The empty space plays a primordial role in Einstein’s equations as it operates in a quantity known as a “cosmological constant”, and the resulting universe model depends on it. Based on this hypothesis, Maeder is now re-examining the model of the universe, pointing out that the scale invariance of the empty space is also present in the fundamental theory of electromagnetism.

Do we finally have an explanation for the expansion of the universe and the speed of the galaxies?

When Maeder carried out cosmological tests on his new model, he found that it matched the observations. He also found that the model predicts the accelerated expansion of the universe without having to factor in any particle or dark energy. In short, it appears that dark energy may not actually exist since the acceleration of the expansion is contained in the equations of the physics.

In a second stage, Maeder focused on Newton’s law, a specific instance of the equations of general relativity. The law is also slightly modified when the model incorporates Maeder’s new hypothesis. Indeed, it contains a very small outward acceleration term, which is particularly significant at low densities. This amended law, when applied to clusters of galaxies, leads to masses of clusters in line with that of visible matter (contrary to what Zwicky argued in 1933): this means that no dark matter is needed to explain the high speeds of the galaxies in the clusters. A second test demonstrated that this law also predicts the high speeds reached by the stars in the outer regions of the galaxies (as Rubin had observed), without having to turn to dark matter to describe them. Finally, a third test looked at the dispersion of the speeds of the stars oscillating around the plane of the Milky Way. This dispersion, which increases with the age of the relevant stars, can be explained very well using the invariant empty space hypothesis, while there was before no agreement on the origin of this effect.

Maeder’s discovery paves the way for a new conception of astronomy, one that will raise questions and generate controversy. “The announcement of this model, which at last solves two of astronomy’s greatest mysteries, remains true to the spirit of science: nothing can ever be taken for granted, not in terms of experience, observation or the reasoning of human beings”, conclued André Maeder.

###

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
379 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
November 27, 2017 1:13 pm

“Dark Matter” … “Dark Energy”

Both racist terms. I propose “Light Matter” and “Light Energy” to rebut, … or to counter balance.

High-end physics theories need diversity too.

Towards this end, I also propose “Questioning Matter” and “Questioning Energy”, … “Bi-Matter” and “Bi-Energy”, … or let’s just dispense with words in the first part of the label altogether and use punctuation marks like “?-Matter” and “?-Energy”, … or “!-Matter” and “!-Energy”.

My personal favorite would be “&#%!?)-Matter” and “&#%!?)-Energy”, because that pretty much sums up my current feeling about both.

Frank DiMeglio
November 27, 2017 4:27 pm

Precisely why ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity:

ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. This is proven by F=ma AND E=mc2. This involves what is possible/potential AND actual in balance. “Mass”/energy involves balanced inertia/inertial resistance consistent with/as what is balanced electromagnetic/gravitational force/energy, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Inertia/inertial resistance is proportional to (or balanced with/as) gravitational force/energy, as this balances AND unifies ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy and gravity; as this balances gravity AND inertia. (This explains F=ma AND E=mc2, as electromagnetism/energy is gravity.) Accordingly, gravity/acceleration involves balanced inertia/inertial resistance; as electromagnetism/energy is gravity. “Mass”/energy is gravity. “Mass”/energy is electromagnetism/energy. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity.
Great !!!!

Gravity/acceleration involves balanced inertia/inertial resistance, as gravity is electromagnetism/energy. Accordingly, a given planet sweeps out equal areas in equal times; AND this is then consistent with F=ma, E=mc2, AND what is perpetual motion; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Balance and completeness go hand in hand. Think about it all very carefully. It all makes perfect sense. Magnificent !!! “Mass”/energy involves balanced inertia/inertial resistance consistent with/as what is balanced electromagnetic/gravitational force/energy, as electromagnetism/energy is gravity. Gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. Fantastic !!!!!

Very importantly, outer “space” involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black.

A photon may be placed at the center of the sun, as the reduction of space is offset by (or balanced with) the speed of light, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity.

By Frank DiMeglio

paqyfelyc
November 28, 2017 2:06 am

“new theoretical model based on the scale invariance of the empty space”
new ….
Nottale, Laurent., 1993, (World Scientific, 1993), “Fractal Space-Time and Microphysics: Towards a Theory of Scale Relativity.”
Well, I Guess 1/4 century is short enough to be called “new”
https://www.luth.obspm.fr/~luthier/nottale/ukmenure.htm

South River Independent
November 28, 2017 10:04 am

There is much knowledge on display here, but little understanding. The excellent historian John Lukacs points out that history is superior (more important than) to science. There is a history of science, but not a science of history. Many here do not know or remember history. Many also do not know, or more importantly, understand science, or philosophy.

Max Born said that theoretical physics was philosophy, not science. There are philosophical proofs for the existence of a creator. (And for Gabro’s information, they have not been falsified, only not understood or ignored.) Check out Edward Feser for more information. Also check out Mortimer Adler’s Ten Philosophical Mistakes.

Atheists, please do not respond with ridiculous claims about the many preposterous claims made by ignorant “believers.” Instead, try to refute the philosophical arguments of Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas.

Gabro
Reply to  South River Independent
December 7, 2017 6:16 pm

When you present what you imagine to be “proofs” of God’s existence, I’ll be happy to refute them for you.

That it’s impossible to “prove” God’s existence is precisely how God wants it. Otherwise faith I’d of no value and justification is by faith alone.

Science seeks only natural explanations of nature. Supernatural stories are of no use for scientific purposes.

Gabro
Reply to  Gabro
December 8, 2017 6:25 am

Please read “faith is” for “faith I’d”. Autofill on the iPhone after typo.

Editor
November 28, 2017 1:02 pm

I am just finishing the reading of the second of two books about the history of the science about Dark Matter/Dark Energy.

Only the first, Richard Panek’s “The 4% Universe”, dares to admit that they might possibly not exist at all, but only be, in reality, ad hoc explanations for things not yet understood.

I highly recommend the Panek book. [ https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/8229029-the-4-percent-universe ]

November 29, 2017 12:23 pm

I did not have time to read the discussions, but I think that few of the participants will understand and accept the truth I am giving. Most will say it’s a religion.
The universe is a sphere of infinite diameter and is filled with the substance AETHER, from which the matter is formed and into which the matter returns back in the form of Aether (black hole). Through the high vibrations of Aether, strings are formed in three spatial directions and in their cross sections matter is formed in two aggregate states: the “solid state” of matter (3 kg of particles, 3 quarks and 3 bonds of gluon), and the “liquid state” of matter-free gluons (annihilation of an electron-positron pair).
The “solid state” of matter has a relationship with Aether in the form of GRAVITATION, “liquid state” causes the appearance of MAGNETISM. With this, everything is resolved in the universe.
The sooner you accept this, because all other theories are contrary to the laws of nature and the structure of the universe. (I’m preparing for some Nobel Prizes).
The universe does not expand, there is no BB, there are no theories of general relativity, nor Lorenz’s transformation, there are no collisions of black holes, there are no GVs and everything related to it.
Kepler’s laws are incorrect, the movement of all celestial bodies is a complete opposite attitude that science is trying to overcome both ourselves and our Creator, which no one from science disregards, and that is why we are immensely affected by various nebuloses and fatheads of individuals. And it’s not a miracle; lies and scams.

Gabro
December 7, 2017 5:00 pm

Two surprisingly large, 13 billion year-old galaxies observed by ALMA in Chile, surrounded by a halo of dark matter:

https://www.space.com/39008-bizarre-ancient-galaxies-in-dark-matter-sea.html?utm_source=sdc-newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20171207-sdc