What is the nature of dark energy?
Dark energy is the driving force on particles containing mass pushing them outwards. The reason why it is not well-understood is because physicists only recognize energy that is proportional to c^1 (light) and energy proportional to c^2 (mass). Most of the energy in the universe remains in its original form… energy that is proportional to c^0 (spacetime). Spacetime is an energy medium in which E1 and E2 energy remains totally independent of. However E1 and E2 energy must co-exist with the E0 energy of spacetime and the interactions of these independent energies result in the particles associated energy fields.Dark energy exists as spacetime itself. A gradient in E0 energy is what creates the force on particles containing mass. How dark energy came to exist can never be answered but what it represents is the energy required to place the multitude of spacetime’s building block entity closer together in their initial primordial alignment.E0 energy cannot be experimentally determined for the same reason why the LHC can’t find “new” math. "Why Can't the LHC Find New Math?"
What is true nature of Dark Matter?
Dark Matter doesn't radiate that much as ordinary matter.Also, Dark matter possess net charge ‘0’.Both characteristics makes Dark Matter different from the ordinary matter.And may be many many other properties of this type of matter are still beyond the current understanding of Physics.
Could dark matter and dark energy shed light on the nature of time?
4 dimensional time is governing all types of energy and matter such that nothing can affect time. Time is such a mighty concept that changes singularities of electromagnetic field into electrical power in the context of electromagnetic theory in noninertial frame based on metric coefficients.search on google
What is the nature of dark energy (if it really exists)? Why is it called dark?
The precise nature is, to be honest, unknown. Dark energy is an intrinsic tendency of space(time) to expand, to get a larger volume as time elapses.It is postulated to be an intrinsic energy of spacetime itself which causes it to have a natural tendency to expand, to create more spacetime out of itself, called also the “vacuum energy”. Similar as a balloon having some intrinsic air pump always giving it the tendency to grow up and become larger.This energy however is small, and when space contains matter-energy, which causes gravity and gravitational attraction, the gravity caused by the density of matter-energy can rather easily overcome that expansion tendency, and if the gravitational attraction is strong enough it can cause the opposite contracting spacetime. But the observations strongly suggest that by now, when the universe has already expanded a lot and so the matter-energy density has become rather low, the dark energy tendency to expand space has become stronger than the gravitational attraction and space as a whole is still not only expanding but it does so at an accelerating rate.It is called “dark” because we do not know very well what the precise nature of this energy is, but it seems clear that it is a sort of energy present in spacetime itself.
"could dark energy reverse its polarity"?
To clarify: This question steams from a statement made by a scientist on the show The Universe. Her statement “ Dark Energy primarily believed to be the cause of the expansion of the universe” and that “one day it might reverse this push and the universe would collapse upon itself”. I just wanted to see if others believed the same thing and couldn’t find anything on this theory on the web. Now Satan Claws the, as you put it, “expensive word” polarity was used not to impress any yahoo readers such as yourself. It was used for lack of a better word, being that dark energy/mater has yet to be proven and is only a theory, there for we have no idea what its properties are. But I do thank you for your response, albeit rude.
Dark matter?
In astrophysics, dark matter is matter that does not emit or reflect enough electromagnetic radiation (such as light, X-rays and so on) to be detected directly, but whose presence may be inferred from its gravitational effects on visible matter. Among the observed phenomena consistent with the existence of dark matter are the rotational speeds of galaxies and orbital velocities of galaxies in clusters, gravitational lensing of background objects by galaxy clusters such as the Bullet cluster, and the temperature distribution of hot gas in galaxies and clusters of galaxies. Dark matter also plays a central role in structure formation and Big Bang nucleosynthesis, and has measurable effects on the anisotropy of the cosmic microwave background. All these lines of evidence suggest that galaxies, clusters of galaxies, and the universe as a whole contain far more matter than is directly observable, indicating that the remainder is dark. The composition of dark matter is unknown, but may include new elementary particles such as WIMPs and axions, ordinary and heavy neutrinos, dwarf stars and planets collectively called MACHOs, and clouds of nonluminous gas. Current evidence favors models in which the primary component of dark matter is new elementary particles, collectively called nonbaryonic dark matter. The dark matter component has vastly more mass than the "visible" component of the universe. At present, the density of ordinary baryons and radiation in the universe is estimated to be equivalent to about one hydrogen atom per cubic metre of space. Only about 4% of the total energy density in the universe (as inferred from gravitational effects) can be seen directly. About 22% is thought to be composed of dark matter. The remaining 74% is thought to consist of dark energy, an even stranger component, distributed diffusely in space. Some hard-to-detect baryonic matter (see baryonic dark matter) makes a contribution to dark matter, but constitutes only a small portion. Determining the nature of this missing mass is one of the most important problems in modern cosmology and particle physics. It has been noted that dark matter and dark energy serve mainly as expressions of our ignorance, much as the marking of early maps with terra incognita.
Why is the science community more interested in the nature of dark matter than that of the dark energy?
I’m not so sure if it’s the scientific community that is more interested in Dark Matter, but the general scientifically-inclined public (which is often mistaken for scientists). While it is unfair to say that either dark matter or energy is more important (dark matter assembles the larger structures of our universe, dark energy keeps the universe expanding), it is important to note that Dark Matter sounds a hell of a lot more interesting (and deceptively simple). Depending on the field of science, you might be more interested in Dark Energy. For example, Cosmologists would most likely be slightly more interested in Dark Energy, because it is vastly important in determining the early and late stages or our universe. However, to someone studying Galaxy Formation/Evolution, Dark Matter would be more important.While the two subjects have similar names, we cannot even be sure if the two are related. Basically, we don’t know much about either of them, so we’ve grouped them together. In reality, dark matter is most likely subatomic particles that we have yet to understand, while dark energy is… well to be honest I’m not too knowledgeable about dark energy.Basically, it’s unreasonable to assume that the entire scientific community is more interested in one of the other.