This Is How Dark Energy’s Main Competitor Failed
“The reason is simple: with the addition of enough extra free parameters, caveats, behaviors, or modifications to your theory, you can literally salvage any idea. As long as you’re willing to tweak what you’ve come up with sufficiently, you can never rule anything out. If you wanted to concoct a dusty explanation that mimicked the effects of dark energy, you could do it. At some point, though, you lose all physical motivation, and you’re coming up with multi-parameter explanations to explain an observation that a single free parameter — dark energy — gave you before you started tinkering with your dust theory.”
When we look out at the ultra-distant Universe, Type Ia supernovae are our most distant standard candle to work with. From billions or even tens of billions of light years away, we think we know the intrinsic brightnesses of these objects. So measure the apparent brightness, and you know how far away they are, right?
Well, not so fast. What if there’s dust or some other light-blocking phenomenon intervening? Could that mean that these objects are closer than we think, and therefore there’s no need for dark energy? It’s a great idea, and one that we investigated for many years, until the data convincingly showed that no, dust cannot work.