No, most theories of dark energy do not predict the value of Ω_M (the matter density parameter) directly. Instead, Ω_M is generally treated as an observational input or parameter that must fit within the broader framework of cosmological models, including those involving dark energy. Dark energy theories primarily aim to explain the accelerated expansion of the universe, while Ω_M concerns the total amount of matter (both dark and ordinary) in the universe. Here’s why Ω_M is observationally derived rather than predicted by dark energy models:

Why Ω_M Is Typically Derived from Observations:

Ω_M is determined by observations of the universe’s matter content and its gravitational effects on cosmic expansion and structure formation. Specifically, Ω_M is constrained by:

• Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) observations, which provide insights into the total energy density in the universe.

• Large-Scale Structure (the distribution of galaxies and matter) and how it evolves over time.

• Type Ia Supernovae measurements that help infer the expansion history of the universe.

These observations consistently show that Ω_M is approximately 0.3, with the remaining 0.7 of the universe’s critical density coming from dark energy (Ω_Λ).

Theories of Dark Energy and Their Relationship with Ω_M:

While dark energy theories focus on explaining the accelerated expansion of the universe, they typically incorporate the value of Ω_M derived from observations. Let’s explore a few key models:

1. ΛCDM (Lambda Cold Dark Matter) Model:

• This is the standard cosmological model, where dark energy is modeled as a cosmological constant (Λ), and dark matter is “cold” (non-relativistic). The model does not predict Ω_M but requires Ω_M ≈ 0.3 to be consistent with observations.

2. Quintessence:

• Quintessence models propose a dynamic form of dark energy, driven by a scalar field that evolves over time. Although quintessence predicts how dark energy evolves, the value of Ω_M still needs to be observationally determined and is not directly predicted by the theory. Most quintessence models adopt an observationally derived Ω_M value of about 0.3.

3. Modified Gravity Theories (e.g., f(R) Gravity, DGP Models):

• These theories attempt to explain cosmic acceleration by modifying general relativity rather than introducing a new form of energy. Although they offer alternative mechanisms for cosmic acceleration, they do not predict Ω_M. Instead, they adjust to fit observed values of Ω_M, typically close to 0.3.

4. Holographic Dark Energy:

• Based on principles from quantum gravity and the holographic principle, this model ties the dark energy density to the size of the universe’s event horizon. Like other models, holographic dark energy does not predict Ω_M but instead constrains it through the same observational data, leading to a value around 0.3.

Conclusion:

No dark energy theories currently predict the value of Ω_M. Instead, Ω_M is determined from observational data (such as the CMB and galaxy surveys), and dark energy models are adjusted to be consistent with these observations. The widely accepted value of Ω_M in modern cosmology is approximately 0.3, and this value is treated as an input or constraint in most dark energy theories.

As shown in my numerous publications (e.g., in 10.3390/axioms13030138), the phenomenon of cosmological acceleration can be clearly explained without uncertainties in the framework of the existing physics, while dark energy is a complete nonsense.

There has been some progress concerning dark energy lately - it is something that decays with time. When the universe is around 100 times its present age, dark energy will have largely decayed to matter particles. Dark matter will then account for around a quarter of the universe. The simplest question one can ask along these lines concerns the ratio of dark matter to baryonic matter, a ratio that will not change very much. It is not something one can necessarily calculate, but it is something which is already comprehensible. For this, knowledge concerning the composition of dark matter, and the purpose of the universe is required.

Most mainstream theories of dark energy don't predict or explicitly calculate a specific ratio of energy densities, such as the approximate 0.70/0.30 observed between dark energy and matter. However, several models offer insights into these proportions.

Regarding the Cosmic Influx Theory (CIT), it does indeed relate to this question. CIT posits a continuous influx of energy, contributing to mass and the universe's expansion. By interpreting dark energy as a byproduct of this influx, CIT can align with the observed proportions indirectly, viewing mass-energy gain as a balancing component in the universe’s energy makeup. Thus, CIT offers a conceptual bridge to understanding these densities without invoking new fields or constants.

Dark Matter and Dark Energy are nothing but aether as aether has been shown to be existing by the same experiment as the result of which aether was rejected to be existing. The scientific research paper which shows the existence of aether is 'Michelson-Morley Experiment; A Misconceived and Misinterpreted Experiment' which is published in peer-reviewed journal Indian journal of science and technology and could be downloaded from www.indjst.org.

I'm not "dark"

There is no Dark Matter and Dark Energy but it is aether, the electric dipoles, with which the space is filled up which acts as medium of propagation of light and forces of nature. Besides it stands shown that all forces of nature are electromagnetic forces and instead of

irrational and senseless action at distance though fields aether is the medium. The existence of aether has been shown to be confirmed in the paper titled 'Michelson-Morley Experiment; A Misconceived and Misinterpreted Experiment' which is available on ResearchGate in my profile.