Evidence that the key assumption made in discovery of dark energy is in error

Re:Evidence that the key assumption made in discovery of dar... by fennecfoxen on Monday January 06, 2020 @11:37PM (#21976875)

If this temporal expansion or contraction produces redshift in the exact same way, and you can fit it into Relativity with the appropriate math, well, six of one, half a dozen of the other — until such point as we understand some discrete mechanism underlying the operation of the universe that would be affected by the expansion of one rather than the other: minimum time steps, minimum distances, proceeding from individual bits, increments of information. (Such a thing is theorized, but observing it is on no one's radar today, so good luck.)

(If it doesn't fit, then it's just wrong.)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Evidence that the key assumption made in discovery of dar... by igravious on Tuesday January 07, 2020 @08:13PM (#21987235)

If this is an accurate conceptual model: https://www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/Space_Science/What_i...

I have this odd notion that the universe has stayed the same "size" (since inception) and that the parameters of the universe and the amount of matter/information has changed over time.

The impression we get (from our perspective) is that of an initial singularity, a period of hyper inflation, and then the expansion we have now.

Probably bollocks but I'd like to know why it's bollocks.

[ Parent | on HN ]