How Can We Confirm That Dark Energy Isn’t Merely a Remnant of the Big Bang?

For a long time, it has been assumed that this expansion had to slow down, hampered by the gravitation of all the material contained in the universe. And yet, in the late 1990s, two independent teams observing IA supernovae – very bright explosions of stars, serving as “standard candles” – made a stunning discovery: distant supernovae were lower than expected. It was only possible if these objects were more distant than we would have believed. Conclusion: the expansion of the universe accelerates.

The momentum of the Big Bang is not enough

A natural objection then arises: why appeal to a mysterious “black energy”? Couldn't the universe just be expanding because of the initial momentum given by the Big Bang?

This idea seems intuitive. After all, if an explosion projects debris, they continue to move away as long as no force brakes them. Couldn't he be the same for the universe?

This is a legitimate question, but the equations of general relativity, and especially the observations, clearly respond to it: no, this initial momentum is not enough to explain what we see today.

In cosmology, the expansion of the universe is described by an equation resulting from general relativity: the Friedmann equation. This equation connects the rate of expansion of the universe (the famous scale factor) to its content: matter (ordinary and black), radiation, and any other form of energy.

However, in a universe filled only with material and radiation, gravity plays a brake role. Even if the space continues to extend after the Big Bang, this expansion should slow down over time, because gravity attracts matter and tends to bend and slow down expansion.

But that's not what observations show. Since the 1990s, distant supernovae measures have revealed a surprising fact: the expansion of the universe has accelerated. And this has been confirmed since by other types of data, such as the fluctuations of the cosmological diffuse background and the large -scale structure of the universe.

This acceleration cannot come from a simple “remaining momentum”: the severity of the material should have slowed it down gradually, not transform it into acceleration. It therefore requires an additional source of energy, different from matter and radiation, which has the special property of producing negative pressure.

In general relativity, this negative pressure acts as a repulsive gravitational force: instead of slowing down the expansion, it strengthens it. This property is exactly what is attributed to black energy: a form of uniform energy, not localized, which pushes the space to stretch more and more quickly.

© Selim Dönmez/Istock

Independent and convergent evidence

The force of the black energy hypothesis lies in the fact that it is not based on a single observation. On the contrary, three major data classes all lead to the same conclusion:

1. IA supernovae, whose brightness and distance measurements have revealed the acceleration of expansion.

2. The cosmological diffuse background (CMB), this fossil light dating from 380,000 years after the Big Bang. Times temperature fluctuations of the CMB, measured with extreme precision by satellites Wmap And Planckmake it possible to reconstruct the total energy density of the universe, of which around 70 % seems to correspond to a form of non -gravitational energy: black energy.

3. The large-scale structure of the universe, in particular the baryonic acoustic oscillations, that is to say the imprints left in the distribution of galaxies by the pressure waves of the young universe. These reasons reveal how the universe dilated over time, and they agree with an accelerated expansion scenario.

Each of these data sets, taken separately, points to the existence of black energy. Taken together, they make it practically inevitable.

What if it was not black energy?

Scientists have not accepted the idea of ​​black energy out of facility. On the contrary, they considered many alternative explanations to the acceleration of expansion, seeking to test each hypothesis with rigor. Among these tracks, several were seriously examined:

• The evolution of supernovae: perhaps these stars did not emit the same amount of light in the past, which would distort distance measurements. But by comparing close and distant supernovae to different eras in cosmic history, and in various types of galaxies, no significant variation has been detected. Their behavior seems remarkably stable.

• Interstellar dust: We have also considered that dust clouds could alleviate the light of distant supernovae, making them look lower – and therefore more distant – than they are in reality. But this type of absorption leaves a characteristic signature in the light spectrum, which has not been observed in the data.

• Exotic phenomena, such as photon-axion oscillations: in certain theoretical models, light could partially transform into invisible particles on the way, reducing its apparent light. These ideas remain intriguing, but they require the introduction of unconfirmed hypothetical particles, and above all, they do not explain all other observations coherently.

By crossing the data from several sources – the supernovae, the cosmological diffuse background, the distribution of galaxies – the researchers systematically confronted these hypotheses with the facts. And each time, observations lean in favor of a simple and robust scenario: the existence of an unknown form of energy, distributed uniformly in space, which acts today as a cosmic repellent force.

An enigma that persists

That said, accepting the existence of black energy does not mean that we know what it is. This is all the subtlety: we know its effects, but not yet its nature. Is it a cosmological constant, like the one that Einstein had introduced to obtain a static universe? Is it a dynamic field, as in quintessence models? Is this a sign that our understanding of severity is incomplete on a very large scale?

For the moment, black energy remains one of the greatest mysteries of modern cosmology. But it is not an empty mystery: it is a fertile track, nourished by decades of rigorous observations and cross analyzes.