Given the latest news about about Dark Energy (see my previous thread), here’s what passes for an article at Phys.org:
https://phys.org/news/2025-03-dark-ener ... eries.html
What is dark energy? One of science's great mysteries, explained
Well that sounds great. We’d love to have dark energy finally explained. BUT IT'S CLICK BAIT.
Dark energy makes up roughly 70% of the universe, yet we know nothing about it.
Huh? That’s what you call "explaining"?
And if we know nothing about DE, how can you claim with certainty that it's 70% of the universe?
In fact, don't the lastest DESI results (see my previous thread) make that figure questionable?
So what is dark energy exactly?
No one knows. It is invisible and it does not interact with matter or light. And it may not even exist.
Well, that sure was helpful.
And I still don’t see the reason to publish this article. And the rest of the article is filled with equal uncertainty. In fact, everything from the cosmological constant to our understanding of gravity is apparently up for grabs it tells us.
But then anyone who reads phys.org and the dozen or so publications like it already know all this ... or should … because there have been a dozen other articles that have already said the same thing. So why publish this article? Maybe they need a DOGE at Phys.org?
And like all such articles, this one ends with sweeping promises.
After all, isn't the #1 job of Phys.org and the other publications to keep the money flowing to gnome astrophysics?
So they conclude with this …
When could we know more?
Soon. The best way to understand dark energy is to look at a vast swath of sky, taking in as many galaxies with as much data as possible.
And a bunch of new telescopes are working to do just that.
On Wednesday, Europe's Euclid space telescope released its first astronomical data since launching in 2023—but any dark energy results are a couple of years away.
NASA's Nancy Grace Roman space telescope, planned for launch in 2027, and the under-construction Vera Rubin Observatory in Chile will also take aim at the problem.
It is an exciting time for dark energy, Frieman said, adding that he expected a "definitive answer" in the next couple of years.
Gee. Hasn't a definitive answer in a few years ago been promised for decades?
There is no time to waste, Frieman said.
Why? How will knowing this benefit humanity? No one has yet explained the URGENCY in these explorations of astrophysics gnomes.
"Every minute we wait, galaxies are disappearing from view."
Seriously? Is THAT their reason for urgency? I’d laugh if they weren’t wasting BILLIONS and BILLIONS of OUR tax dollars.
Given the latest news about about Dark Energy (see my previous thread), here’s what passes for an article at Phys.org:
https://phys.org/news/2025-03-dark-energy-science-great-mysteries.html
[quote]What is dark energy? One of science's great mysteries, explained[/quote]
Well that sounds great. We’d love to have dark energy finally explained. BUT IT'S CLICK BAIT.
[quote]Dark energy makes up roughly 70% of the universe, yet we know nothing about it.[/quote]
Huh? That’s what you call "explaining"?
And if we know nothing about DE, how can you claim with certainty that it's 70% of the universe?
In fact, don't the lastest DESI results (see my previous thread) make that figure questionable?
[quote]So what is dark energy exactly?
No one knows. It is invisible and it does not interact with matter or light. And it may not even exist.[/quote]
Well, that sure was helpful. :roll: And I still don’t see the reason to publish this article. And the rest of the article is filled with equal uncertainty. In fact, everything from the cosmological constant to our understanding of gravity is apparently up for grabs it tells us.
But then anyone who reads phys.org and the dozen or so publications like it already know all this ... or should … because there have been a dozen other articles that have already said the same thing. So why publish this article? Maybe they need a DOGE at Phys.org?
And like all such articles, this one ends with sweeping promises.
After all, isn't the #1 job of Phys.org and the other publications to keep the money flowing to gnome astrophysics?
So they conclude with this …
[quote]When could we know more?
Soon. The best way to understand dark energy is to look at a vast swath of sky, taking in as many galaxies with as much data as possible.
And a bunch of new telescopes are working to do just that.
On Wednesday, Europe's Euclid space telescope released its first astronomical data since launching in 2023—but any dark energy results are a couple of years away.
NASA's Nancy Grace Roman space telescope, planned for launch in 2027, and the under-construction Vera Rubin Observatory in Chile will also take aim at the problem.
It is an exciting time for dark energy, Frieman said, adding that he expected a "definitive answer" in the next couple of years.[/quote]
Gee. Hasn't a definitive answer in a few years ago been promised for decades?
[quote]There is no time to waste, Frieman said.[/quote]
Why? How will knowing this benefit humanity? No one has yet explained the URGENCY in these explorations of astrophysics gnomes.
[quote]"Every minute we wait, galaxies are disappearing from view."[/quote]
Seriously? Is THAT their reason for urgency? I’d laugh if they weren’t wasting BILLIONS and BILLIONS of OUR tax dollars.