A Canadian astrophysicist proposes a new model of the universe that reduces dark matter and energy to a “cosmic illusion,” but is his radical departure from current consensus based in fact?
The hunt for elusive dark matter and dark energy, which combined are believed to comprise 95% of the known universe, has been a significant avenue of physics research for decades, as scientists seek to understand the theoretical forces that underpin our current understanding of the universe.
According to University of Ottawa Adjunct Professor Rajendra Gupta, dark matter and energy may be imaginary constructs created to explain data that actually reflects a weakening of natural forces as the universe ages.
A Weakening Universe
The crux of Gupta’s argument is that the intensity of natural forces slowly decays with time and distance. That weakening would therefore explain universal expansion and galactic evolution.
“The universe’s forces actually get weaker on the average as it expands,” Gupta explained. “This weakening makes it look like there’s a mysterious push making the universe expand faster (which is identified as dark energy). However, at galactic and galaxy-cluster scale, the variation of these forces over their gravitationally bound space results in extra gravity (which is considered due to dark matter).”
“But those things might just be illusions, emergent from the evolving constants defining the strength of the forces,” Gupta said.
Gupta presented his ideas on this astrophysics controversy last year, focusing on larger, universal scales, and in his most recent research, he examines the scale of individual galaxies more closely. Generalizing behavior on the universal scale and then closing in on what Gupta calls “lumpy” individual regions of space requires different equations in the standard model of the universe, known as ΛCDM, to account for the influence of dark matter and dark energy at both scales.
However, Gupta claims to have resolved the problem down to a single equation that accounts for observations of the universe at all scales, without requiring dark matter or dark energy.
“What’s really exciting is that this new approach lets us explain what we see in [the universe],” Gupta adds, including “galaxy rotation, galaxy clustering, and even the way light bends around massive objects, without having to imagine there’s something hiding out there.”
“It’s all just the result of the constants of nature varying as the universe ages and becomes lumpy,” Gupta says.
An Older Universe
Astronomers generally agree that the universe is 13.8 billion years old. Yet another quirk of Gupta’s theory is dating the universe at a much more distant 26.7 billion years. To the Canadian scientist, radically changing the age of the universe isn’t a problem, as he believes it best fits the data on its early period. This longer timeline provides more opportunity for the unexpectedly well-developed early universe that space observatories, such as the James Webb Space Telescope, are discovering to have coalesced.
“For years, we’ve struggled to explain how galaxies in the early universe formed so quickly and became so massive,” Gupta said. “With our model, you don’t need to assume any exotic particles or break the rules of physics. The timeline of the universe simply stretches out, almost doubling the universe’s age, and making room for everything we observe.”
Gupta cautions that decades of research into mysterious dark matter and energy may have been in vain, tantamount to a construct created to make the math work in the standard model of the universe.
Defending Dark Matter
While Gupta’s work is not yet considered a viable alternative to the standard model by most scientists, some researchers do see value in re-examining the present consensus. Speaking to The Debrief, UC San Diego professor and host of the Into the Impossible podcast, Brian Keating, offered some support for Gupta’s drive to question existing paradigms but remained unconvinced with his conclusions.
“Mainstream cosmologists do not treat these ideas as a serious alternative to ΛCDM at this stage,” Keating said. “They’re regarded as speculative exercises. That said, the field benefits from contrarians: if the mainstream model can’t withstand scrutiny from unconventional approaches, then it isn’t strong enough. And DESI shows cracks in LCDM too.”
Keating explained that the primary issue with Rajendra’s methodology is that it only reinterprets existing data, rather than providing new data. The problem is that changing how one part of the framework fits may have further effects on our understanding of events like supernovae, which are constrained by multiple independent observations, and will need to be adjusted to be addressed. Additionally, the conclusions Rajendra draws from his work may be unfounded.
“The conclusions, such as drastically altering the inferred age of the universe, are very strong claims built on weak evidentiary assumptions,” Keating said. “Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence, and at present, his conclusions seem to run ahead of the robustness of his framework. I think the DESI team has addressed many of Gupta’s claims to my satisfaction.”
Debating Dark Matter
“At a preliminary level, the central idea appears underdeveloped and has not yet been formalized with the rigor typically expected in the field,” said Alexey Bobrick of Monash University and Applied Physics, in an email to The Debrief. “In addition, the journal in which it appears is not generally recognized for its rigor.”
Gupta’s ideas may be met with strong reservations from mainstream researchers, but that is an essential element in conducting good science. While accepting fantastic claims without rigor does a disservice to science, continually re-examining basic assumptions also serves to further our understanding of the universe around us.
“There is always merit in asking bold questions about cosmology,” Keating said. “Gupta’s papers push against conventional interpretations of the standard model of cosmology, and that sort of intellectual pressure-testing is healthy for the field.”
“He’s a brilliant mind,” Keating added. “So, the more ideas the better.”
The paper, “Testing CCC+TL Cosmology with Galaxy Rotation Curves,” appeared in Galaxies on September 12, 2025.
Ryan Whalen covers science and technology for The Debrief. He holds an MA in History and a Master of Library and Information Science with a certificate in Data Science. He can be contacted at ryan@thedebrief.org, and follow him on Twitter @mdntwvlf.