edit: title was modified to call attention to the discussion in the comments


The article is by Rajendra Gupta, Adjunct professor Physics @ L’Université d’Ottawa/University of Ottawa

First few lines:

Do constants of nature — the numbers that determine how things behave, like the speed of light — change over time as the universe expands? Does light get a little tired travelling vast cosmic distances? It was believed that dark matter and dark energy explained these cosmological phenomena, but recent research indicates that our universe has been expanding without dark matter or dark energy.

Doing away with dark matter and dark energy resolves the “impossible early galaxy problem,” that arises when trying to account for galaxies that do not adhere to expectations regarding to size and age. Finding an alternative to dark matter and energy that complies with existing cosmological observations, including galaxy distribution, is possible.

“We need to consider alternatives to dark matter that better explain cosmological observations” (see comments for discussion)

  • SmoothOperator@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 month ago

    That’s a pretty outlandish idea, is there any reason why that would be the case?

    I don’t think dark matter as a placeholder is accurate - it’s not some fully unexplained phenomenon, it’s matter with mass that doesn’t seem to interact with light.

    • lost_faith@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Please remember I am a layman.

      I watch a lot of science people like Dr. Becky, Cool Worlds, and Anton Petrov to name 3, and there is an Australian physicist that I forget his name. As I listen to these guys/gal talk about either their own or others findings things seem to coalesce in my mind. I forget who it was but one of them brought up something that made me think down that road again.

      There is mass changing the course of light, gravitational lensing, that magnifies objects behind it. (I did always find dark matter/energy a little lacking but our understanding is also lacking. Is physics the same all across the universe through time?) Whatever is causing that mass is only affecting gravity in that area but not blocking light. Combine that with one of the multiverse theories (not the bubble universe) and in my mind there is a possibility that the “missing mass” is possibly other whole universe. Supposedly with what is measured only, what, 5% of all mass is visible to us. (Now the way we measure mass is most likely off somehow same with how we measure distance) This lead to my thinking down this road of possibility.

      I don’t think dark matter as a placeholder is accurate - it’s not some fully unexplained phenomenon, it’s matter with mass that doesn’t seem to interact with light.

      Several of the people I listen to have said this, they do not know what it is just that they observe certain behaviours. At the same time, dark matter effects may be just a product of several forces working together, that we don’t yet understand, causing us to think it is physical in nature.

      I have no answers, just a lot of questions that lead to thoughts. Perhaps in my lifetime I/we will get these answers, perhaps not, but it is fun to think about and let the mind wander. Much has changed about our understanding of the universe, much of what I learned in childhood has been rewritten as new discoveries were made.

      • SmoothOperator@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Happy to hear you’re enjoying the work of talented scientists!

        As a non-layman, there isn’t any observations or theories that I know or that would support your cool idea, but as you say, we can always let the mind wander.

        • lost_faith@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Thank you. I really need to get a sub at that documentary site I keep seeing in creator ads. YT used to have good full docs, now its just click bait ai garbage and using known scientists images, except the ones like I mentioned they are great and try to stay to what is verified/verifiable.