Dark Energy Debunked? Cosmic Acceleration May Be an Illusion (sciencedaily.com)
(Thursday September 10, 2026 @03:00AM (BeauHD)
from the modern-cosmology dept.)
- Reference: 0185573546
- News link: https://science.slashdot.org/story/26/09/10/0230225/dark-energy-debunked-cosmic-acceleration-may-be-an-illusion
- Source link: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/09/260907201600.htm
[1]alternative_right shares a report from ScienceDaily:
> A new analysis of more than 1,700 supernovae is questioning whether the universe is really accelerating at all. After accounting for the ages of the stars that produce these explosions, researchers found signs that cosmic expansion [2]may actually be slowing . They also argue that the apparent acceleration changes with direction, which would be difficult to explain with dark energy. Other cosmologists dispute the conclusion, setting up a major test for upcoming observatories.
The analysis has been [3]published in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society .
The conclusion is disputed, though. The report mentions a [4]separate paper co-authored by Professor Maria Vincenzi, also at the University of Oxford, that "concludes that observations continue to support an accelerating universe."
[1] https://slashdot.org/~alternative_right
[2] https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/09/260907201600.htm
[3] http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stag844
[4] http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stag797
> A new analysis of more than 1,700 supernovae is questioning whether the universe is really accelerating at all. After accounting for the ages of the stars that produce these explosions, researchers found signs that cosmic expansion [2]may actually be slowing . They also argue that the apparent acceleration changes with direction, which would be difficult to explain with dark energy. Other cosmologists dispute the conclusion, setting up a major test for upcoming observatories.
The analysis has been [3]published in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society .
The conclusion is disputed, though. The report mentions a [4]separate paper co-authored by Professor Maria Vincenzi, also at the University of Oxford, that "concludes that observations continue to support an accelerating universe."
[1] https://slashdot.org/~alternative_right
[2] https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2026/09/260907201600.htm
[3] http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stag844
[4] http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stag797
The "reality is just messing with us" hypothesis (Score:3)
by Jeremi ( 14640 )
The size of the universe is increasing...
but the rate at which it is increasing is decreasing...
but the rate at which the rate is decreasing is increasing...
but the rate at which the rate of the rate is increasing is decreasing...
but the rate at which the rate of the rate of the rate is decreasing in increasing...
[... and so on, ad infinitum...]
Not an expert (Score:2)
It is interesting to hear the universe is expanding, every galaxy has a black hole, a yet unknown material keep solar systems pushed in, and yet we are moving faster away from the source of the big bang.
All these factors seem to indicate the inverse of the claim, however, the universe could easily be like the seasons on earth, an ebb and flow of direction based on forces we dont know, or have happened over x million or billion of years ago are affecting us now.
Understanding the universe is like understand
Re: (Score:2)
The usual assumptiom is that there is no source of the big bang, everything banged.
With enough mathematical wrangling, you could probably make current observations compatible with a centered big bang (far enough on the edge you might not be able to tell the difference). But it would be blasphemy to cosmologists to even try.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
> everything banged.
Even slashdotters?
Re: Not an expert (Score:1)
"The usual assumptiom is that there is no source of the big bang, everything banged."
That seems like it would require a lot of faith.
Re: (Score:2)
They have enough cosmic coincidences to deal with, without a cosmology where our view of the universe is privileged in such a way it makes it look unprivileged. Why would science Satan do that?
Re: (Score:2)
"but weather changes are so significant that our prediction models dont work anymore"
AI weather models may use the past to predict the future but AFAIK conventional models simply use physics so climate change will be factored in by default by dint of registering higher temps at monitoring stations.
Re: (Score:2)
"every galaxy has a black hole, a yet unknown material keep solar systems pushed in, and yet we are moving faster away from the source of the big bang."
These have nothing to do with the universe expanding. It is the space between galaxies that expanding, that's sort of how we measure it, i.e., by looking at near galaxies and far off galaxies (them are further back in time), and observing the differences.
" the universe could easily be like the seasons on earth, an ebb and flow of direction based on forces we
Re: (Score:1)
> I see the same with the universe. We have no models, we can only look at what we see before us, and use that information to inform possibilities.
We do not have accepted models. There actually is models that are however kind of speculative. I actually also built my own highly speculative model - just for fun - and while it has some nice explanations, I am very aware, that this is not finished. If you are interested, see [1]https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo... [doi.org] . And yes, it explains why there would be dark matter and dark energy, but there is no way to interact with it besides gravitational effects.
[1] https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20306533