+- Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum (https://www.scivillage.com)
+-- Forum: Science (https://www.scivillage.com/forum-61.html)
+--- Forum: Astrophysics, Cosmology & Astronomy (https://www.scivillage.com/forum-74.html)
+--- Thread: Research Controversial new theory of gravity rules out need for dark matter (/thread-15562.html)
Controversial new theory of gravity rules out need for dark matter - C C - Mar 11, 2024
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2024/mar/09/controversial-new-theory-of-gravity-rules-out-need-for-dark-matter
EXCERPTS: Dark matter is supposed to account for 85% of the mass in the universe, according to conventional scientific wisdom. But proponents of a radical new theory of gravity, in which space-time is “wobbly”, say their approach could render the elusive substance obsolete.
The proposition, outlined in a new paper, raises the controversial possibility that dark matter, which has never been directly observed, is a mirage that a substantial portion of the physics community has been chasing for several decades. The theory is viewed as quite left-field and is yet to be thoroughly tested, but the latest claims are creating a stir in the world of physics.
Announcing the paper on X, Prof Jonathan Oppenheim, of University College London, said: “Folks, something seems to be happening. We show that our theory of gravity … can explain the expansion of the universe and galactic rotation without dark matter or dark energy.”
[...] The latest paper, published on the Arxiv website and yet to be peer-reviewed, raises the question of whether it even exists, drawing parallels between dark matter and flawed concepts of the past, such as “the ether”, an invisible substance that was thought to permeate all of space.
“In the absence of any direct evidence for dark energy or dark matter it is natural to wonder whether they may be unnecessary scientific constructs like celestial spheres, ether, or the planet Vulcan, all of which were superseded by simpler explanations,” it states. “Gravity has a long history of being a trickster.”
In this case, the simpler explanation being proposed is Oppenheim’s “postquantum theory of classical gravity”. The UCL professor has spent the past five years developing the approach, which aims to unite the two pillars of modern physics: quantum theory and Einstein’s general relativity, which are fundamentally incompatible.
Oppenheim’s theory envisages the fabric of space-time as smooth and continuous (classical), but inherently wobbly. The rate at which time flows would randomly fluctuate, like a burbling stream, space would be haphazardly warped and time would diverge in different patches of the universe. The theory also envisions an intrinsic breakdown in predictability.
The paper, by Oppenheim and Andrea Russo, a PhD candidate at UCL, claims this take on the universe could explain landmark observations of rotating galaxies that led to the “discovery” of dark matter. Stars at the edges of galaxies, where gravity is expected to be weakest based on visible matter, ought to be rotating more slowly than stars at the centre. But in reality, the orbital motion of stars does not drop off. From this, astronomers inferred the presence of a halo of unseen (dark) matter exerting a gravitational pull.
In Oppenheim’s approach the additional energy required to keep the stars locked in orbit is provided by the random fluctuations in spacetime, which in effect add in a background hum of gravitation. This would be negligible in a high gravity interaction, such as the Earth orbiting the Sun. But in low gravity situations, such as the fringes of a galaxy, the phenomenon would dominate – and cumulatively could account for the majority of the energy in the universe.
[...] Not everyone is convinced, including the well-known theorists Prof Carlo Rovelli and Prof Geoff Penington, who have signed a 5,000:1 odds bet with Oppenheim against his theory being proven correct... (MORE - missing details)