In our ongoing mission to explore, understand, synthesize, and share the human experience in as many different ways as possible via the UpRights News Art Project (UNAP), we have further refined what we believe is our testable hypothesis that the dark energy placeholder calculation is erroneously usurping the more likely force for universal expansion (based on about a 100 years of measuring the acceleration of matter in space), specifically what we have coined as Concave Universal Gravity or CUG hypothesis, illustrated above (our "back of the napkin" elucidating, and refined in the two diagrams below).
The image above is probably the best image we have created thus far for the CUG hypothesis, which we believe leading edge dark energy collaborative research does both prove and prove is testable. The first link is a layman's summary, and the second link is the actual research of different objects in space, which are accelerating towards the boundaries of the observable universe in a non-uniform manner, which we hypothesize is due to the sum of the weak gravitational forces from much more mass particles outside of the observable universe exceeding the weak gravitational forces from the much more dilute mass particles inside the observable universe, in a manner that resembles a meteor or satellite falling to Earth, except we hypothesis that all of the mass particles from the Big Bang within the observable universe are falling in a three dimensional manner towards much greater mass found outside of the observable universe.
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/map-universe-dark-energy-cosmology-desi
https://data.desi.lbl.gov/doc/papers/
CUG is seemingly (we have reached out to astrophysicists and asked them to critic this hypothesis as to why it might fail in our quest to better understand the human experience, where we come from, and where we will go next) a more practical and simpler explanation than dark energy (for the acceleration of objects away from one another in the observable universe or Big Bang wake) -- and where dark energy is used as a placeholder concept or calculation as responsible for the acceleration of the universe, but which seems to violate the laws of thermodynamics, specifically that energy can't be created or destroyed only changed or diffused from a higher state of energy to a lower one -- and where the center of the Big Bang about 17 million light years away from us diffused, like a nuclear bomb, the most amount of energy in the fastest manner during and immediately after the Big Bang, followed by a cooling period or dissipation of energy, leaving residual radiation, heat, energy, and/or light, known as redshift across the universe -- and so the convenient but seemingly misunderstood dark energy placeholder calculation and explanation seems to violate the laws of thermodynamics, because exponential expansion of the entire universe away from the center of the origins of the Big Bang requires exponential energy, but where there is no exponential source of energy from the center of the Big Bang away towards the edges of the observable universe (as far as we can see or detect with our best space telescope technologies), nor can it magically appear nor be created -- and so dark energy is simply used as the currently unknown explanation and calculation variable for why objects in space are accelerating away from one another.
This next illustration simplifies the hypothesis of Concave Universal Gravity (CUG) with circles representing the hypothesized concentration of mass particles inside, outside, and between observable universe, and where each line represents a universal gravitation equation with a different force for gravity between each mass particle, and where we haven't included every possible line between every particle, in part because it would further blot out the three zones of CUG, (1) the sum of the force of gravity between mass particles within the observable universe (depicted by 8 mass particles with many gravitational forces on one another within the observable universe), (2) the sum of the force of gravity between the hypothesized much greater number of mass particles outside of the observable universe, and (3) the sum of the force of gravity between them.
Returning to the diagram at the top of the page, and refining the same, the reason we coined the terms concave gravity (when fewer mass particles are in a three dimensional manner attracted to many more mass particles around them, pulling the mass of the observable universe apart) is to differentiate between the identical process most people are familiar with, traditional or convex gravity (when fewer mass particles are in a three dimensional manner attracted to and surrounding many more mass particles, like space debris around the Earth attracted to the Earth).
Again, we have proposed to more than one team of astrophysicists this theory, in hopes of them critiquing the same and letting us know why this model wouldn't work, so that we can better understand, explore, and share this angle of the human experience with our audience.
The current weak "evidence" of dark energy doesn't seem to help to do anything other than support our hypothesis, as follows.
“The evidence for dark energy is indirect but comes from three independent sources:
- Distance measurements and their relation to redshift, which suggest the universe has expanded more in the latter half of its life.[25]
- The theoretical need for a type of additional energy that is not matter or dark matter to form the observationally flat universe (absence of any detectable global curvature).
- Measures of large-scale wave patterns of mass density in the universe.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_energy
However, “Distance measurements and their relation to redshift, which suggest the universe has expanded more in the latter half of its life.[25]” can alternatively be evidence for concave gravity as Big Bang mass particles from the explosion projectile power of the Big Bang accelerated mass particles towards the edge of the observable universe, beyond which much greater mass particles would explain the acceleration as the distance between the mass particles inside and outside the observable universe get closer and closer.
Consideration must be given to the terminal velocity of all of the same, in the same manner as a meteor is attracted to the Earth but limited to a terminal velocity, as another way to test and/or refute this hypothesis, or not, if the terminal velocity doesn’t begin until outside of the observable universe, accelerating to the edge of the same in an untestable manner.
Similarly, “The theoretical need for a type of additional energy that is not matter or dark matter to form the observationally flat universe (absence of any detectable global curvature)“, could be achieved if the observable universe was located between two massive bodies of mass outside of the observable universe with the same geometric plane, in a similar manner to how the moon pulls on the tide and stretches the oceans out onto a beach in the tangential horizontal, versus significantly perpendicular to tangential horizontal, except using this analogy, there would be at least two moons pulling on each different side of the Earth’s oceans resulting in greater eccentricity of the Earth’s spheres at the equator located in the same plane. The same seems more probable than exponential energy being created in a manner at the center of the Big Bang and out, violating the laws of thermodynamics.
