Alternative Cosmology?

That's 'cos you still don't understand them Anyone who groups the two together so naively will never be taken seriously. Dark energy has always been half expected by those of us in theoretical phsyics and was no real surprise - though a fantastic discovery. How does that equate to a fudge?

Dark matter on the other hand was a surprise, and requires a much more complex answer. However, the vast majority of observations suggest that cold dark matter (WIMPs) forms the primary component, as opposed to just about every other conceivable way of changing physics to accomodate observation.

Critics seem to have this bizarre notion that we guess an answer that seems cool, and then consider the problem solved. Although a tempting way of working, surprisingly real science does not progress this way...

I grouped them in the sense I could see a paradigm shift happening in both areas

And in what sense are you saying 'half-expected' ? In the sense 'it was predicted' or in the sense 'the theory could accomodate it' ?

Of course, you can hypothezise new undetectable particles to accomodate observation,

But that's the whole idea of a paradigm shift. It attacks the problem from a whole new angle (maybe the sun is at the center ?). Likewise, New physics shouldn't be discarded, especially if they come in the form of complementing General Relativity in the same way it itself complemented Newton's Universal gravity.

I still consider this problem to be wide-open in the scientific community.

You may not be aware of it, but the best candidate currently to do what you are suggesting is M-Theory.

Perhaps, which is why I am not completely against the BBT, but I have read some websites with stimulating new ideas as you mentioned. But don't you think after 30 years of failing to detect dark matter that there should be more funding towards alternative explanations like plasma cosmology? I am not saying they should ditch dark matter but open up new possibilities.Plasma cosmology - Wikipedia Wiki on Plasma Cosmology, interesting stuff.

cavediver writes:AAAAAAAARGH!!!

slevesque writes:I think this is a very interesting topic to look after in the up coming years. I could see a paradigm shift coming in cosmology if enough counter-evidence to the current BBT can pile up to become unavoidable.Dark matter and energy are areas where I could see the paradigm shifting early. I'm sure cavediver remembers how I once called them fudge factors, and I still think they are.It's like back when Newton's theory of universal gravity came to explain a lot of incredible things, but failed to explain the precession of the perihelion of the orbit of Mercury. To explain the difference, an ''unknown'' planet named Vulcan was hypothesied to exist.Some looked for that planet for over 50 years. We now know that the answer lied elsewhere, namely new physics with Einstein's relativity.I think it is a distinct possibility that the same is happening with dark matter. We have been searching for it for what, at least 20-30 years now ? With no concensus on what it is, and only very disputed evidence of it's detection. Maybe then the answer to the discrepencies dark matter is hypothesied to explain will in fact be answered from another direction, maybe new physics once again ?I'm sure the old-schoolers in physics such as Cavediver will disagree with me. But then again, that's why we need young and naive New-comers on the scene like me AbE I read a quote on that phenomenon once, something along the liens of ''science progresses with the replacement of the old minds''. (It may be something worded totally differently, but this was the essence of the message)