The “Mathematical Universe” is drawn on the basis of the CDM standard cosmological model. It brings together the theory of the “big bang” with its remnant “relict radiation”, Einstein’s theories about “curvature of space” by a mass of matter, theories of “dark matter” and “dark energy” and many other inventions.
In a paper published in the journal Astronomy & Astrophysics
Observers and theorists of the Planck project described the contradictions between the application of the theory of “CMB” and Einstein’s general theory of relativity to estimate the distribution of mass in space. They estimated this mass distribution in two ways through “relic radiation” and through “gravitational lensing”. Both methods rely on different aspects of the CDM model. But as a result, it turned out that the answers contradict each other.
Previous studies, independently performed by different groups, have already found discrepancies between the “relic” and “lensing” mass distributions.
Hildebrandt’s Kilo-Degree Survey (KiDS) project included infrared data from distant galaxies in their observations. The KiDS survey used data from the VLT, the world’s largest optical telescope. To evaluate “gravitational lensing”, they needed to know the distance to different light sources. Millions of distant galaxies estimated according to the Hubble law were used as such distant candles. The redshift of the galaxy was recognized by measuring its brightness in different colors. And it was this survey, in which, thanks to infrared data, the distances to galaxies were measured most accurately, showed the largest discrepancy with the information obtained from the analysis of the CMB. Scientists hoped that adding infrared radiation data would reduce the contradiction, but everything turned out the other way around, this increased the discrepancy with the Planck data.
To understand the work, you need to know that the “relict radiation” is real, but mythologized in the theory of the “big bang” microwave radiation of the diffuse substance of space. Therefore, a method based on observing this radiation makes sense. But the second approach using “gravitational lensing” is meaningless, because gravity does not act on photons. This is what this study has shown once again.