Is Dark Energy a Mistaken Concept?

[Al]

supposedly the time after .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 of a sec can be explained yet no one can explain the love value of starting entropy, dark energy and dark matter. Like I sad, man does not have the intellect to determine ultimate. And that considering the QM is the most amazing theory ever developed.

I have read 50 books on QM and the double slit experiment can't be explained.

 

[PWMDMD]

On the universe expansion idea, and its effects..... I have thought about this explosion model and just cant get past two things....the first is obvious: how can their be a effect without a cause.......but the second is more based in science than anything else:

So how do you think the universe started?

If the expansion of the universe was started by a single event, and everything that exists in the universe either existed or was created at that point......it would seem to me that the gravity caused by all that matter/mass, would be more powerful than any potential expansion event that could be created, at that time.

Gravity is peculiar in that like other three fundamental forces, it is very weak. We don't know what it's so weak and that is partially why we are looking for a quantum theory of gravity. It could be gravity "leaks" into tiny additional extra dimensions of string theory, or at least that's one idea. Anyway, may point is gravity is wicked weak compared to the strong force, weak force, electromagnetic force.

 

[JimPghPA]

Gravity is uber weak, but Einstein believed that gravity continued to act regardless of the distance. This is being debated. If it's affects / effects , have no distance limits, then ultra long distant pulls of gravity can exert forces if given enough time.

 

[KrisZ]

I don't believe we're living in a simulation and I don't believe video games are a good analogy to the reality in which we are living.

My video game reference wasn't meant to be analogous to the reality in which we're living in, but to demonstrate how we deal with computational limitations.

Now if you look at the progress of video game graphics, it's just a matter of time that the virtual worlds rendered will be visually indistinguishable from the reality. "Uploading" our consciousness into the digital realm has been a long talked about concept and brain implants are likely a step in that direction. We are very likely to create a "matrix" type reality eventually. Once we do, then what? If a person is born into that digital world, it will be as real to them as the reality we're living in now.


And doesn't matter which theory you subscribe to, it requires a set of beliefs, as we'll never know the truth. Our civilizations have been reset so many times, with the accompanied knowledge base loss, that it's pretty much a guarantee.

 

[burbguy82]

So how do you think the universe started?

The big bang, of course. More like a whisper.

Gravity is peculiar in that like other three fundamental forces, it is very weak. We don't know what it's so weak and that is partially why we are looking for a quantum theory of gravity. It could be gravity "leaks" into tiny additional extra dimensions of string theory, or at least that's one idea. Anyway, may point is gravity is wicked weak compared to the strong force, weak force, electromagnetic force.

Hmmmm understand you I do not.

I think gravity could be explained equally in both ways, either an effect of mass exerted to space and time, or the effect of the displacement of space and time by mass, either one, the math would mirror each other, I think.

But I am not a scientist or teacher on these matters, I am a student of those who are willing to bare the burden of teaching me

 

[burbguy82]

wasn't meant to be analogous to the reality

We are very likely to create a "matrix" type reality eventually

Our civilizations have been reset so many times

All these portions point to your stated opinion that there is a multiverse, or the matrix or whatever fantastic other worldy, but completely baseless situation.

It is one or the other.

 

[KrisZ]

All these portions point to your stated opinion that there is a multiverse, or the matrix or whatever fantastic other worldy, but completely baseless situation.

It is one or the other.

It's no more baseless than dreaming up dark energy and matter, which cannot be measured, seen, touched, interacted with etc. because things that are super far away behave differently than what we have in our solar system and we cannot explain it.

Edit:
And no, I do not subscribe to the multiverse theory.

 

[PWMDMD]

The big bang, of course. More like a whisper.

Hmmmm understand you I do not.

I think gravity could be explained equally in both ways, either an effect of mass exerted to space and time, or the effect of the displacement of space and time by mass, either one, the math would mirror each other, I think.

But I am not a scientist or teacher on these matters, I am a student of those who are willing to bare the burden of teaching me

Sorry, that should've said, "Gravity is peculiar in that UNlike other three fundamental forces, it is very weak."

I encourage you to read/listen to some of the books out there made for popular consumption on cosmology and gravity. Some of them are very well written and they go through the issues point by point, no real background needed as they discuss everything you need to know to understand the main points of books. There are others but here are a few recommendations. Interesting topic.

