PHYSICISTS OF NS: Accelerated expansion (dark energy) of universe could be illusion (article)

I found this article and it's interesting. If this is true then there might not any dark energy or cosmological constant that permeates a vaccum. I thought I'd share. What do you guys think?

'Accelerating Universe' could be just an illusion

(if true could rid cosmology of its biggest headache--dark energy)

By: Natalie Wolchover

In 1929, cosmologists discovered

that the universe is expanding — that space-time, the fabric of the cosmos, is

stretching. Then in 1998, light coming from exploding stars called supernovas

suggested that the universe is not only expanding, but that it has recently

begun expanding faster and faster; its expansion has entered an

"accelerating phase." This was bad news for the fate of the cosmos:

An accelerating universe is ultimately racing toward a "Big Rip," the

moment at which its size will become infinite and, in a flash, everything in it

will be torn apart.The discovery was bad news for the

state of cosmology, too. Because gravity pulls

stuff inward rather than pushing it out, cosmologists believed that

the expansion of the universe ought to be slowing down, as everything in it

felt the gravitational tug of everything else. They didn't understand the

mechanism that seemed to be opposing the force of gravity, so to explain their

observations, they invoked the existence of "dark energy," a

mysterious, invisible substance that permeates space and drives its outward

expansion.

Now, a new theory suggests that the

accelerating expansion of the universe is merely an illusion, akin to a mirage

in the desert. The false impression results from the way our particular region

of the cosmos is drifting through the rest of space, said Christos Tsagas, a

cosmologist at Aristotle University of Thessaloniki in Greece. Our relative

motion makes it look like the universe as a whole is expanding faster and

faster, while in actuality, its expansion is slowing down — just as would be

expected from what we know about gravity.

If Tsagas' theory is correct, it

would rid cosmology of its biggest headache, dark energy,

and it might also save the universe from its harrowing

fate: the Big Rip. Instead of ripping it to bits, the universe as Tsagas space-time

envisions it would just roll to a standstill, then slowly start shrinking.

Cruising through space-time 
Tsagas' alternative version of events, detailed in a recent

issue of the peer-reviewed journal Physical Review D, builds on a recent

discovery by Alexander Kashlinsky, a cosmologist at NASA's Observational

Cosmology Laboratory. In a series of papers over the past three years,

Kashlinsky and his colleagues have shown that the huge region of space-time in

which we live — a region at least 2.5 billion light-years across — is moving

relative to the rest of the universe, and fast.

Some cosmologists remain skeptical

about the newfound "dark flow," as it's called, and say that more

evidence is needed to persuade them that the strange phenomenon is real. But

the evidence that does exist is compelling. Based on light collected from

galaxy clusters, our enormous bubble of space-time appears to be drifting at a

rapid clip of up to 2 million miles per hour. No one knows why, exactly — there

may be something beyond the part of the universe we can see, tugging on us —

but Tsagas argues that the dark flow is skewing our perspective on the behavior

of the universe as a whole.

"My article discusses how

observers living inside such a large-scale 'dark flow' could arrive at the

(false) conclusion that the universe is accelerating, while it is actually

decelerating," Tsagas told Life's Little Mysteries. In his paper, he illustrates that dark flow would cause the space-time

within our moving bubble to expand faster than the space-time outside of it

(which is not accelerating). Without considering the dark flow, but just

knowing that light we observe from nearby galaxies left its source more

recently than light from galaxies farther away, we get the false impression

that the whole of space-time recently entered an accelerating phase.

In short, Tsagas' explains our

observations of the expansion of space-time nearby and far away without

invoking dark energy, or any other mysterious mechanism. According to Tsagas'

work, the acceleration of the universe in our immediate vicinity is caused by

its motion alone. The universe beyond our region isn't accelerating outward;

rather, it is safely rolling to a stop.

Axis illusion 
Tsagas' theory is supported, in part, by other recent

observations that have puzzled cosmologists. Some data collected from space, such

as the cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation and light from supernovas,

seems to show that the universe has a "preferred axis": In its

outward expansion, it appears to be stretching more one way than another.

