(This doesn’t contradict the idea that the universe is flat — but it makes the fact that it is flat, while still expanding, a very unusual and unexpected set of circumstances, which required very narrow parameters on the early conditions of our universe. Any real cosmologists to weigh in on matter?So, this just makes me wonder if I understand this right: If the expansion is accelerating, then in the past it must have been slower, so if we look at very distant galaxies, for instance at a distance of 10 billion light-years away, we should see them flying away from each other more slowly than objects that are closer by.
NASA’s Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe studied the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation of the Universe for 7 years, and put the amount of dark energy at 72.8% of the Universe. Dark energy is the name given to the mysterious force that’s causing the rate of expansion of our universe to accelerate over time, rather than to slow down.
The amount of gravity it would take to flatten out the universe.Here’s a question – would that saddle shape be exactly the observed behavior of the accelerating expansion of the universe? Galaxies could be viewed as forming from a dense population of supernovas. We know this because we would be able to detect baryonic clouds by their absorption of radiation passing through them.
But the same arguments have less purchase when the life of frugal simplicity is a choice, one way of living among many. Two of the biggest mysteries of both string theory and cosmology are the presence of unseen dark matter and of repulsive gravity in the form of dark energy.Astronomers have discovered that the gravitational effects observed in our universe don’t match the amount of matter seen. The researchers believe that standard models of the universe …
I refer to the observation that the universe is flat – and if the visible amount of matter and the invisible amount of dark matter aren’t enough to make the universe flat then there must be something else that closes the universe from being “saddle” shaped to being flat. With the Dark Energy Survey, they hope to discover how much of this dark energy makes up the universe: Current estimates put the amount at over 70 percent.DiversyFund allows you to enter a market previously open to only the 1%.Astronomers have recently discovered the most massive neutron star to date, nearly at the theoretical limit for such stars. [+] Universe with the measured amount of radiation, and then either 70% dark energy, 25% dark matter, and 5% normal matter (L), or a Universe with 100% normal matter and no dark … Read the original article.
So the mystery continues.The thing that is needed to decide between dark energy possibilities - a property of space, a new dynamic fluid, or a new theory of gravity - is more data, better data.By fitting a theoretical model of the composition of the universe to the combined set of cosmological observations, scientists have come up with the composition that we described above, ~68% dark energy, ~27% dark matter, ~5% normal matter. "Each 'most massive' neutron star we find," continued Ransom, "brings us closer to identifying that tipping point and helping us to understand the physics of matter at these mind-boggling densities.Is that where the 68% comes from?
To account for these differences, it appears that the universe contains a mysterious form of matter that we can’t observe, called In the 1930s, Swiss astronomer Fritz Zwicky first observed that some galaxies were spinning so fast that the stars in them should fly away from each other. When so many people live below the poverty line, there is something unseemly about in-your-face displays of opulence and luxury. If dark matter were presumed to have been made proportionately to the occurrence of supernovas, then dark matter distributions were determined for the most part early in the history of the universe.
For years, quantum field theory predicted a huge cosmological constant, but most physicists assumed that some property (such as supersymmetry, which does reduce the cosmological constant value) canceled it out to zero. Some of this might reflect a kind of nostalgia for the pre-industrial or pre-consumerist world, and also sympathy for the moral argument that says that living in a simple manner makes you a better person, by building desirable traits such as frugality, resilience and independence – or a happier person, by promoting peace of mind and good health, and keeping you close to nature.
These are plausible arguments. There are candidate theories, but none are compelling.
But the question was, how fast was it slowing down? However wise the sages, it would not have occurred to Socrates or Epicurus to argue for the simple life in terms of environmentalism.