Similarly, “Measures of large-scale wave patterns of mass density in the universe””, could also be explained by concave gravity, in the same manner that a receding wave will leave wave patterns on a beach, clustering sand grains into rippled wave patterns.
Accordingly, all of the evidence for dark energy seems to also be evidence for gravity instead of dark energy explaining universal expansion.
The following is the leading edge research on universal expansion attributed to placeholder name dark energy, following huge numbers of celestial bodies and their movement away from one another many different ways, which per the hypothesis above is the evidence of universal gravity (inside and outside of the observable universe) as the replacement for the placeholder for dark energy.
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/map-universe-dark-energy-cosmology-desi
https://data.desi.lbl.gov/doc/papers/
As predicted by Mandelbrot number sets and chaos theory for multivariate systems, and as illustrate below, the research elucidates at the largest scales fractal-like structures (filaments of superclusters), representing the 5% visible or light mass (a double meaning as one the mass is visible, and/or two the mass is not dense enough to create a gravitational field where light can’t escape), which is similar to the film of soap on a bubble, and the space between that light mass and/or dark or heavy matter, representing the 25% of dark matter, and where 70% of placeholder dark energy is imposed on all of the same, seemingly in violation of the laws of thermodynamics, because energy needs to be constantly created or sourced in order to drive exponential universal expansion from the center of the Big Bang, and yet the Big Bang’s energy has been dissipating for over 13 billion years, and like a nuclear explosion releases the greatest amount of energy in the smallest amount of time, followed by dissipation of the remaining energy, or background (cosmic) radiation.
Dark Energy or Inflation = Concave Gravity = F(de) = ∑ [m(out) x m(in) x G]
[r2(out-in)]
F(de) = ∑ F(out) = ∑ m(a) x m(b) x G > ∑ F(in) = ∑ m(c) x m(d) x G
r2 r2
∑ F(out) = Sum of the forces of gravity between all mass particles [m(a) and m(b)] outside the observable universe – whose existence is proven by the acceleration of big bang matter towards some much greater surrounding mass, and so this is testable (the rate at which different known celestial objects within the universe accelerate towards the edge of the observable universe, should be different, because their mass and distance from the edge of the observable universe can be different, just like the force of gravity between the mass particles in a meteor and the mass particles on Earth is not the same at the top of Mt. Everest when compared to Death Valley, CA, because of the different distances between all of the mass particles of the meteor and the varying surface distances of the Earth relative to the meteor).
∑ F(in) = Sum of the force of gravity between all mass particles [m(c) and m(d)] inside the observable universe
F(tween) = Dark Energy or Inflation = The force of gravity between all mass particles outside the observable universe and all mass particles inside the observable universe.
∑ F(tween) = Sum of the force of gravity between all mass particles inside and outside of the observable universe.
∑ F(out) > ∑ F(tween) > ∑ F(in)
∑ [m(out) x m(in) x G)]/r2(out-in)] = Dark energy or inflation equals the sum of the forces of gravity between all mass particles inside and outside of the observable universe from the center of the “big bang” towards an infinite sphere, whose radius approaching an infinite sphere may be limited and determined once the rate of inflation reaches zero or the matter from the “big bang” reaches terminal velocity towards the provably much larger mass located outside of the observable universe, to which the matter from the big bang is accelerating towards.
CUG Hypothesis (Concave Universal Gravity = Dark Energy) Assumptions:
- Dark energy doesn’t exist, because it would violate the laws of thermodynamics, because after the Big Bang dissipated energy from a higher to a lower energy from the center of the Big Bang, it is impossible for energy to be created, required in the dark energy placeholder for concave energy of mass particles outside of the observable universe, so great in number as to cause the mass particles from the Big Bang to accelerate due to gravity towards the much greater concentration of mass particles outside of the observable universe, instead of that acceleration being cause by impossible dark energy, an impossible exponentially increasing source of energy from the center of the Big Bang 13.787 billion years later. More bluntly, that massive source of energy has dissipated and cooled, and so the question our hypothesis solves better than dark energy is that our model doesn't require a seemingly impossible violation of the laws of thermodynamics by inventing, expecting, and/or predicting an unlikely exponential energy source strong enough to accelerate the entire universe from the center of the Big Bang outwards 13.787 billion years after the greatest quantity of energy was dissipated from that point, a seemingly impossible exponential source of energy otherwise seemingly required by the dark energy placeholder explanation.
- Even though the force of gravity is weak, the sum of weak forces from more mass particles can be strong enough to exert a pull effect on the sum of lesser weak forces from less mass particles, as illustrated by a meteor crashing to Earth in a convex (traditional) gravity distribution of mass particles, but in a concave gravity distribution of mass particles, the mass particles of the Big Bang would accelerate towards the greater mass particles outside of the observable universe, if greater mass particles outside of the observable universes existed, as the distance between the Big Bang mass particles and the much greater mass particles outside of the observable universe decreases.