Cosmologists still have no idea what dark energy is.

In 1998, two astronomical research teams independently discovered what is now called “dark
energy.” Saul Perlmutter o the !awrence "erkeley #ational !a$oratory and "rian Schmidt rom
the %ustralian #ational &niversity pro'ects each led the two teams who discovered that the (u$$le
)onstant, a uniorm e*pansion rate imparted to the &niverse rom the "ig "ang e*plosion, was
)ertain concepts, like redshit and gravity, are undamental to the "ig "ang hypothesis. %ccording
to theory, light shits toward the red end o the spectrum $ecause an o$'ect is moving away. "ecause
o$'ects interpreted to $e at great distances move away aster than o$'ects nearer to +arth, the
&niverse is e*panding. ,he usual understanding is that gala*ies are all moving away rom each
other $ecause the &niverse is growing larger.
%nother important principle is that the &niverse is gravity-driven. I gravity is the only controlling
orce, then the e*pansion set in motion $y the "ig "ang must $e slowing inescapa$le
conclusion $ased on gravitational attraction.
(owever, Perlmutter and Schmidt reali/ed rom the study o ,ype 1a supernovae that the e*pansion
o the &niverse was not slowing down, instead it was accelerating. 0hen the astronomers plotted
redshited “velocities o recession,” the igures suggested that the e*pansion rate o the &niverse is
greater today than in its early days.
In order to analy/e the inlu* o computer data rom telescopes around the world and out in space,
the 12avitational l+nsing %ccuracy ,esting 3448 512+%,486 P%S)%! )hallenge, a group o 78
scientists rom 19 international institutions, was gathered in hopes o solving so-called “dark
acceleration” in the (u$$le )onstant $y %pril 74, 3449.
,he computational re8uirements were distri$uted across a wide assortment o disciplines.some
not necessarily in the astronomical realm. "y making use o distri$uted processing, astronomers can
un$urden their own computer resources and use any num$er o voluntary su$scri$ers or assistance.
0as all this eort even necessary9 +ven some #%S% scientists are 8uestioning the e*istence o
dark energy. 0hat is the more likely e*planation or the supernovae anomalies that led to the dark
energy theory9 )osmologists made their irst mistake when they ignored electricity as a signiicant
orce in the cosmos. :or e*ample, Supernova 198;a, the closest supernova to +arth ever studied,
e*hi$its unmistaka$le signs o electrical discharge.
Si/e, color, and luminosity reveal nothing a$out a star<s age. % red giant star is $ig $ecause there is
low electrical stress in the star<s connected circuit. % $lue-white star, on the other hand, is under
e*treme electrical much so that it could e*plode due to a $reakdown in its dou$le-layer
envelope or due to electrical issioning. #o assumption a$out a star<s age can help when trying to
determine i it will e*plode. In act, one aspect o high-energy plasma discharges is that they can
produce redshits that have no connection to recessional velocity.
,he Supernova !egacy Survey discovered that the $righter supernovae were more common in the
past and that they were a$out 13= $righter 8 $illion years ago than they are now. #o one knows
why the early &niverse had more o the ,ype 1a supernovae. >ne o$servation does show a
compelling clue? the $righter star$ursts are ound more oten where there is a high rate o star
%s the +lectric &niverse postulates, more stars are $orn where there are greater lows o electric
charge. ,hat current could also initiate a greater num$er o stellar e*plosions with anomalous
luminosities and high redshits. ,hat would make highly charged, near$y o$'ects undergoing
electrical discharges look like remote, high redshit supernovae that are too $right or their
distances. >ne can imagine the theoretical pro$lems that would result rom that misinterpretation.
Stephen Smith

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful