Black holes that form in 'reverse Big Bang replays' could account for dark energy

[Admin]

Black hole formation could be a little Big Bang in reverse, coupling the matter of a dying star with dark energy, the mysterious force driving the accelerating expansion of the universe.

Black holes that form in 'reverse Big Bang replays' could account for dark energy : Read more

 

[Unclear Engineer]

While I support the logical exploration of concepts such as this one, I think the way the article described the evidence for it is awfully weak.

The closest it comes to make a coherent argument for the concept is the statement "[A]s more black holes were created, the universe's content of dark energy increased in lockstep." Of course there is an increase of black holes over time, as they are formed by the evolution of large stars over time. And, we currently conceptualize "dark energy" as increasing with time, if only because we postulate that it is not diminished by the expansion of the universe that we observe. So, a rough correlation is expected, but that has no implications for cause and effect relationships.

So, the whole concept hinges on the idea of some tighter correlation, implied by using the word "lockstep". The article implies that DESI data shows that dark energy is not uniform, and is correlated in 'Lockstep" with black hole formation, implying differences in black hole formation rates correlate with non-uniform dark energy density. That is what should have been described in much more detail for readers. How is this data acquired? How is it interpreted? What exactly are the correlated parameters? How strong is the correlation?

 

[danR]

The article implies that DESI data shows that dark energy is not uniform, and is correlated in 'Lockstep" with black hole formation, implying differences in black hole formation rates correlate with non-uniform dark energy density. That is what should have been described in much more detail for readers. How is this data acquired? How is it interpreted? What exactly are the correlated parameters? How strong is the correlation?

I think the article is adequate for its purpose. Those who want to enquire further can turn to the papers themselves. Whether there is a causal link in the correlation suggested by the DESI data is a matter for the academic physics community at large.

 

[danR]

Nice to see a concept that removes the 'need' for singularities altogether, although it isn't the only one. Time will tell whether the BH-DE idea is falsified with further evidence, or else rises to the level of "theory".

 

[Helio]

The discovery of DE goes back to the late 1990's observations of Type 1a SN, which revealed the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate. Some sort of energy is forcing our universe in a way that accelerates it. It's a mystery what it might be.

But before Einstein, a universe that includes matter will collapse, though Newton suggested an infinite universe would prevent any collapse since there would be not c.g. (center of gravity) to give it place to collapse to.

As the universe expands, the gravitational force becomes weaker, thus a residual and repulsive force of energy (DE) would become increasingly larger relative to the weaking gravitational force. This assumes DE doesn't get weaker itself with expansion, of course. No one knows what DE is so we just play with the observations, for now, that suggest this is the case.

I don't see how the researcher's statement makes a lot of sense. "In the very early universe, when gravity was very strong, a form of dark energy caused the universe to exponentially inflate. Through some unknown process, this energy was transformed into the matter of the universe today,"

1) It states DE has different forms. That's an odd claim.
2) it states "the matter of the universe" comes from DE. We know high energy densities can produce matter in places like particle colliders (e.g. CERN) and in the cores of all stars. No DE is required, apparently.

It seems a little odd too that we have such great isotropy (1 part in 100,000) in the CMBR as predicted, and without some sort of uniform distribution of BHs.

There are other issues I have as well. Perhaps I'm misjudging the work, but it sounds like more metaphysics than physics.

 

[Helio]

Those who want to enquire further can turn to the papers themselves. Whether there is a causal link in the correlation suggested by the DESI data is a matter for the academic physics community at large.

But I didn't see a link, though I found one here DESI.

From the link, "The results are in general agreement with the current best cosmological model (Lambda CDM), which takes into account the roles of dark energy and dark matter."

So we may not need something new.

On the other hand, the link states, "But as noted by DESI Director Michael Levi, “we’re also seeing some potentially interesting differences that could indicate that dark energy is evolving over time. Those may or may not go away with more data, so we’re excited to start analyzing our three-year dataset soon.”

It's unclear what's being suggested. If DE is simply increasing relative to the gravitational field, then acceleration would be expected, so perhaps they mean something else, though I suspect this may not be the case. The study of the Lyman-Alpha Forest would reveal acceleration changes, which I think is what they are finding.

 

[Unclear Engineer]

The paper itself is pretty opaque to the average reader, even with an extensive STEM background. See https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1475-7516/2024/10/094/pdf .

As Billslugg says, we need a bartender-level explanation of the basic evidence.

 

[Atlan0001]

Ahem, if I may!

Page 36 - From a drop of water....

Page 36 - Seeking answers about space? Join the Space community: the premier source of space exploration, innovation, and astronomy news, chronicling (and celebrating) humanity's ongoing expansion across the final frontier.

forums.space.com

 

[Helio]

The paper itself is pretty opaque to the average reader, even with an extensive STEM background. See https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1475-7516/2024/10/094/pdf .

As Billslugg says, we need a bartender-level explanation of the basic evidence.

Yeah and first let's have a round of double BHs and tonic.

 

[DrRaviSharma]

I am not an expert on Dark Energy Research. But I have stated in my yet to be published but accepted for publication article that DE is likely to be related to the disappearence of Matter Energy into Dark Matter.
Therefore as humbly submitted even after a year of acceptance I awit its publication mostly about DM.
Regards.
Dr Ravi Sharma

 

[finiter]

New ideas should be welcomed and evaluated. The singularity can be removed easily by assuming gravity is finite. That is, gravitational force that a body can exert has a limit, just like the speed-limit. If the universe is expanding due to the initial heat energy, which gradually changes to speed, then the expansion will be accelerating, and that eliminates the need of dark energy. These possibilities have not been considered so far.