'Bumblebee gravity' could explain why the universe is expanding so quickly

[Huxter]

Sounds more correct than dark energy to me...

'Bumblebee gravity' could explain why the universe is expanding so quickly | Space

"Some models of gravity argue that the universe isn't exactly symmetrical after all. These models predict that there are extra ingredients in the universe that force it to not exactly obey Lorentz symmetry all the time "

"One of the most powerful uses of bumblebee gravity models is to potentially explain dark energy —the phenomenon responsible for the observed accelerated expansion of the universe. It turns out that the degree to which our universe violates Lorentz symmetry can be tied to an effect that generates accelerated expansion. "

 

[Funkworks]

I just read the article. It’s interesting that there‘s a way forward to back the theory: better resolution black hole images.

Finding a theory that can be verified by experiments or observations is a success in itself. (as opposed to something like string theory which is mathematically very cool but can’t be verified in practice at least not yet).

 

[Jeff Lassahn]

I'm not sure why, in the absence of experimental evidence, "Spacetime has an effective negative energy density because there's a quantum field we've never seen before that has a complicated self-interaction potential that produces a nonzero vacuum expectation value" is a better choice than "Spacetime has a negative energy density just because it does"

Can't hurt to play with it and see what happens, though.

 

[aerostadt]

Well, remains to be seen whether this Bumble Gravity theory is a viable alternative. Going back to string theory, it is my understanding that this idea has fallen into disuse, because string theory cannot be verified.

 

[Funkworks]

I'm not sure why, in the absence of experimental evidence, "Spacetime has an effective negative energy density because there's a quantum field we've never seen before that has a complicated self-interaction potential that produces a nonzero vacuum expectation value" is a better choice than "Spacetime has a negative energy density just because it does"

i wouldn’t know where those statements comes from, but physics is about finding mathematical relationships between measurable quantities. Since the relationships can be very elaborate, translating these equations into a spoken language is always a challenge and necessarily introduces ambiguities.

Going back to string theory, it is my understanding that this idea has fallen into disuse, because string theory cannot be verified.

Not sure about actual “disuse”, but having no prospect of experimental verification makes it less appealing. If any research area is going to be active, it’s because people see a way forward.

 

[aerostadt]

If you "google" this subject and related stuff, you can find additional material out there. I wanted to get a handle on Lorentz symmetry and breaking and found this link. My understanding from this article is that Lorentz symmetry breaking is the violation under some circumstances that the Lorentz Invariant (the speed of light is the same in all inertial reference frames) is violated. One of the topics that this article talks about is the violation at extremely small scales. The subject has been around for awhile and to date the tests have not revealed a violation, but tests are continuing.

https://physicsworld.com/a/breaking-lorentz-symmetry/