Bringing balance to the universe: New theory could explain missing 95 percent of the cosmos

University of Oxford ^ | Dec 5, 2018

[Windflier]

...if ordinary matter and energy are basically one and the same, it makes sense that the other two might also be.

Dark energy and dark matter are theoretical constructs, postulated by cosmologists to explain glaring faults in the 'expanding universe' theory. No one has yet proven that they, in fact, exist.

Attempting to tie these artificial constructs back to real matter and energy, is little more than burnishing these dreamed up goblins with the air of authenticity that association with known science can bring.

What's hilarious (and all too predictable), is that theoretical physicists resort to dreaming up another band-aid to patch the previous band-aid, which was dreamed up to patch yet another band-aid.

Unlike classical physicists, they seem to have no familiarity with falsification or going back to the drawing board when their theories fail. They just dream up another fanciful goblin to explain why their model doesn't work, and keep on cashing the federal grant checks.

That's not science. It's taxpayer funded science fiction.

[ETL]

Dark energy and dark matter are theoretical constructs, postulated by cosmologists to explain glaring faults in the 'expanding universe' theory. No one has yet proven that they, in fact, exist.

I fully understand that. Same is true for inflation theory. It was concocted to explain away several major problems with the big bang. However, as far as theories of their existence and workings, it is certainly worth a try to treat the hypothetical pair as though they were similar in nature to their very real counterparts.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks Swordmaker.

---

· String Theory Ping List ·

---

---

· Join · Bookmark · Topics · Google ·
· View or Post in 'blog · post a topic · subscribe ·

---

[Windflier]

...as far as theories of their existence and workings, it is certainly worth a try to treat the hypothetical pair as though they were similar in nature to their very real counterparts.

Until it can be proven that 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' even exist, there's little point in going through that exercise. It will only lead to the invention of some other goblins or fairies, that likewise exist in theory only.

Ultimately, such exercises are destructive, as they produce ideas which further solidify the existing cosmological paradigm, which itself, is an enormous conglomeration of unproven, untested, unworkable theoretical constructs, that does nothing to accurately predict or explain observed phenomena in our universe.

[ETL]

The existence of dark energy, or some sort of ‘hidden’ energy, is likely, given the (supposed) fact that the universe is accelerating in its expansion.

[ETL]

More here...

Negative-Mass Dark Fluid: Astonishing New Theory Could Explain Universe’s Missing 95%

Dec 5, 2018 by News Staff / Source

The standard cosmological model known as LambdaCDM can only explain 5% of the observable Universe. The remaining 95% is famously made up almost entirely of two invisible components called dark matter and dark energy. Yet the physical nature of these two components remains a mystery.

A new study by University of Oxford researcher Jamie Farnes suggests both dark phenomena can be unified into a single substance — a negative-mass ‘dark fluid.’ Dr. Farnes’ theory may also prove right a prediction that Albert Einstein made 100 years ago.

http://www.sci-news.com/astronomy/negative-mass-dark-fluid-06687.html

[Windflier]

The existence of dark energy, or some sort of ‘hidden’ energy, is likely, given the (supposed) fact that the universe is accelerating in its expansion.

The 'expanding universe' is an unproven theory, which is based upon the belief that red shift is an indicator of motion and velocity.

Noted astronomer, Halton Arp, proved in the 1960s, that red shift is actually an indicator of age. In his book, "Atlas of Peculiar Galaxies", Arp presented high definition photos of 388 galaxies that are conjoined to companion quasars whose red shifts differ dramatically from their parent galaxies.

These quasars are clearly connected to their companion galaxies by visible filaments, so how can that be? Well, it can't be, if red shift is an indicator of motion and velocity. This observation led Arp to conclude (correctly, in my estimation) that red shift is an indicator of age, not motion or velocity.

Naturally, the astronomical community, which had already accepted the Big Bang theory as gospel, thoroughly rejected Arp's findings out of hand, and labeled him a kook heretic. They did so (and continue to do so) despite the clear associations between these objects and the wild variances in their red shifts.

In subsequent decades, thousands of such objects have been added to Arp's original catalog.

The ramifications of these observations can't be overstated. Arp essentially disproved the Big Bang theory.

[ETL]

They define 3 different types of redshift.

1) Doppler, due to actual movement of light source through space

2) Gravitational, due to strong gravity field “stretching” space-time

3) Cosmological, due to universal expansion

[Windflier]

“They define 3 different types of redshift.”

1) Doppler, due to actual movement of light source through space

2) Gravitational, due to strong gravity field “stretching” space-time

3) Cosmological, due to universal expansion <<

Okay. Shouldn’t associated galaxies and quasars still have the same red shift?

[wideminded]

I wonder why he felt the need to do a press release.

Seems like it's the universities that are doing a lot of press releases lately. So maybe this was put together by the Oxford press office.