Is dark energy needed at all?

I received links to two very interesting ScienceDaily articles from Mark McWilliams. The first article (see this) discusses dark energy. The second article (see this) discusses Hubble tension. Both articles relate to the article “Cosmological foundations revisited with Pantheon+.” published by Lane ZG et al in Notices of Royal Astronomical Society (see this).

On the basis of their larger than expected redshift supernovae in distant galaxies appear to be farther than they should be and this inspires the notion of dark energy explaining accelerated expansion. The argument proposes a different explanation based on giving up the Friedmannin cosmology and giving up the notion of dark energy. This argument would also resolve the Hubble tension discussed in the second popular article. The argument goes as follows.

1. Gravitation slows down the clocks. The clocks tick faster inside large voids than at their boundaries where galaxies reside. When light passes through a large void it ages more than if it passed through the same region with an average mass density.
2. As the light from distant supernovae arrives it spends a longer time inside the voids than in passing through galaxies. This would mean that the redshift for supernovae in distant galaxies appears to be larger so that they are apparently farther away. Apparently the expansion accelerates.
3. This is also argued to explain the Hubble tension meaning that the cosmic expansion rate characterized by the Hubble constant, for the objects in the early Universe is smaller than for the nearby objects.

This looks to me like a nice argument and is claimed to also explain the Hubble tension. The model forces us to give up the standard Robertson-Walker cosmology. Qualitatively the proposal conforms with the notion of many-sheeted space-time predicting Russian doll cosmology defined by space-time sheets condensed on larger space-time sheets. For the general view of TGD inspired cosmology see this.

I have written two articles about what I call magnetic bubbles and used the term “mini big bang” (see this and this). Supernova explosion would be one example of a mini big bang. Also planets would be created in mini big bangs.

But what about the galactic dark matter? TGD predicts an analog of dark energy as Kaehler magnetic and volume energy of cosmic strings and of monopole flux tubes generated as they thicken and generate ordinary matter in the process is identifiable as galactic dark matter. No dark matter halo is predicted, only the cosmic strings and the monopole flux tube with much smaller string tension appearing in all scales, even in biology.

It should be noticed that TGD also predicts phases of ordinary matter with non-standard value of Planck constant behaving like dark matter. The transformation of ordinary matter to these kinds of phases explains the gradual disappearance of baryonic (and also leptonic) matter. These phases are absolutely essential in TGD inspired quantum biology and reside at the field bodies of the organisms with a much larger size than the organism itself and their quantum coherence induces the coherence of biomatter.

For a summary of earlier postings see Latest progress in TGD.

For the lists of articles (most of them published in journals founded by Huping Hu) and books about TGD see this.