Extract
[...] Thus, science seems not to be able to hold an absolute truth, and must be content with relative and falsifiable truths, lest it no longer be considered as scientific facts (to recall, a non-falsifiable theory (such as certain metaphysical speculations) cannot be scientific according to Popper). Beyond the theory of constant dark energy, it is all the theoretical conclusions we had drawn about the universe that are being questioned, the ?CDM model being the current foundation of cosmology. This shows us to what extent science remains alive, revisable, and open. However, this uncertain character of science described by Popper, the fact that it advances by successive approximations, questions our relationship with certainty. How can we find reliability in a provisional science? [...]
[...] Our challenge is therefore to learn to live with uncertain but rigorous science. And it's in this sense that the research on dark energy symbolizes our humility in the face of the cosmic unknown, we cannot issue absolute certainties and we are subject to error, but we know how to be prudent, after all, the scientists of DESI are themselves prudent about their discovery, telling us that we need to make other verifications to avoid any statistical error. Despite the uncertainty, it is this doubt that allows us to advance science. [...]
[...] In this paradox, some see a clear weakness, saying that 'scientists change their minds all the time'. In a context where many people doubt science (with climate, vaccines, etc.), this uncertainty is taking on an increasingly important role in our society. Popper would respond to this by saying that trust should not be placed on the results and affirmations, but on the scientific method, which accepts error and progresses by correcting itself. Science is reliable not because it is definitive, but because it accepts revision. [...]
[...] The major cosmological theory (i.e., that dark energy is constant) is tested by scientific observations, so it constitutes by definition an empirical fact. Moreover, according to the observations made by DESI, the model could be falsified or at least partially questioned: according to Karl Popper, it is thus a scientific fact, subject to falsifiability; it cannot be verified by induction problem, because one cannot make a singular experience a universal truth, but it can be tested and refuted by experience. [...]
[...] It is titled: 'Revolution in cosmology: according to the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI), dark energy would not be a constant, and that changes everything'. This article reviews the recent observations of the DESI project (composed of many researchers and scientists), which question the main cosmological model named ?CDM, and which we thought was true for 25 years. In fact, dark energy (which is this still mysterious energy that we consider to be the origin of the universe) was previously considered to be a constant cosmological constant, that is, one that does not change, and which is responsible for the acceleration of the expansion of the Universe. [...]
