Rotational universe without dark energy and dark matter?

[petergreen]

I found an interesting paper...

Dark Energy and Dark Matter as Inertial Effects

A globally rotating model of the universe is postulated. It is shown that dark energy and dark matter are cosmic inertial effects resulting from such a cosmic rotation, corresponding to centrifugal and a combination of centrifugal and the Coriolis forces, respectively. The physics and the cosmological and galactic parameters obtained from the model closely match those attributed to dark energy and dark matter in the standard Lambda-CDM model.

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1210.3021.pdf

 

[Bobbywhy]

I have looked over the paper " Dark Energy and Dark Matter as Inertial Effects" by Serkan Zorba. My first impression is "WOW!". I'm not qualified to evaluate the technical details, however. Is it possible this one man has figured out how to explain away Dark Matter and, at the same time, show why our observable universe's expansion appears to be accelerating? This would be revolutionary! Hoping some of our expert members here will contribute their assessments.

 

[petergreen]

The rotating universe would be a natural explanation for dark energy, and explains why rotating galaxies, stars and planets in the universe...

 

[Bandersnatch]

Is it possible this one man has figured out how to explain away Dark Matter and, at the same time, show why our observable universe's expansion appears to be accelerating?

It's possible. But this one is not the man.

A universe rotating around any axis would not be isotropic, so that discredits it right off the bat.

Furthermore, it looks like the article has not been reviewed and published in any reputable scientific journal, so it shouldn't be even discussed on this forum as per the rules.

 

[JesseM]

It's possible. But this one is not the man.

A universe rotating around any axis would not be isotropic, so that discredits it right off the bat.

Technically the Godel metric isn't rotating around any specific axis--no matter where you are you'll see the rest of the universe rotating around you in exactly the same way, so it's spatially homogenous, though you're correct that it's non-isotropic (the universe looks the same at every point, but at every point there is a preferred direction, the axis of rotation at that point). This page has a good basic description:

First of all, don't try to imagine the universe as rotating as a whole. That way of thinking is misleading. I'll come back to rotation as a whole later.

Second, don't think that this implies some center of rotation. According to the Copernican principle, all places in the universe are equivalent. This is a simplifying assumption adopted by most cosmologists; whether it holds in reality is an open question. On smaller scale the universe is badly inhomogeneous, but there is still hope that the large scale structure is homogeneous.

Third, study carefully the following attempt to visualize a rotating universe.

Imagine you are in a laboratory without windows floating around somewhere in the universe. If you and the other objects in the laboratory get pressed against the walls, you would say that the laboratory is rotating, and centrifugal forces are responsible for the effects. Now, the laboratory happens to be equipped with small engines that can be used to control the rotation. Use the engines until you have totally eliminated the centrifugal forces, and thereby the rotation. When done, drill some peepholes in the laboratory (but please make sure you don't lose your air supply). Observe the galaxies. If you find that the galaxies rotate around you, then the universe is said to be rotating.

You have actually only seen that the universe rotates around the point where you are, but if the Copernican principle holds, then it rotates around any point. That's a rotating universe.

The paper in the OP seems to be using something akin to the Godel model (though probably not identical, since the Godel metric describes an eternal rotating universe whereas I think the paper still assumes a Big Bang):

A rotational universe is perfectly viable with General Relativity (GR) as shown first by Gödel.

 

[Mordred]

Interesting paper, however I agree with Bapowell and JesseM, on the isotropy issue.

 

[bahamagreen]

I thought there were already some geometric models where a true universal rotation of four-dimensional hyper-spaces produced a universal hyperbolic non-rotating flat expansion in all possible three-dimensional sub-spaces, or something like that...?

 

[Mordred]

There are other similar models, Poploksii's torsion/spin model where we are inside the EH of a black hole bears similarities. As mentioned the Godel universe is also a rotating universe, however its usually static, there have been attempts such as this one to define a non static with the Godel metrics.


All the above models as well as the one presented in this paper, failed at one key aspect.

none of the mentioned articles have a means to explain the early large scale structure formation. The LCDM model shows that dark matter allows the early large scale structure formation. Without DM or similar mechanism, structures would form much later

 

[Stavros Kiri]

All the above models as well as the one presented in this paper, failed at one key aspect.

none of the mentioned articles have a means to explain the early large scale structure formation. The LCDM model shows that dark matter allows the early large scale structure formation. Without DM or similar mechanism, structures would form much later

This needs to be supported. Is there a reference?

 

[Mordred]

This thread is over two years old lol. Nonetheless here is one such paper that shows how dark matter supports early structure formation. (Though probably not the one I recall from two years ago)

"Our analysis shows that high-density peaks of the den-
sity field are present already at the very early stage of the
evolution of the structure. Recent numerical studies show
that the formation of first generation stars starts just in-
side these high-density peaks. The density is highest in
protohalos of central clusters of future rich superclusters.
Simulations by Gao et al. [17] have shown that metal-
free gas in dark matter haloes of virial temperature about
2000 K and mass M ∼ 106 M⊙ cools efficiently, thus giv-
ing rise to formation of stars. In these high-density re-
gions star formation can start as early as at the redshift
z ≈ 50. These first generation stars have large masses and
evolve rapidly, and at least some of them may explode
and spread products of nuclear synthesis to the surround-
ing “pure” gas.
CO"

http://www.google.ca/url?q=http://a...GngM_w&usg=AFQjCNFu1IkAm7lSbFf2kGbx8v0PNfvhJg

 

[Mordred]

There was a paper on arxiv that compared DM models to other cosmologies in regards to LSS formation. I might be able to dig it up but I haven't read it in over two years.

Here is another similar study.

All observations together clearly rule out the simplest model of a purely baryonic
universe with density parameter Ω ∼ 0.1 and adiabatic initial fluctuations (either
the initial perturbations are too large to satisfy CMB limits, or they are too small
to develop into the observed large scale structure).

http://www.google.ca/url?q=http://a...61WTfA&usg=AFQjCNFZcW_0XnMU5KF6p6cZZgxU6i_Ygg

 

[PeterDonis]

Thread closed for moderation.

Edit: since the thread is old and is attracting speculation we will leave it closed