Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dark energy from supermassive black holes? Physicists spar over radical idea

science.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 116 posts

Re: Dark energy from supermassive black holes? Physicists spar over radical idea

#51

Post by icare_1er »

badcppdev wrote: post #14
icare_1er wrote: post #8

[flagged]

Nonsense. Inside the global warming field there are loads of different models and predictions and intense debate about different ideas. There are some outlier models that are ignored by other scientists because of their bad faith assumptions and methodology but that's true of many fields of science like quantum physics and cosmology.

Wrong. Scientists trying to get funding for projects exploring things like the impact of sun radiations on earth climate, have a very hard time because of the political rules that are enforced in terms of what's allowed to be looked at and what's not.

Re: Dark energy from supermassive black holes? Physicists spar over radical idea

#52

Post by cld8483 »

kelseyfrog wrote: post #43
MichaelZuo wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give examples of these parameters that must be set manually?

These are the free parameters of the Standard Model https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model#Construction_...

You'd be hard pressed to derive a model for the coarse structure of the universe from the Standard Model, considering the Standard Model can't describe gravity. Maybe this is part of the problem..

Re: Dark energy from supermassive black holes? Physicists spar over radical idea

#54

Post by yencabulator »

syllablehq wrote: post #38
Mizza wrote: post #13

I'm a layman, but I like this idea intuitively. It's not mentioned in the article, but this theory also necessitates that black holes aren't singularities, which gets rid of what always seemed to me like the biggest hack in physics.

I've always wondered if the "horizon" metaphor in event horizon was more apt than we expected - just like when you approach the earth's horizon, you don't get flattened or fall off, you just reveal more geography - I've always wondered if it were possible that as you approach an event horizon you don't get "squashed into spaghetti" but just reveal more space which is just as "normal" as the space before you approache…

> you just reveal more geography

Technically true, according to current theories. The slope of spacetime gets steeper and steeper and you traverse through that spacetime as you go.

(Due to the gravity, you won't be whole to experience it.)

https://youtu.be/8-xODPI1OFg?t=253

Re: Dark energy from supermassive black holes? Physicists spar over radical idea

#55

Post by adgjlsfhk1 »

icare_1er wrote: post #51
badcppdev wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nonsense. Inside the global warming field there are loads of different models and predictions and intense debate about different ideas. There are some outlier models that are ignored by other scientists because of their bad faith assumptions and methodology but that's true of many fields of science like quantum physics and cosmology.

Wrong. Scientists trying to get funding for projects exploring things like the impact of sun radiations on earth climate, have a very hard time because of the political rules that are enforced in terms of what's allowed to be looked at and what's not.

Scientists also have a hard time trying to get funding for proving that things don't fall down when you drop them.

Re: Dark energy from supermassive black holes? Physicists spar over radical idea

#57

Post by sgregnt »

lake_vincent wrote: post #10

Correct me if I'm wrong (please), but don't we still lack any kind of fundamental definition of what dark energy/matter is other than..."the cause of the difference between what is calculated, and what is observed"? To the point that we aren't even really sure that there is such a "thing" as dark matter (in that it exists in any conventional sense)? From Wikipedia: "Dark matter is a hypothetical form of matter though…

Dark matter and dark energy are different notions. The article is about the later.

Re: Dark energy from supermassive black holes? Physicists spar over radical idea

#59

Post by gtech1 »

axilmar wrote: post #53

Could it be that there is no gravity, and what we perceive as gravity is the pressure from the expanding universe?

So how would that explain the fact that spacetime is curved in a very predictable manner in a clear relation to the mass of an object in spacetime ?

Re: Dark energy from supermassive black holes? Physicists spar over radical idea

#60

Post by gtech1 »

Maursault wrote: post #58
axilmar wrote: post #53

Could it be that there is no gravity, and what we perceive as gravity is the pressure from the expanding universe?

> Could it be that there is no gravity It makes so much more sense that there's no Dark Matter.

around the turn of the century many ideas were floating around in order to explain unexplainable phenomena. It took Einstein and Quantum physics to radically change the worldview and make sense, while make-shift ideas were discarded.

I suspect the same will happen with Dark Matter

Post reply on HN