Go Back   IceInSpace > General Astronomy > Astronomy and Amateur Science

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 07-01-2020, 04:56 PM
gary
Registered User

gary is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mt. Kuring-Gai
Posts: 5,924
New evidence claims key assumption made in the discovery of dark energy is in error

A 5 January 2020 press release from the Department of Astronomy
at Yonsei University in Seoul describes new observations that the
researchers claim puts doubt on the accelerating universe observations
and with it, the existence of dark energy.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Department of Astronomy Yonsei University, Seoul, South Korea

High precision age dating of supernova host galaxies reveals that the luminosity evolution of supernovae is significant enough to question the very existence of dark energy

The most direct and strongest evidence for the accelerating universe with dark energy is provided by the distance measurements using type Ia supernovae (SN Ia) for the galaxies at high redshift. This result is based on the assumption that the corrected luminosity of SN Ia through the empirical standardization would not evolve with redshift.

New observations and analysis made by a team of astronomers at Yonsei University (Seoul, South Korea), together with their collaborators at Lyon University and KASI, show, however, that this key assumption is most likely in error. The team has performed very high-quality (signal-to-noise ratio ~175) spectroscopic observations to cover most of the reported nearby early-type host galaxies of SN Ia, from which they obtained the most direct and reliable measurements of population ages for these host galaxies. They find a significant correlation between SN luminosity and stellar population age at a 99.5% confidence level. As such, this is the most direct and stringent test ever made for the luminosity evolution of SN Ia. Since SN progenitors in host galaxies are getting younger with redshift (look-back time), this result inevitably indicates a serious systematic bias with redshift in SN cosmology. Taken at face values, the luminosity evolution of SN is significant enough to question the very existence of dark energy. When the luminosity evolution of SN is properly taken into account, the team found that the evidence for the existence of dark energy simply goes away (see Figure 1).

Commenting on the result, Prof. Young-Wook Lee (Yonsei Univ., Seoul) who was leading the project said; "Quoting Carl Sagan, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, but I am not sure we have such extraordinary evidence for dark energy. Our result illustrates that dark energy from SN cosmology, which led to the 2011 Nobel Prize in Physics, might be an artifact of a fragile and false assumption".

Other cosmological probes, such as CMB (Cosmic Microwave Background) and BAO (Baryonic Acoustic Oscillations), are also known to provide some indirect and "circumstantial" evidence for dark energy, but it was recently suggested that CMB from Planck mission no longer supports the concordance cosmological model which may require new physics (Di Valentino, Melchiorri, & Silk 2019). Some investigators have also shown that BAO and other low-redshift cosmological probes can be consistent with a non-accelerating universe without dark energy (see, for example, Tutusaus et al. 2017). In this respect, the present result showing the luminosity evolution mimicking dark energy in SN cosmology is crucial and is very timely.

This result is reminiscent of the famous Tinsley-Sandage debate in the 1970s on luminosity evolution in observational cosmology, which led to the termination of the Sandage project originally designed to determine the fate of the universe.
Press Release and Figure 1 here :-
https://astro.yonsei.ac.kr/galaxy/ga...rticleLimit=10

"Early-type Host Galaxies of Type Ia Supernovae. II. Evidence for Luminosity Evolution in Supernova Cosmology" by Kang et. al. 20 Dec 2019
at arXiv :-
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1912.04903.pdf
https://arxiv.org/abs/1912.04903
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (kjMtOMwwgzQIJOzZGmvK.png)
28.9 KB36 views
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-01-2020, 05:40 PM
DarkArts
Registered User

DarkArts is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 606
Interesting reads. Thanks for posting.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-01-2020, 08:46 AM
multiweb's Avatar
multiweb (Marc)
ze frogginator

multiweb is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 22,062
That's a pretty big deal.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-01-2020, 05:42 PM
foc (Ross)
Registered User

foc is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: ACT
Posts: 208
Thanks for posting!
It would be great if we can soon have some consensus on dark matter and dark energy. I assume evidence dark matter is still fairly solid, if indirect with some supporting indications from recent new particle detection work, but I would be happy to 'see' the back of dark energy, as long as it is not replaced with another fudge factor quantity.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-01-2020, 09:30 AM
Shiraz's Avatar
Shiraz (Ray)
Registered User

Shiraz is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ardrossan south australia
Posts: 4,918
another great thread - thanks Gary.

so the Oxford group (your previous dark energy thread) are OK with the 1a expansion data (I guess), but think that the acceleration analysis was faulty. The Korean group (this thread) thinks that 4 different studies show that the standard 1a candles are evolving, so the expansion data itself may be faulty.

interesting times. thanks and cheers Ray

FWIW, this summary is a bit old, but it seems to give a glimpse into just how difficult studies can be at the cutting edge in this field. https://physicsworld.com/a/the-dark-energy-deniers/
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-01-2020, 04:29 PM
Shiraz's Avatar
Shiraz (Ray)
Registered User

Shiraz is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ardrossan south australia
Posts: 4,918
FWIW, questions raised on the quality of the study..https://www.space.com/dark-energy-not-debunked.html
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-01-2020, 04:49 PM
gary
Registered User

gary is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mt. Kuring-Gai
Posts: 5,924
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shiraz View Post
FWIW, questions raised on the quality of the study..https://www.space.com/dark-energy-not-debunked.html
Hi Ray,

Thanks for both links!

Best Regards

Gary
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 14-01-2020, 01:32 PM
multiweb's Avatar
multiweb (Marc)
ze frogginator

multiweb is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 22,062
+1 Good link Ray. It's so hard now to know or understand the validity of data.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 04:19 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Testar
Advertisement