Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_2021_annual.thumb.jpg.3fc34f695a81b16210333189a3162ac7.jpg

Dark Energy Confirmed


tibbs1972
 Share

Recommended Posts

At last, finally dark energy is confirmed.

I'll sleep better tonight knowing the universe will last a bit longer.

Should get a few billion years more viewing time in.

BBC News - New method 'confirms dark energy'

The article ends with this

"However, despite scientists being able to infer the existence of dark energy and dark matter, these phenomena still elude a full explanation."

The basis also was looking at the arrangement or distribution of galaxies.

Dark energy is hardly the only explanation I would think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they have confirmed it, then I suppose they must now be abvle to detect it, so I guess that it is no longer Dark Energy.

Only exists when you don't look at it.. a bit like the Schrodinger's Cat but with energy/matter and a box the size of the universe.

So that means we may or may not exist. Religious deities may or may not exist and therefore the box may or may not exist. Leaving only "I am" in very uncertain state of affairs. You may or may not be confused..

Edited by NickK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may or may not be confused

Not at all, it is all perfectly clear. Nobody knows anything and never will. Live with it. Die with it. We are totally insignificant but we can all hold our heads up high and say "I think, therefore I am." or, "I think I think, therefore I might be!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they have confirmed it, then I suppose they must now be abvle to detect it, so I guess that it is no longer Dark Energy.

Looking at the distribution of galaxies is actually not confirming it. The article is wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, but yes this is a confirmation of dark energy. Of course, there's not many (if any) ideas what it is, but it's a key step to identify that it's nothing to do with one of the known forces.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking at the distribution of galaxies is actually not confirming it. The article is wrong.

Maybe you should let them know, I'm sure they would appreciate your input.

Edited by RobH
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, but yes this is a confirmation of dark energy. Of course, there's not many (if any) ideas what it is, but it's a key step to identify that it's nothing to do with one of the known forces.
I understand you think so. But confirming something that is not known and calling it 'dark energy' is meaningless I would think. They may as well call it 'spiritual forces'. In other words something we can call whatever we want....is affecting the (what some think are shock waves) in the background radiation of the universe, and apparent distribution of galaxies. If we see a few galaxies actually getting distributed this way let me know..then we can talk about what we know might be doing it:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well to take an example - we don't really know what light is. We see how it affects things, we can make equations for it, but really we don't understand it. Is it a wave, is it a particle, does it travel in straight lines, does it go through every point in the universe? We might as well call it an "aural" force, :) We can call it whatever we want. All we see is its interactions, and that's all we can see with dark energy. OK with light we can also generate it, so we understand it a bit better. Newton thought he understood it, so did Maxwell, and Einstein - they all got a bit closer to the "truth". So where do you drawn the line about something being "known"!

Dark energy makes predictions - a at least one of those has been confirmed, so we have something, and it needs a name, so we can all talk about it without getting confused! :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dark energy makes predictions - a at least one of those has been confirmed, so we have something, and it needs a name, so we can all talk about it without getting confused! :)

We have "dark energy",DE, and a mathematic proof that is build on provable mathematic predicates (theories) where the only unproven point is DE that then results in X being true.

Now if we have a set of mathematic predicates that state all must all be true and have only proved one is true then we cannot say that this is a full proof. Yet.

Edited by NickK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have "dark energy",DE, and a mathematic proof that is build on provable mathematic predicates (theories)

Explain?

What math is used to predict dark unknown stuff?

..we cannot say that this is a full proof. Yet.
That then in itself is a prediction..."yet" I'll make one too I guess "ever"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Explain?

What math is used to predict dark unknown stuff?

That then in itself is a prediction..."yet" I'll make one too I guess "ever"

Starrdad,

Instead of posting these rather confrontational and rather curt challenges to the other SGL members posting here I suggest that you do some more background reading and then you can make some more positive contributions to threads of this sort.

If you go on in this style you may find that the dialogue dries up.

Thanks :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.