Dark Energy Doesn't Exist
XMM-Newton gave us this X-Ray photo. Cluster RXJ0847.2+3449 is about 7 billion light-years away. We see the cluster as it was when the Universe was half its present age. This pretty picture, containing dozens of galaxies, has much to do with cosmology. X-Ray spacecraft give us more evidence that "dark energy" doesn't exist. From ASTRONOMY magazine:
"Using the European Space Agency's XMM-Newton space observatory, a team led by Alain Blanchard of the Astrophysics Laboratory of the Midi-Pyrenees Observatory in France found galactic clusters whose distance corresponds to nearly halfway back toward the beginning of time. Composed of hundreds or thousands of galaxies, clusters form over billions of years as gravity pulls matter together. But roughly five billion years ago, dark energy became the dominant force in the universe, expanding space and rendering it even more difficult for gravity to sculpt its masterworks."
"As dark energy dilutes the matter, galaxy clusters should become fewer and farther between. So when Blanchard's team surveyed clusters that predate the onset of dark energy, they should have found many more than exist today. Instead they found significantly fewer--suggesting that matter has continued to gravitationally coalesce over time, that there is four times as much dark matter as previously believed, and that dark energy is nothing more than a fantastic illusion."
Bee's Backreaction October 21: "Globular clusters show little or no evidence for dark energy."
Discovery of the rebellious supernova SNLS-03d3bb further confronts "dark energy." Redshifts are the only evidence of cosmic acceleration, and this Type Ia doesn't support the paradigm. Despite all this, people claiming to be scientists have been telling the world that DE exists. How long can this go on?
posted by L. Riofrio at 8:23 PM
5 Comments:
How long can this go on? Well, let's see. At this rate, my guess is that something like half a billion internet users will have cottoned on to the controversy before mainstream physics thinking even wakes up. Hard to believe, isn't it?
HI Kea, and thanks for the encouragement. Mainstream physicists have dug themselves into a hole and don't even realise it. This is hard to believe and sad, really sad.
Louise, your post is somewhat misleading. The next paragraph in the Astronomy magazine article is:
Still, the numerous lines of evidence for dark energy greatly outweigh the evidence against it. "In a very short time, the idea of dark energy has gone from an unlikely speculation to by far the leading contender for most of the stuff in the universe, despite the fact that our theoretical understanding of dark energy remains woefully inadequate," says University of Chicago physicist Sean Carroll. "It is nevertheless so popular because it is indicated by a wide variety of independent observational probes: supernovae, large-scale structure, the microwave background, the age of the universe, and more. For dark energy not to exist would require a truly pernicious conspiracy of effects that are tricking us into misinterpreting a very disparate collection of experiments."
It appears that "Mainstream physicists" are well aware that dark energy (if it exists!) is not well understood yet.
Tone down your polemics!
Thanks, Shrink. Astronomy was also nice enough to present both sides of the issue. Sean has found a role as a spokesperson, even though he calls his universe preposterous. Redshifts are the only evidence of "cosmic acceleration," and they are better predicted by c change. CMB and LSS, even the 4.507034% of baryons, can also be predicted.
The mainstream tries to squelch more promising theories in order to save the Concorde cosmology. That is why they don't understand the universe. I do appreciate you contributing to the discussion, and hope to hear more!
thanks for information
Sumber Makanan Mangan Cegah Risiko Serangan Epilepsi
Post a Comment
<< Home