HoverboardViking t1_j9n8vfn wrote on February 23, 2023 at 4:29 AM

Not really. Dark Matter and dark energy are hypothetical forms of matter and energy that we assume must exist to make the universe function the way it is.

IMO (not an educated explanation) either we lack the ability and understanding to explain where these forms of matter and energy come from or where they are; or there is some underlying mechanics with gravity and matter that we just don't understand that causes dark energy and matter.

Since these are hypothetical terms that "should exist", even saying god did it (sorry Richard Dawkins) doesn't actually explain anything or make sense. Like what exactly did god do? My point is, even if we assume an omnipotent being did it all, it doesn't explain anything other than "miracles". Nothing falls into place assuming god did it. What we need to do is figure out exactly where these hypotheticals are, how they exist and hopefully use that knowledge to create a deeper unified field theory.

For thousands and thousands of years the mysteries of the universe could only be explained with god. Now, as we unravel the universe, people have the power to answer questions that once seemed divine. That's the power of humanity.

hatersaurusrex t1_j9nbp42 wrote on February 23, 2023 at 4:55 AM

>Dark Matter and dark energy are hypothetical forms of matter and energy that we assume must exist to make the universe function the way it is.

Similar to the old concept of 'phlogiston'

When early scientists created a reaction that gave off invisible CO2 (like the baking soda and vinegar volcano of our childhoods) they couldn't figure out why the resultant material weighed less than the inputs. So they formulated a working theory that there was an invisible substance called phlogiston that had negative mass, and it allowed them to continue quantitative experiments while using that as a placeholder.

I look at the concepts you outlined the same way. We don't know what they are, we can only describe some of their properties. When a new breakthrough comes along that properly accounts for them the way the discovery of CO2 accounted for mass loss in chemical reactions, the theory will rectify and we'll move forward.

But skeptics then, as now, like to point out these failures as a failure of science - but the truth is these are just placeholders for science to stick a working model until they can understand what's in the black box.