Are Dark Matter and Dark Energy Actually the Same Thing?

We're getting into some very high-minded science here today. One of the thorniest issues with astrophysics today is dark matter and dark energy. We know they exist, but we have no idea what they are and they seem to make very little sense. Scientists have tried combining the two in models previously, but that involves modifying general relativity, which is a pretty bedrock theory. Modifying it hasn't gone well.

But now, there's a new idea out there, something that combines two things that sound ridiculous but are actually completely compatible with general relativity: negative masses and matter creation. Essentially, this new theory posits that dark matter and dark energy are some sort of exotic fluid that possesses negative mass and also continuously creates new negative mass. Negative mass, if you don't know, is mass, but negative. If you tried to throw a baseball made of negative mass, it would accelerate toward you instead of away. It's weird and completely hypothetical at this point. It was also thrown out as a candidate for dark matter/energy because it would get thinner and less repulsive as the universe expanded, and that's not the result we're seeing. That's where matter creation comes in. If this negative matter constantly creates more negative matter, the density won't thin out and the expansion of the universe works out.

Frankly, this is some EXTREMELY hypothetical stuff, with not a hint of proof behind it. However, it works perfectly within our current laws of physics, and it perfectly predicts the observations we see of dark matter halos. It fits the observations we have, now all we have to do is observe it. No problem, right?

Advanced Astrophysics is Kind of Difficult

A few months back, scientists announced they had found gravitational waves from the very beginning of the universe, lending credible evidence to the theory that the universe expanded at an enormous rate in the first few... what's the small prefix I can think of...picoseconds.  Anyway, in those first few instants, the universe expanded at much faster than the speed of light, or so the theory goes.

As I've mentioned before, science is hard, and this kind of science is really hard.  An extraordinary claim was made here, and you know what they say about those.  Of course, equally important is making sure you didn't make any silly mistakes, like not compensating for dust floating around the Milky Way.  Now, no one is saying the observation is wrong, or that the whole theory is wrong.  Unlike propulsion from nothing, this actually has a chance of working out.  I hope it does.

In an unrelated bit of news, I'm putting the link to my Twitter back on the bottom of each post.  I'm going to try and actually be an active Twitter user...er, even if I don't care for it.  Just don't expect too much.

My Twitter