Talk:Dark energy

(+) DARK MATTER AND ATOMS

(-)DARK ENERGY

ATOMS:- FINISHED GOODS

DARK MATTER :- SUPPORTING MATERIAL

DARK ENERGY:- WASTE

CALCULATION :- 72%-23%+5%= 44% (DARK ENERGY).

THE HUGE AMOUNT OF DARK ENERGY(72%) IS ATTRACTING THE SMALL AMOUNT OF DARK MATTER(23%) AND ATOMS(5%).

. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RajnishGuunwal (talk • contribs) 12:44, 12 December 2012‎

A more updated review on dark energy should be cited in the introduction. I suggest the book

{{cite book |last1= Amendola |first1= Luca |last2=Tsujikawa |first2=Shinji | date= 2010 |title= Dark Energy. Theory and Observations. |url=

http://www.cambridge.org/9780521516006 |publisher= Cambridge University Press |isbn= 9780521516006}}

{{reflist|closed=yes}}

It could also serve as citation for several of the "citation needed", e.g. the possible failure of general relativity.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.246.99.116 (talk • contribs) 07:50, 18 October 2014‎ (UTC)

IMO this should be its own section instead of a subsection of Theories of Dark Energy. Most articles of scientific theory for theories not already well-established have their contravened sections more conspicuous. It could probably use more content too but we've at least touched on the first of the Sarkar papers. We should probably expand the section with the V3 of their latest paper, "Evidence for anisotropy of cosmic acceleration" - https://arxiv.org/abs/1808.04597

Seems recent studies suggest that Dark Energy thinking is seriously "Flawed"{{cite news |last=Overbye |first=Dennis |authorlink=Dennis Overbye |title=A Tantalizing ‘Hint’ That Astronomers Got Dark Energy All Wrong - Scientists may have discovered a major flaw in their understanding of that mysterious cosmic force. That could be good news for the fate of the universe. |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/04/science/space/astronomy-universe-dark-energy.html |date=4 April 2024 |work=The New York Times |url-status=live |archiveurl=https://archive.ph/xOhg1 |archivedate=4 April 2024 |accessdate=5 April 2024 }} - or that Dark Energy doesn't even exist at all{{cite news |last=McRae |first=Mike |title=Physicist Claims Universe Has No Dark Matter And Is 27 Billion Years Old |url=https://www.sciencealert.com/physicist-claims-universe-has-no-dark-matter-and-is-27-billion-years-old |date=18 March 2024 |work=ScienceAlert |url-status=live |archiveurl=https://archive.ph/wip/WQmSW |archivedate=18 March 2024 |accessdate=5 April 2024 }}{{cite journal |last=Gupta |first=Rajendia P. |title=Testing CCC+TL Cosmology with Observed Baryon Acoustic Oscillation Features |date=15 March 2024 |journal=The Astrophysical Journal |volume=964 |issue=55 |page=55 |doi=10.3847/1538-4357/ad1bc6 |doi-access=free }} - if interested, [https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/04/science/space/astronomy-universe-dark-energy.html#permid=132331836 my related pubished NYT comments] may be relevant{{cite news |last=Bogdan |first=Dennis |authorlink=User:Drbogdan |title=Comment - A Tantalizing ‘Hint’ That Astronomers Got Dark Energy All Wrong - Scientists may have discovered a major flaw in their understanding of that mysterious cosmic force. That could be good news for the fate of the universe. |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/04/science/space/astronomy-universe-dark-energy.html#permid=132331836 |date=4 April 2024 |work=The New York Times |url-status=live |archiveurl=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/PdSfW |archivedate=8 April 2024 |accessdate=8 April 2024 }} - in any case - Worth adding to the main "Dark Energy" article - or Not? - Comments Welcome - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 13:45, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

:Yes, I think dark energy will go the way of “the aether.” Far more believable is that expansion is due to the merger of universes. 174.205.98.225 (talk) 19:53, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

NOTE: A related discussion has been centralized on "physics Wikiproject", and can be found at the following link => "Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics/Archive April 2024#Dark Energy is Flawed or Nonexistent?" - iac - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 22:19, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

{{reflist-talk}} Drbogdan (talk) 13:45, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

• A new study lends credence to this idea. See here: [https://ras.ac.uk/news-and-press/research-highlights/dark-energy-doesnt-exist-so-cant-be-pushing-lumpy-universe-apart] 104.171.53.110 (talk) 03:49, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

We shouldn't be adding in competing theories right as they're published. Dark Enrgy as a thing is well established in cosmology and any countering papers are going to need to cross WP:ECREE thresholds. Certainly they may, but that's why WP:TOOSOON is a situation in this case. There are plenty of studies every year that come out proposing alternative models, there's no reason to include all of them as they arise when that's both against the consensus and the academic community hasn't even had time to weigh in yet. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ 17:30, 31 December 2024 (UTC)