Dark matter and energy may not actually exist according to a new study and theory that has passed it's first test.
Dark Energy
Why do people think dark matter exists to begin with?
The universe looks like it's expanding faster now than in the past, according to 1998 Hubble Space Telescope (HST) observations of very distant supernovae. Something is causing an acceleration they say. The name for whatever that is, is so-far called dark energy.
There are (at least) 4 reasons to accept the theory of dark energy, which the above is one:
- cosmic microwave background
- expansion of the universe
- scale of the universe
- age of the universe
Dark Matter
Dark matter is not known either. It's not visible, hence called "dark". Why is there the idea that there is even dark matter? Scientists calculated 68% dark energy, leaving 32% for the rest, presumably matter, but they could only account for 5% of matter, leaving 27%, meaning there was again something else, and this time it was called dark matter to complement dark energy.
Why Could Einstein Be Wrong?
Einstein posited the cosmological constant as a something, and energy present in the fabric of space itself, meaning space wasn't empty. A competing theory of gravity might put a stinger in how we understand gravity.
Margot Brouwer at Leiden University, the Netherlands, and her astronomer colleague looked at the distribution of matter in over 30,00 galaxies and might be able to explain away the unseen dark matter.
The team studied gravitational lensing of the galaxies to measure how much dark matter would be required to bend the light. They found a way to account for the lensing with a new model of gravity.
Calculations Revised
The current calculation for dark matter models need four free parameters that are adjusted to make the calculations, model and theory match and fit the observations. Whereas this new model by Brouwer doesn't need this variable trickery.
The shape and color of the background galaxies were used in statistical algorithms to infer a lensing profile of the foreground galaxy. It's like projecting an image onto a warped transparent surface, and trying to figure out what the properties of the warped surface are by looking at the projection from the other side, at least that's how they analogize it.
Taking this new way of lens profiling, and applying it to some newer models based on newer discoveries that outdate Newton's and Einstein's model of gravity, it turns out the calculations do better than with the current accepted model for gravitational lensing.
One alternative model for the gravity and the universe is from Erik Verlinde based on quantum mechanics, relativity, information and string theory, and another similar model by Mordehai Milgrom which has already gained some fame, called Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND). They both do better with Brouwer's study.
If more validation is granted, this could revise our models for gravity and more. The problem with this is that often new discoveries are denied due to people having vested interest in supporting a current model. It will be interesting to see where this research goes. Physicists and theoretical physicists are going to battle it out again!
Thank you for your time and attention! I appreciate the knowledge reaching more people. Take care. Peace.
References:
- First test of rival to Einstein’s gravity kills off dark matter
- First test of Verlinde's theory of Emergent Gravity using Weak Gravitational Lensing measurements
- Dark Energy, Dark Matter
- Lambda-CDM model
- How do scientists calculate the percentage of dark energy in the universe?
If you appreciate and value the content, please consider:
Upvoting, Sharing, and Resteeming below.
me for more content to come!
