Chatroom
 

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Bad Astronomy and Universe Today Forum > Space and Astronomy > Astronomy
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 05-March-2008, 09:00 AM
WalrusLike WalrusLike is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 176
Default Kolb et al / Wiltshire reckon dark energy is a furphy

A short while ago a story came out that a NZ astronomer reckons that dark energy is simply the result of not allowing for the bubbles in the universe... that the reason we think we need dark energy is that the assumptions are for a smooth mass distribution rather than allowing for the gravity well effect on our measurements of time.

They reckon that if we measured time from in the voids we would think the universe is 18 billion years old and we wouldn't need dark energy.

It seems that he made some calculations (there are suggestions on the web of errors in the calcs) based on a paper of a few weeks earlier. (Kolb et al) In any case I am not at all qualified to comment on any of this... I was wondering what the experts reckon?

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articl...e&topic=latest

Earlier paper: http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0503117
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 05-March-2008, 07:33 PM
Ara Pacis's Avatar
Ara Pacis Ara Pacis is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: between the candle and the star.
Posts: 1,975
Default

But does this explain the rotational aberrations astronomers claim to see in distant galaxies?
__________________
"What you think you thought you saw you did not see." Agent J, MiB - Manhatten Bureau
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 05-March-2008, 09:36 PM
grant hutchison grant hutchison is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,950
Default

Heh.
Does the word "furphy" travel outside of Australia? That's certainly the first time I've encountered it.

Grant Hutchison
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 05-March-2008, 10:03 PM
WalrusLike WalrusLike is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by grant hutchison View Post
Heh.
Does the word "furphy" travel outside of Australia?
I has now...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furphy
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 05-March-2008, 10:08 PM
Jerry's Avatar
Jerry Jerry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,661
Default

I think it means hinky.
__________________
jwj

If you always believe what you already know, you can't learn anything - Liz
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 05-March-2008, 10:18 PM
grant hutchison grant hutchison is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4,950
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
I think it means hinky.
That's the first time I've encountered "hinky", too.
Talk about nations divided by a common language ...

Grant Hutchison
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 06-March-2008, 01:18 AM
Noclevername's Avatar
Noclevername Noclevername is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 10,663
Default

Y'know him, Furphy, the inventor of "furphy's law".
__________________
"If this were play'd upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction."
Shakespeare, Twelfth Night
Illuminati's Razor-The most complicatedly evil answer is usually the most correct answer. - Fazor
"Every book is a children's book if the kid can read." - Mitch Hedberg
"Distance doesn’t matter much in space, where if you just start a thing off with the right kind of shove, sooner or later it will get where you want it to go." -Frederik Pohl, Mining the Oort

Last edited by Noclevername : 06-March-2008 at 02:39 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 06-March-2008, 02:38 AM
WalrusLike WalrusLike is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
I think it means hinky.
Nah mate I dont think so... I, (like grant...) had not seen hinky before. Looked it up and it sorta seems to me to mean 'sus' (which of course is suspicious...) although hinky might be closer to meaning 'sus for no obvious reason', kinda like 'dodgy'... looks alright at first glance... but sometin aint right.

A furphy is where you get something wrong.... you were led up the garden path.... leaving you in that famous creek....
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 06-March-2008, 05:47 PM
rucs_hack rucs_hack is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: England
Posts: 41
Default

I Hawking is correct, and the universe is full of micro black holes, could not they, plus the other ones we cannot see because they have exhausted the material around them, account for Dark Matter?

oops, you meant dark energy, ah well.
__________________
http://code.google.com/p/nmod/
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Speculation that something preceded expansion Bogie Against the Mainstream 81 06-February-2008 02:42 PM
Why the perfect background of the ISU isn’t luminiferous aether either. Bogie Against the Mainstream 12 21-May-2007 01:04 PM
Null Space an Energy Conduit? Michael Noonan Off-Topic Babbling 113 12-May-2007 09:20 PM
The Infinite Spongy Universe (ISU) Bogie Against the Mainstream 42 05-March-2007 02:02 AM
Dark Energy is Light Energy Peter Wilson Against the Mainstream 268 11-November-2006 06:21 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.0.0
©  2006 Bad Astronomy and Universe Today