Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Thursday October 27 2016, @02:03AM   Printer-friendly
from the slow-down dept.

A newly published analysis of Type Ia supernovae calls into question the accelerating expansion of the universe and the existence of dark energy:

Five years ago, the Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to three astronomers for their discovery, in the late 1990s, that the universe is expanding at an accelerating pace. Their conclusions were based on analysis of Type Ia supernovae – the spectacular thermonuclear explosions of dying stars – picked up by the Hubble space telescope and large ground-based telescopes. It led to the widespread acceptance of the idea that the universe is dominated by a mysterious substance named 'dark energy' that drives this accelerating expansion.

Now, a team of scientists led by Professor Subir Sarkar of Oxford University's Department of Physics has cast doubt on this standard cosmological concept. Making use of a vastly increased data set – a catalogue of 740 Type Ia supernovae, more than ten times the original sample size – the researchers have found that the evidence for acceleration may be flimsier than previously thought, with the data being consistent with a constant rate of expansion.

Marginal evidence for cosmic acceleration from Type Ia supernovae (open, DOI: 10.1038/srep35596) (DX)


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 27 2016, @05:11PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 27 2016, @05:11PM (#419486)

    Nobel prizes usually require more than 3 sigma of confidence.

    The article suggested the original calculations were based on other assumptions that have not been thoroughly tested. It's like they habitually used to assume spherical cows, but new knowledge suggests that spherical cows are not significantly more likely than say cubical cows.

    Do they take Nobels away for innocently wrong conclusions?

    I'm rooting for constant expansion.

    There's a trade-off. Constant expansion probably means the Universe will last longer, but it also means that bad guys from far off have a better chance of coming our way. An accelerating expansion would relatively quickly isolate civilizations, putting distant galactic systems beyond near-light-speed travel. Earth-bound encounters between different civilizations show that they are usually of unequal technological capability and of different philosophy, leading to mass slaughter and other problems. The more civilizations that can reach us, the more likely a bad and powerful group will slaughter us. Good "fences" make for good neighbors.

  • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Thursday October 27 2016, @07:36PM

    by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Thursday October 27 2016, @07:36PM (#419545) Journal

    Dark Energy driven expansion would have no affect on the "bad guys", as the local group (Milky Way, Andromeda, etc.) is gravitationally bound, and will hold together against cosmic expansion long enough for the sun to die.

    --
    Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.