Ann wrote:Could a non-constant dark energy "constant" explain the disagreements?
That does indeed appear to be the direction that the evidence is converging toward: a non-constant Hubble factor with universal expansion rates changing over time. It looks like it is time to stop calling it a “constant”, since it ain’t ‘cuz it ain’t one.
Possible but unlikely, I think. Although studies looking across different epochs are yielding various expansion rates, they all show expansion. This variable effect must be caused by something that is variable over universal time, IMHO.Or is it possible that the more we learn about the Universe, the lesser the need for a mysterious dark energy contributor becomes? Or is that, too, wishful thinking?