History and theory suggests that the problem of how to account for dark energy (the accelerating universe or the increased stretching out of space itself) may be a conceptual reference frame problem.
From a historical perspective, physics has sometimes been stymied not by difficult mathematics but rather by taking for granted a conceptual point of view that must be varied or even inverted to arrive at a more successful theory. For example, the Earth motionless relative to the revolving Sun, consistent with ordinary quotidian perception, turned out to be less effective as a conceptual reference frame than the Sun motionless with the Earth rotating. The rate of change in time as an invariant was a hurdle in the way of explaining the invariance of light speed in a reference frame orthogonal to the passage of the Earth in its revolution around the Sun. So there are historical precedents for theoretical difficulties not being mathematical but rather the point of view.
As to theory, modern physics has general relativity and a considerable body of physics related to it, astronomical observations obtained using advanced telescopes, CCD’s and other technologies. The resistance of dark energy to a solution despite the available mathematical, technological and theoretical physics suggests that the possibility lies not with the problem solving tools available but rather an inopportune choice of conceptual reference frame. What are your views?
Dear Robert Shour,
This is exactly what I am advocating throughout my presence here in RG and what I have published in Article Analysis of the Expansion of Space and a Theory of the Big Implosion
The current concordance model of the big Bang states somehow
There was a time where all of space in the visible part of the universe was as big as a subatomic particle.
You can also say the same with:
There was a time where a subatomic particle was as big as the visible universe.
In one view the change of scale is seen as originating from the change of size of the universe where the equations describe how the scale of the universe depends on the content of the universe. In the other view the change of scale is seen as originating in the change of size of every element of matter. There the equations have to describe how matter loses its size.
The problem with these two are that from observation you can't distinguish between the two. Only the first, and general accepted, view needs that space is unbound while time has a start. The second view allows space to be unbound while time also is unbound in future and past.
Regards,
Paul Gradenwitz
Yes, indeed, an expanding universe with acceleration looks more like an addition or increase of space itself with acceleration. However, I would not say that it looks like stretching - again, this is rather a phase transition of dark energy into dark and visible matter.
JM
- Badges
- Science topic