28 Jun 15
From the article:
"A new form of matter, dark energy, repulsive in nature, ...."
Although I guess we can call photons 'matter', it gets a little confusing when you have 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' and then call the 'dark energy' a form of matter.
My understanding is that if they are correct about the universe ringing, then it might remove the need for dark energy, and would also have implications for the long term future of the universe (big crunch rather than continuous expansion).
28 Jun 15
Originally posted by twhiteheadWe will all know within a couple billion years🙂
From the article:
"A new form of matter, dark energy, repulsive in nature, ...."
Although I guess we can call photons 'matter', it gets a little confusing when you have 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' and then call the 'dark energy' a form of matter.
My understanding is that if they are correct about the universe ringing, then it might remove the nee ...[text shortened]... ications for the long term future of the universe (big crunch rather than continuous expansion).
30 Jun 15
2 edits
Originally posted by sonhouseNo. Improvements in the mapping of the locations of galaxies. Distance is determined at least in part by redshift which is a function of expansion. If the expansion is not uniform, but galaxy distribution is, then the map we get based on the assumption of uniform expansion will show density waves in the galaxy distributions.
You are talking about the continued improvements in the mapping of the cosmic background?
We should also find discrepancies between redshift distance and other methods of measuring distance.
02 Jul 15
Originally posted by twhiteheadYour hypothesis supports my ideas about dark energy and the fate of the universe. :-)
My understanding is that if they are correct about the universe ringing, then it might remove the need for dark energy, and would also have implications for the long term future of the universe (big crunch rather than continuous expansion).
18 Jul 15
Originally posted by twhiteheadI think physicists are just running out of ideas.
From the article:
"A new form of matter, dark energy, repulsive in nature, ...."
Although I guess we can call photons 'matter', it gets a little confusing when you have 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' and then call the 'dark energy' a form of matter.
My understanding is that if they are correct about the universe ringing, then it might remove the nee ...[text shortened]... ications for the long term future of the universe (big crunch rather than continuous expansion).