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)
(Score: 3, Interesting) by fubari on Thursday October 27 2016, @05:44PM
Does seem reviving bad ideas from the past to explain though.
Actually they were awesome ideas. Just because in idea is wrong doesn't make it bad.
"Luminiferous aether" [wikipedia.org] was a sound, logical theory based on the physics of the day.
It was a great idea that just happened to be wrong, and that was a stepping stone to a new and better view of the universe.
(Excerpt from the wikipedia link, emphasis added.)
The point is, giving birth to relativity and quantum theory doesn't sound to shabby for a "bad idea".