31
submitted 1 month ago by Delta_V@lemmy.world to c/space@lemmy.world

...Scientists have believed dark energy was a "cosmological constant," but it is actually changing over time in unexpected ways...current data shows that, at the beginning of the universe, dark energy was very strong. But it has weakened with time and will continue to do so...The new research builds on data released from DESI in April 2024 that found signs that dark energy was changing. DESI has been surveying the universe for four years and an analysis of five years' worth of data is next for its research

all 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Delta_V@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I wonder if its a result of the topography of spacetime? Like, if we were to assume the universe is toroidial, and then superimpose a coordinate system over the torus where each point on the grid is one Plank-legnth from its neighbors, I wonder if the distance between grid squares would look bigger at the outside edge of the torus than in the central funnel? If Earth were near the center, then when we look outward/backward we'd observe objects apparent acceleration outward even though from the perspective of those objects themselves they are jumping from grid square to grid square at a constant rate.

[-] Treczoks@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I wonder what we will see once physics has really understood all this dark matter and dark energy stuff.

I guess they will then talk about those like when we talk about pre germ theory medicine, when people believed that "bad air" causes sickness, and vermin was "created" by dirt.

[-] asmoranomar@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

The only difference I see is that "dark" is understood as unknown and not necessarily a single thing.

A lot of older stuff we talk about seems to be assertive in their existence and what they are. Not all of course, but in the absence of a term that indicates "we really don't know", it seems random ideas were pretty common.

That's not to say we don't still do that, but I think it'll be ideas that came out of or overly supported "dark" nomenclature. Like, say we find out we got Hubble's constant wrong. I don't think history will remember us as "believing in dark energy". Just that we got Hubble's constant wrong.

[-] mumblerfish@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Found signs

Is this a "best fit" sort of result or an actual significant measurement on the equation of state?

String theorists have conjectured that the exclusion of a (positive) cosmological constant explanation for dark energy is a prediction of string theory. If this result holds up, that line of research seems quite interesting.

this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2025
31 points (100.0% liked)

[Dormant] moved to !space@mander.xyz

10398 readers
1 users here now

This community is dormant, please find us at !space@mander.xyz

You can find the original sidebar contents below:


Rules

  1. Be respectful and inclusive.
  2. No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
  3. Engage in constructive discussions.
  4. Share relevant content.
  5. Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
  6. Use appropriate language and tone.
  7. Report violations.
  8. Foster a continuous learning environment.

Picture of the Day

The Busy Center of the Lagoon Nebula


Related Communities

๐Ÿ”ญ Science

๐Ÿš€ Engineering

๐ŸŒŒ Art and Photography


Other Cool Links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS