Posted on 04/28/2009 9:16:01 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Science Still in the Dark about Dark Energy
by Brian Thomas, M.S.*
Evolutionary astronomers have a problem. The universe is expanding at an ever-increasing rate, but if general relativity is an accurate cosmological model, and if the universe is made up of the kinds of matter and energy that are directly detectable (like atoms and light), then its expansion should be slowing. Astronomers “fixed” this problem by theorizing that “75% of the energy density of the universe exists…as dark energy.”[1] This non-detectable dark energy allows the man-made model to match astronomical observations.
However, scientists are aware that dark energy itself has problems: “Nothing meeting the description of dark energy [matches] fundamental particles… It is a substance that has not as yet been measured directly, has properties unlike anything we have ever seen…. In short, we are very much in the dark about dark energy.”[2] At the urging of mainstream cosmologists, millions of government dollars are being spent trying to detect and characterize dark energy, whose supposed existence is only one of the assumptions required to make standard cosmological models “work.”
Another of these assumptions is...
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
Good theory. LOL!
I had seen this on the History channel Universe series, here is a link to the Scientific American video about this topic:
http://www.sciam.com/video.cfm?lineup=1406165298&id=17285482001
Gravity is not a constant.
Settle down there Rufus. Ellie May’s got more ‘tater chips, and Wheel of Fortune’ll be on in just a minute.
Unexplained is not inexplicable.
Well, yes. I am a religious person. Cosmology and indeed quantum physics are resembling religious belief systems. It was bound to happen.
“if general relativity is an accurate cosmological model” Then there should be something slowing down expansion. You look for it and it can’t be found anywhere. Well it must be INVISIBLE then!
This sounds oddly similar to the “evidence” used to convict people of witchcraft. There is a deep problem in modern physics. They have made an error way back, and they keep cobbling on nonsense “fixes” to make the math fit the original error.
Thanks for the link.
It’s the pervasive idea that all systems as we see today,
have come from some more unorganized precursor state. Just
as life (highly ordered) formed by chance /nature/randomness
....
The concept is more philosophical than western “scientific”
As a prime example when some cosmologists talk about a
“beginning” to our universe they talk about random fluctations
of virtual particles coming in and out of existence, then
gathering enough “steam” for lack of a better word to coalesce
and you know the rest of the story....
But how can a particle come in and out of existence? Or is
it that the particle when it goes out of existence is
just undectable to us? Since science supposedly deals with
stuff it can detect, the idea that the virtual particle
can exist outside of our detection methods is ruled out, therefore
it is considered as not existing....But that is a philosophical
position (formed in a mind which is an illusion?), not
necessarily the real truth(shebang, spiel, game, shooting
match, 9 yards, etc). So the term evolutionary astronomer
is one who explains all existing astronomy in terms of
development from unexplained matter to chaos to order and now
back to chaos....
Thankfully for us you are still in second grade then, huh?
Don’t forget, different “maths” (topology, imaginary numbers,
imaginary time) need to be invented for
the theoretical to match the actual.
Is math “scientific”? Or is it a good attempt at
explaining what we still don’t know too well?
A lot of the holes in current cosmological theory go away if you view the Universe as cyclic with no “big bang” or “big crunch”.
He always has to tout his Master’s degree to lend him some credibility. Mine’s hanging on the wall not behind my signature.
Actually i’m in college getting a degree in engineering and mathematics.
As much sense as an all-knowing, all powerful God, who for reasons known only to Himself, creates a universe, creates one planet in that universe, places a Man in a garden by himself, then recognizes His error, creates a woman He knows will defy Him, condemning all of mankind to death, but only until He makes His son manifest, and has His son murdered, thereby redeeming all of the rest of mankind, as long as they follow His rules.
Makes perfect sense.
Topology and imaginary numbers are mathematical concepts. Imaginary numbers were not “invented for the theoretical to match the actual”. People in the 1500’s who didn’t believe in imaginary numbers also thought negative numbers were useless. They are a natural product of the way we define our number system and are as real as “1” and “2”. Better get rid of everything in your house that is electric if you don’t like them.
LOL. Who came up with those six steps? And pray tell, what can cosmic evolution teach us about biological evolution?
Yet you couldn’t answer the question any third grader could. Oh well.
"Evolutionary astronomers" == Creationist term for any astronomer who believes the universe is more than 6,000 years old (give or take).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.