Introduction
In 2025 a group of theorists claimed the evidence for dark energy was weakening. Their research suggested that the expansion of the universe might no longer be speeding up and offered a different mathematical solution to the apparent “ acceleration” problem first mooted by Reiss and others a few decades ago. However an even more recent paper (Still accelerating: type Ia supernova cosmology is robust to host galaxy age evolution. Wiseman, Reiss et al 2026.) with authors including Reiss, one of the the original proponents of imaginary acceleration, argued this 2025 paper refuting acceleration was erroneous.
Separate to this It’s amazing how critics say that any paper that doesn’t supply enough “maths” does not contain acceptable levels of theoretical ‘proof’ to publish. Yet these same maths obsessed theorists will ignore the fact that endless “acceptable” peer reviewed published papers with pages and pages of maths and formulae will end up being subsequently rejected as erroneous and not acceptable as theoretical proof anyways. Probably 99 % of papers riddled with pages and pages of “acceptable” amounts maths and published in the last century have been subsequent rejected as nonsense theory by the same establishment theorists who claim that endless pages of maths confers acceptabilty regardless of how ridiculous the theoretical concept in the paper turns out to be.
Anyways to get back to this tit for tat acceleration debate it’s worth pointing out that in fact despite endless fiddling of the evidence with maths, the acceleration and expansion problem is theoretically unsound as the acceleration first mooted by those theorists including Reiss in the 90’s is just an attempt to disguise the fact that the SN1a data sourced from the SCP actually shows no expansion at all! As shown by the maths in this chi squared maths page.
And the apparent acceleration imagined by Reiss was actually an artifact of his attempt to try and explain why the non expanding data fit less and less well with data from higher and higher redshifted SN2a data in the BBT expanding model.
Summary
Essentially the SN1a data is not time dilated at all. As this paper and others show to be true. So when subsequently higher redshifted data fails to show time dilation, the expected BBT time dilated lightcurve obviously can not be observed.
Why? Because the universe isn’t expanding.
To account for this lack of time dilation observed in ever higher redshifted SN data, theorists like Reiss and Wiseman pretend the time dilated lightcurve is still there (!) but it’s too faint to be seen because of……Accelerated expansion!!
What bunkum these maths obsessed theorists resort to.