As detailed in a new paper recently

posted to the physics arXiv, Zhong-Liang Tuo and colleagues at Key Laboratory

of Frontiers in Theoretical Physics in China have identified such a

"preferred axis" in the expansion of space-time by looking at light

from more than 500 supernovas.

By measuring how much the light

from each of the stellar explosions is red-shifted — stretched — they detected

the rate of expansion of different parts of space, and found that the universe

looks to be stretching more toward the constellation Vulpecula in the northern

sky than it is in any other direction.

Previously, a "preferred

axis" in the expansion of space-time was also detected in the cosmic

microwave background radiation, and pointing in the same direction. Tsagas said

this alignment is no mere coincidence: the axis is another illusory effect of

the "dark flow" of our space-time bubble.

"Peculiar motions have a very characteristic

signature," Tsagas wrote in an email. "Observers will 'measure'

slightly faster acceleration in one direction and slower in the opposite, as a

result of their own drift motion alone."

To see why, imagine swimming in a

river: If you're swimming with the current, you move faster than when you're

trying to swim upstream or across the river. Similarly, our galactic bubble is

also "swimming." Tsagas argues that this is why we perceive the

expansion of space-time as faster in one direction — the direction of our

motion — than any other.

Paradigm-shifting potential 
Kashlinsky, the cosmologist who discovered dark flow, said

Tsagas' theory might not yet explain everything we observe. "In general, I

find this to be an interesting idea. But I am skeptical that it can account for

many other observations such as the spatial distribution of the cosmic

microwave background anisotropies or the observed pattern of galaxy clustering

among others," Kashlinsky said. "Still, it'd be interesting to see how

— or whether — these observations can be accounted for by models such as

proposed in (Tsagas') paper."

In response to these points, Tsagas

replied: "There should be no extra effects on the CMB, since the very

large-scale kinematics (motions) remain essentially unaffected (by my theory).

There might be some small effects on galaxy clustering, but one needs to look

into it to make sure."

Dominik Schwarz, a cosmologist at

the University of Bielefeld in Germany who also studies cosmic expansion, finds

Tsagas' theory plausible, and believes local or "peculiar"

accelerations really could obscure our measurements of the global behavior of

the universe. "The task for the community will be to find out how to

distinguish these peculiar accelerations on large scales from an acceleration

of the global expansion," Schwarz said. If we can do that, he said, we can

determine if there really is a global acceleration at all.

Cosmologist Dejan Stojkovic of the

University of Buffalo, who has found evidence that calls dark flow into question

— or at least dark flow as fast as that measured by Kashlinsky — said: "If

the dark flow of that magnitude is real, then Tsagas is pointing out that it

could trick us into thinking the universe is accelerating. This is

plausible."

In short, Tsagas may have shown

that the universe either has dark flow or dark energy, but not both. Dark flow

is by far the less mysterious of the two: While no one knows what dark energy

is, or how we might find it, dark flow is merely movement.

LINK TO ARTICLE:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44690771/ns/technology_and_science-science/#.T1uexZj5aKi

 
just came back to look what a guy name "fuckface4.0" could contribute to a physics thread.

leaving now feeling slightly satisfied. could have been better though.
 
If you studied theoretical physics you might understand quick summary of dark matter and dark energy

Dark Matter:

A type of matter that does not interact with electromagnetic radiation (light) so we cannot see it. The only way it interacts with normal (baryonic) matter is through gravitation and weak force (not gonna go into what weak force is). Dark matter has been shown to exist as lots of matter is missing to account for deviations in bending of electromagnetic waves (light) and the movement of galaxies with respect to each other. In short Dark Matter is very very likely to exist although hasn't been detected yet (current experiments attempt to detect it)

Dark Energy: Completely different than dark matter dark energy is the energy that a vacuum has (according to most). As the universe expands the vacuum that is space gets bigger and bigger. If there is no energy in the vacuum then eventually the universe should stop expanding and start shrinking (due to gravity). Observations seem to show that the expansion rate is increasing meaning some force must be driving this expansion. Dark energy which permeates all of empty space could be the driving force behind this and is factored into general relativity by adding a cosmological constant giving vacuum energy which we have called "dark energy"

The article is trying to show that because of our point of reference the accelerated expansion of the universe could be just an illusion. It does not debate the existence of dark matter.

