Dark energy may be a pipe dream after all.
Korean study indicates the type 1A supernova intensity may diminish with age of universe which means no expansion and no dark energy
https://phys.org/news/2020-01-evidence-key-assumption-discovery-dark.html
Earlier supporting evidence https://arxiv.org/abs/1808.04597

The first review (criticism) of the paper says no
https://arxiv.org/abs/1912.02191

A critcism of the "criticism" says the aurhors failed to take account of the Milkyway and our Solar system's velocity

Back and forth is here
https://motls.blogspot.com/2020/01/cosmologists-neglecting-motion-of-solar.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+LuboMotlsReferenceFrame+(Lubos+Motl%27s+reference+frame)

Fortunately, this scientific discussion has not gotten to the point where disagreeing studies are the work of "expansion deniers" and require gatekeeping to push the expanding universe theory.

I still view theories about dark matter and energy with a grain of salt. If 75% or more of the universe is made up of stuff that can't be seen then maybe there is a big flaw in the theories. I am definitely no expert on these matters but I wonder about those who claim to be.

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

JPL astronomers say they have found evidence of dark matter clumps around a Galaxy by the gravitational lensing effect on the image of a distant quasar, which gives four images. The image is distorted by the dark matter clumps compared to what it would be without the dark matter clumps. Physicists say they find no evidence of dark matter particles such as WIMPS, axions and massive neutrinos. Whom do we believe?
Tullio

---

JPL astronomers say they have found evidence of dark matter clumps around a Galaxy by the gravitational lensing effect on the image of a distant quasar, which gives four images. The image is distorted by the dark matter clumps compared to what it would be without the dark matter clumps. Physicists say they find no evidence of dark matter particles such as WIMPS, axions and massive neutrinos. Whom do we believe?
Tullio

Neither, we rewrite Einstein's theory's and fix the standard model. ;-)

The Standard Model does not include gravitation. That is the rub. General Relativity has many experimental confirmations, including gravitational waves. Now the physicists say they need a bigger accelerator than LHC, which has found no evidence of supersymmetric particles. Maybe we need a new Einstein.
Tullio

---

The Standard Model does not include gravitation. That is the rub. General Relativity has many experimental confirmations, including gravitational waves. Now the physicists say they need a bigger accelerator than LHC, which has found no evidence of supersymmetric particles. Maybe we need a new Einstein.
Tullio

Agree: They need to be more creative with what they already have. NASA funded "advanced concepts" for a while, looking at inertia less drives as part of "breakthrough propulsion" Funding was continued but not by NASA. They looked at just about everything except perpetual motion and cold fusion.

Take in some off-the-wall ideas like spinning a bunch of neutral antimatter clockwise, then counter-clockwise and see if it interacts with gravity to raise or lower the beam in the earths gravitational field. this is my idea that is worth only 2c unless they hit it big and get antigravity.

[edit] Cannot be neutral as magnetism is how they keep the particles in a circle.

Sometimes gravity is included in the Standard Model.
The force carrier graviton is then a tensor boson and have the properties mass=0, charge=0 and spin=2.
Most likely dark matter interact with gravitons just as with ordinary matter. But it's VERY difficult to find or detect any of it.
But even so it doesn't explain dark energy that is not included in the Standard model but account to mass/energy the most in the universe.

Most every theory I read about here or see on serious science based TV has as much weight as any other, at least until someone makes the big breakthrough.

---

Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.

I have often though that the Universe, itself, might be rotating. Possibly about an axis in some other dimension. This might account for gravitational observations which are interpreted as dark matter or energy.

I think the idea of a rotating universe was advanced by the logician Kurt Goedel, but I could find only a reference to this idea in a book by Peter G. Bergmann, a coworker of Einstein, in his book "The riddle of gravitation" at page 144 in the Italian edition "L'enigma della gravitazione".
Tullio

---

Dr. Moninder Singh Modgil - The Rotating Gödel Universe
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqg86cnBMO4

In 1949, on the occasion of Einstein’s 70th birthday, Gödel, in a seminar, presented a model of a rotating universe--the model which bears his name. This was the first solution of Einstein’s field equation in which it was demonstrated that time travel was possible. Obukhov has researched a metric which combines expansion with rotation. The rotation is high in the early stages of the universe, and slows down as the universe expands. Observational evidence for rotation of the universe is discussed.