• The Biggest Ideas in the Universe: Space, Time, and Motion by Sean Carroll
• Quanta and Fields: The Biggest Ideas in the Universe by Sean Carroll
• Quantum Space: Loop Quantum Gravity and the Search for the Structure of Space, Time, and the Universe by Jim Baggott
• Dreams of a Final Theory: The Scientist's Search for the Ultimate Laws of Nature by Steven Weinberg
• Three Roads to Quantum Gravity by Lee Smolin
• Something Deeply Hidden: Quantum Worlds and the Emergence of Spacetime by Sean Carroll

 

[MolaKule]

I think there may be a link between gravity and Quantum world effects.

Sabine Hossenfelder has a paper, EXPERIMENTAL SEARCH FOR QUANTUM GRAVITY, that explores this topic:

Abstract: We offer a brief survey of existent and planned experimental tests for quantum gravity. First, we outline the questions we wish to address and then introduce some of the phenomenological models that are currently used in quantum gravity, both with and without a lowered Planck scale. After that, we summarize experimental areas where these models can be tested or constrained and discuss the status of the field. This article is partly based on the talks at the workshop on Experimental Search for Quantum Gravity, Stockholm, July 12-16 2010.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1010.3420

Comments:	This article is partly based on the talks at the workshop on Experimental Search for Quantum Gravity, Stockholm, July 12-16 2010
Subjects:	General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology (gr-qc); High Energy Physics - Phenomenology (hep-ph); High Energy Physics - Theory (hep-th)

 

[JimPghPA]

Big Bang was a very poor choice of words for naming it.

There was no bang as there was no gas or fluid or even solid for it to travel through.

The big expansion or big inflation would be much better terms.

And there's an interesting phrase that has 2 ways of being interpreted in English. " Nothing can go faster then lightly. "

Indeed at the beginning, "Nothing" inflated at a speed much faster than light. So, "Nothing" can indeed go faster than light.

Interesting that this second meaning that is often overlooked, applies so well.

 

[KrisZ]

We cannot have "nothing" expanding and becoming something. That's a logical fallacy.

 

[ripcord]

We cannot have "nothing" expanding and becoming something. That's a logical fallacy.

I think you need to be able to accurately describe the mechanics of a universe initiation event before you can say that categorically.

 

[JimPghPA]

The initial big inflation, did expand faster than light.

 

[MolaKule]

The initial big inflation, did expand faster than light.

"For a fraction of a second, the universe expanded faster than the speed of light. We do not know what triggered that initial, rapid expansion, but this period, called cosmic inflation, explains much of what we see in the universe today.:."

https://science.nasa.gov/mission/hubble/science/science-behind-the-discoveries/hubble-big-bang/

 

[KrisZ]

I think you need to be able to accurately describe the mechanics of a universe initiation event before you can say that categorically.

Based on our observable universe it is a categorical law. Not sure why you would place the burden on me for describing the mechanics of universe creation, when I'm not the one claiming the universe came from nothing.

 

[MolaKule]

Speaking of alternative cosmology theories, I found this alternative theory from discussions on another website that seems to be a scientifically and mathematically coherent cosmology:

Consider Patrick Tonin's hypothesis, The Quantum Bang Hypothesis; An Alternative to Dark Matter and Dark Energy, Journal of High Energy Physics, Gravitation, and Cosmology, 2020, 6, 753-764?

It is available for download from the Internet as a PDF.

 

[MolaKule]

A sticking point for me has always been the supposed singularity from which the cosmic expansion came to be. Furthermore, it is a "naked" singularity. A naked singularity is not permitted according to the “cosmic censorship hypothesis,” according to: Penrose, Roger (1969). "Gravitational Collapse: the Role of General Relativity". Nuovo Cimento. Rivista Serie. 1: 252.

So what process led to this assumption? The Hot Big Bang model.

What they did was extrapolate backwards using assumptions from universal expansion.

That is, the existence of this promordial singularity is not the most fundamental assumption in BB theory; it is the backward extrapolation of the universe's expansion to a singular state that forms this fundamental assumption.

 

[Pablo]

"For a fraction of a second, the universe expanded faster than the speed of light. We do not know what triggered that initial, rapid expansion, but this period, called cosmic inflation, explains much of what we see in the universe today.:."

https://science.nasa.gov/mission/hubble/science/science-behind-the-discoveries/hubble-big-bang/

I know what triggered it. And it was Good.

 

[Shannow]

I remember arguing with my physics teacher back in 1985 (crusty Calgarian, really great guy) that if you had to invent ten times as much stuff as we knew, and declare it invisible and untouchable to get the maths to work...the maths is wrong.

Saw that video Molakule when it hit youtube...loved it.

 

[JimPghPA]

We cannot have "nothing" expanding and becoming something. That's a logical fallacy.

Applying the laws of physics that we know to be true to about matter, to a time before matter existed, may be a huge mistake making it even harder to determine what went on during that practical imposable to understand event.