Also point about god is irrelevant i am not debating if he exists or not just debating theories that we have developed to explain the natural phenomenons of the world around us.

Sorry if I sound mean (not my intention) I am just trying to help you understand what this article is talking about.

 
"inb4" that stupid sailor photo/gandalf photo

seriously though saying that there was nothing before the big bang is just as valid as saying there was god. If god was there before the universe, where did he come from? Either way you have to have something that has either always been, or was created from nothing.

 
Can we please not debate the existence of God I would like some discussion about thoughts on this reference frame idea for the expansion of the universe.

It seems a bit awesome as it would help simplify astrophysics and would mean that the universe is very likely to be a cycle where there is numerous big bangs throughout "time" This would also partially invalidate string theory and its multi-verse hypothesis.
 
The universe is still cyclic, even with this dark energy shit eventually the universe will expand to a point where it has no method of expansion and gravity will eventually bring everything back to a single point. How would it invalidate string theory though?
 
agreed.

but wouldnt it be very hard to make observations of things that are outside of that flow? and to be precise of their speed/size/etc? (if the theory is correct)

idk if that makes any sense.
 
To above 2 repliies:

The universe may not be cylcic if dark energy is true. This is because as the vast expanse of space gets bigger and bigger there is more vacuum (meaning more dark energy) This leads to everything just being spread apart farther and farther and a terminal end where the universe cools down and everything is so far apart we cannot see other clusters of galaxies as they are moving at faster than the speed of light but not in their reference frame (weird concept that doesn't defy relativity). This could lead to something known as the Big Rip.

Here is a some relevant info that might help:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy#cite_note-25

Also feihlination I think you are right. It would be very very hard to make accurate observations on that scale but the study suggests that our 2.5 billion light years wide area is moving at approximately the same speed but moving faster than the rest of the universe (like not our 2.5 bly wide area). I think the study says that galaxies up to 2.5 bly away we see dramatically less redshift (for wavelengths thats how we measure speed of other galaxies relative to ours) than for those that are more than 2.5 bly away. This would lead to the idea that maybe we our area is moving at speeds faster than the rest of the universe which could be how our 'illusion of acclerated expansion' could come.

Idk if that makes sense to you its a hard concept to explain.

 
As for reply on string theory it stipulates that there is dark energy (energy inside a vacuum) because of the cosmological constant. Not all parts of string theory stipulate that though so it only partially invalidates it (sort of)
 
Got this from wikipedia just to show you

String theory as currently understood makes a series of predictions for the structure of the universe at the largest scales. Many phases in string theory have very large, positive vacuum energy [32]. Regions of the universe that are in such a phase will inflate exponentially rapidly in a process known as eternal inflation. As such, the theory predicts that most of the universe is very rapidly expanding. However, these expanding phases are not stable, and can decay via the nucleation of bubbles of lower vacuum energy. Since our local region of the universe is not very rapidly expanding, string theory predicts we are inside such a bubble.
 
Btw I haven't studied physics extensively and could be completely wrong on some of the things i am saying so please if you see something that doesn't make sense say something
 
Interesting idea. But I dont believe dark energy is real. Dark energy was invented after the type 1A supernova. In 2000's we found ood number suggesting the universe is accelerating, but shrugged it off because it makes no sense. But the term dark energy was used to explain the force imbalance.

But, in 2010, the numbers confirmed it. But dark energy has no form, doesnt interact with anything and has no signature. So by logic, it doesnt exist until we have proof otherwise.

But dark matter is different. Its a dip in the space time fabric. Think of it like a wavy pool. take a picture of it and turn it into a frozen reality. Now, pour sand on the frozen water...notice how it clumps in the depressions of the wave...like how a galaxy is formed. The dip in the space time is also where gravity takes place. Things will follow the curvature of space, but at the same time its time will slow!
 
Back
Top