Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Physics Forum Is dark energy an illusion?

The quickening pace of our universe's expansion may not be driven by a mysterious force called dark energy after all, but paradoxically, by the collapse of matter in small regions of space. Now, physicist Syksy Rasanen of CERN in Geneva, Switzerland, says we might not need dark energy after all. As counter-intuitive as it sounds, the increasing rate of expansion might be due to the collapse of small regions of the universe under gravity, he says. In any given region of space, the force of gravity between bits of matter acts as a brake on expansion. This means that expansion should slow down quickly in regions with lots of matter, while continuing without much change in mostly empty regions. It is this difference in the expansion rate between different regions that could produce the illusion of dark energy, Rasanen says. Strangely enough, even though the expansion rate decreases or stays about the same in every region, the average rate of expansion for the universe as a whole can increase. For the full story Click Here . But I wouldn't hold my breath on this one.

Until now, when people asked the question, "If space is expanding, why doesn't the distance between objects like the sun and Earth increase?". The answer has always been that the gravitational bond overcomes the local effect of the expansion of space. This theory says that not only does strong enough gravity overcome the effects of expanding space, it actually decreases the local expansion rate.

Rasanen says "a very plausible explanation" for accelerated expansion. There's obviously a great deal that I don't know, because I find that I still need an answer to the question: Why does the expansion rate in low density regions increase?

Because, at least in according to this reading, there is less stuff exerting a force to restrain it.

Yes, I got that bit about the restraining regions being comparatively small, but why should the expansion rate increase rather than remain steady, or decrease?

A very good theory, in fact I like it.
It might well be the alternate theory 'par excellance' to account for the dark or invisible matter holding the Universe together.

My reasoning is as follows:-
It would certainly account for the Pioneer 10 and 11 anomally, i.e Their slowing down, by not being in the place that time and speed calculations says they should be.
i.e The Pioneers having come from an area of high density, (our part of the Universe) are travelling outwards to an area of less density. This would account, according to Syksy Rasanens theory, the reason for their slowing down.
I know that other reasons have been cited for this, like a minute fuel leakage? But what are the odds that this, or a similar mechanical problem would have affected both Pioneers?

Again, present theory says:- Matter should not be held onto the peripheral edge of fast rotating Galaxies. Present theory dictates that this matter is held in place by the extra gravity of invisible dark matter.
Not withstanding that the presence of this Dark Matter remains unproven, being a 'fudge' to account for the edge of a rotating Galaxy to hold together, after its total mass, (plus black hole) has been calculated, as being of insufficient gravity.

I feel, Syksy Rasanens new theory could be used to postulate that there is a constant 'inward stream of lesser density' pouring into a rotating Galaxy of high density, which might well hold a spinning Galaxy's edge matter in place?
Less complicated than the posit of invisible dark matter
I like his theory, someone should look into it.

--------------------
"You will never find a real Human being - even in a mirror." .....Mike Kremer.
.