• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,075 questions , 2,226 unanswered
5,347 answers , 22,749 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
818 active unimported users
More ...

  Is it possible that recent discoveries showing dark energies rate increases can explain the current big bang models problems(matter-antimatter imbalance, the existence of dark matter)?

+ 0 like - 0 dislike

This theory aims to explain dark energies recently discovered rate increase, the matter/anti-matter imbalance, the nature of dark matter, the cause of inflation, and their relationships.

If you are willing to give this theory a quick glance to see if it would be worth your time I would really appreciate it. It's not very long or complicated.

Recent discoveries by many professional agencies have observed that dark energies rate is not only increasing like we thought, the rate of increase is increasing too. (quintessence).

This could be because of gravitational time dilation. The rate more space is generated increases because there is less gravity In the area in all 3 dimensions as mass moves further away. And as this happens the amount of space available to do more generating is created, so more speed to create and more area of creation. This seems to be confirmed by recent studies and is a discrepancy the current model fails to account for. But an extreme professional would have to analyze the math behind this theory to see if it holds up.


This means in space that lacks any mass dark energy will peak where time and space are generated at an extremely high rate. At t=0 all of space would have this property.  This would generate infinitesimal areas of space(infinitesimal cubes, because space is flat) with heights and widths slightly smaller than the space between virtual particles have with their partner when they are generated by a fluctuating string. This is because these excited cubes would generate virtual particles that are split randomly on opposite halves of the cubes almost immediately around them as it generated slightly more space than they needed for them to occupy. 

This random distribution would leave an asymmetry in the amount of matter/anti-matter produced on opposite randomly aligned halves of the infinitesimal cubes. The dominantly generated particle or anti-particle on each half during a long enough successive flow would annihilate its opposite on that half leaving pockets of cmbr in space, pockets of remaining particles, and pockets of empty fresh space that was generated without a particle in it. This fresh space would also have roughly the same excited state as the original cube and generate on its own but the generation in an already dominated side would not change the amount of matter/anti-matter in the already dominated area, just it's location. This would account for the matter/anti-matter asymmetry problem.

Almost all the mass/space-time generated by each original peak would never reach what their neighboring original points generated but their cmbr would. The edges of the original cubes generations would align with their neighbors where a small amount of the close enough matter interacted.

Virtual particles become actual particles the longer they are separated by an external force.

The initially generated space would be spreading very quickly but would slow down as the mass was generated this is concurrent with what we know about the big bang. Lots of generated mass/energy, lots of expansion. That slows rapidly, where dark energy slowly takes over again as its accelerations compound relative to the space/time that's still being generated relative to the rate that the mass around the initial cube is being diminishingly generated.

This might also explain what dark matter really is, because the diminishing sphere of gravity around galaxies would exponentially diminish the rate of dark energy and in every point of matter that occupied space that rate would be zero. A professional would have to check the math behind this.

I'm not sure the correlation of size of virtual particle to it's likely hood of generation but larger particles that were generated in this fashion with no anti pair near them would have decayed long before now.

If you've read this far I really appreciate it. 

asked Dec 21, 2019 in Theoretical Physics by Jason Doege [ revision history ]
edited Dec 22, 2019

are you saying the whole premise of my argument was what youre saying scientists agree on. and you want me to call it chat. or do you think im saying that the expansion is decelerating or something?
But Actually scientists have very direct measurements, and no they do not think dark energies rate is accelerating(until possibly considering it very recently), they know dark energy is making the universe spread out at an accelerating rate, but they don't think the accelerating rate in which it spreads out is istelf accelerating, you are confusing the acceleration of the spread with the acceleration of the force itself. the current accepted model is that dark energy is constant, new data seems to disconfirm that 

I don't think anyone will comment on it on this forum anyway. This doesn't seem like the thing to discuss in any forum I find. 

Im not making some fringe theory based on new data, im going for the second theory in line behind the cosmological constant, the other less accepted option known as quintessence. I think from your comment you seem to think im saying that dark energy is decelerating or something like that. im not exactly sure what youre saying. 

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
Please complete the anti-spam verification

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights