Interesting lecture. I think that the reason there is such a disparity between dark energy and quantum theory , (virtual particles) is because it's probably wrong. The person who asked the question about repulsive gravity I think hit the nail on the head. The problem is that we don't understand gravity as an attractive force, and therefore can't explain it as a repulsive force. This is because we don’t understand what spacetime is or how it works. There is actually quite a simple explanation rooted in quantum mechanics. The solution boils down to the universal gravitational constant not being a constant constant. It's a time based variable. G increases with time very slowly. This is what actually causes attractive gravity. But because it is increasing, any fixed mass/energy at any fixed distance has to gain gravitational potential energy (which is actually a negative quantity). But and increasing negative potential energy breaks the first law of thermodynamics and as scientists will know energy can't be created or destroyed. So increasing gravitational energy (negative) has to be balanced by a gain in positive energy, or kinetic energy. The further an object is the greater the gain in negative potential energy and therefore the greater the amount of positive kinetic energy is required to balance it. For any mass that starts out with essentially zero kinetic energy from other sources we end up with Hubbies law. For masses that also carry additional kinetic energy we end up with an accelerated repulsion. The more initial k.e. the greater the acceleration. But its not really a repulsive force, its the result of spacetime itself stretching like a three dimensional piece of rubber. The universe always ends up un perfect balance between negative gravitational energy and positive kinetic energy. Dark energy is not virtual particles. So what is going to happen to the universe? Well according to this hypothesis, gravity will get relentlessly stronger locally, while distant matter is pushed further away. Eventually, complete gravitational collapse of baryonic matter. The universe is kind of going to develop huge voids as more and more matter collapses and will eventually just fizzle out. An analogy would be blowing a soap bubble. At first it grows, until it gets so big that it can no longer remain stable then huge holes/tears start to appear and it very quickly loses its integrity and dissappears.
So 10^120 is the magnitude of dark energy assuming quantum mechanics empty space theory is the pushing force. Where is that nice balancing (almost) 10^-120 keeping the Universe expanding but not blowing up coming from?
The dark energy stuff is just a thumb on the scale to explain flaws in the expanding universe theory. Hubble's observation was looking from the wrong way. It is lights changes over time that explains Hubble's observation. Not us somehow affecting galaxies billions of years before we existed. How f..king stupid is that concept. But accepted anyway.
It comes from our observation of what we think is the actual expansion. The quantum vacuum energy is a predicted amount, so the ^120 gap is between predictions and observations. Hth.
the expansion myth needs to be changed. it didn't fit the data when we realized the galaxy wasn't the end, and jwst is still proving it wrong. but instead of rethinking, more magic forces we cant see or detect are added. and the model brakes it's own fundamental law. nothing can travel faster than C. but redshift in this model says that most of the universe is expanding faster than C. and to explain they say space isn't travelling. but also say it is the gravity from dark energy causing the expansion. so either space is travelling faster than C or gravity is acting faster than C to get space to expand that fast. brilliance.
This short video on cosmology clearly links: dark energy, gravity, the curvature of space, black holes, increasing expansion of the universe, and inertia, all in one simple dynamic lower dimensional physical model of the universe whose linking features are real and understood. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-3KDS7HW5F8I.html
All I can say is that, that is a mess of pseudo-science you got there, buddy. All that stuff you just said, you can't prove, measure, test, observe, nor repeat. It's called the scientific method.
@@fanbutton Physics, cosmology, and consciousness are ultimately all connected. Math is vital to understand the universe, but more is needed. Instead of being about math's very real quantitative measurement of changes in the uncountable, (the quantities of qualities), my video is about the equally real qualitative relational analysis of the countable parts, (the qualities of quantities). It is about the lateral, not the linear: How different things are the same and comparable to all other things; the subjective abstract instead of the objective concrete. Both exist in all things. There are no new equations to understand. If you only like objective proofs and concrete equations, this may not be for you. This is more like describing the many parts a puzzle and showing how all these different things work similarly in the abstract. The video is aimed at the scientifically literate. For them, this work is mostly a review of understood proven science with some abstract insights, leading to reasoned speculation. I detail, qualitatively, similar relationships found in the images and ideas of science, math, topology, and geometry. Since the information is in the abstract, it is scientific metaphysics. If you seek a new perspective and a broader understanding of the nature of things, this might be for you. It is a deep dive. There is a lot to see. Getting there is a process. I am painting a picture. This is a non linear way to think of things. I'm not proving anything. I'm just describing what I see and showing connections that now seem obvious. Math describes most of these images, but what I see is the concurrent abstract relationships among those images. I don't always know everything those relationships mean. On every topic, many others know much more than I do. They will find meanings beyond what I have found, and see math I can not see. I make novel connections between very many different areas of thought, but the ideas clearly resonate as a single thing in the abstract. I build up to things, please don't skip ahead. Just keep up and keep going, one page at a time. The drawings are vital, please dwell on them. Structure of Existence 3.1 narrated ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-UDGeXvDRwgU.html
The vacuum energy is the opposite of the expansion which is also associated with black holes that are growing in size by absorbing space time. Again, it’s the opposite of inflation.
The expanding universe, as with the big bang, keep needing revision because everiwe see shows it doesn't fit. Alternately if light is allowed to slow by 4.6mm/s/year, the redshift is explained. Amd we know light slows because of refraction. We know space is not actually empty. So we know light therefore must slow as it travels. But by tiny amounts, so we only see it as the source gets a very long way away. Hense hubbles observation. The only problem is our model that doesn't work, says light cant slow in a vacuum. But again, even space isnt a pure vacuum. Why does the model not work? Because nothing can go faster than C, but the redshift shows that "space-time" is expanding faster than C. As a result of the change to the way we look at redshift, we dont need the absolute BS dark stuff that we cant find but otherwise the math doesn't work😂. So it must be there😂.
