Dark Energy and Dark Matter, are challenged here using Evidence Based Logic. Dark Matter is visible and Dark Energy is shown to be the force which enables the self propulsion of matter.

Introduction   Dark Energy and Dark Matter Resolved

Welcome to a completely different way of looking at how our universe works. I was 18 years old when I had a fatal disagreement with mainstream science.  At that time (1956) the idea of  Dark Matter was already being taken seriously.  Dark Energy had not become a possibliity because Hubble was decades away.  My problem then and ever since has been a fundamental disagreement with Newton and Einstein.  I was sure then and have become surer still that I was right about how the universe works.  Observational revelations since then have made my theories not just more plausable but have reinforced the plausibility of them.  So who am I...?  Well I am completely unknown and irrelevent as I don't exist in the scientific community and perhaps never will.  This could be an advantage as I have absolutely nothing to lose.  Although it may be very irritating, I can't be ostracised, I can't lose my precious job, I can't be struck off and my funding can't be withdrawn from me.  So it is good for my sanity that I am unknown. O.k. so you might think that my theory is crackpot.  But they are every bit as relevant as all of the other crackpot theories which solve nothing yet require big leaps of imagination (magic) for them to work like 'cosmological constant'.  Uh.. what mechanism does the multiverse use to keep pumping energy into our universe and at the same time magically evenly distribute it like a gas (perhaps our universe is a gas)? My theory simplifies, reveal solutions and make possible the mechanical functioning of the universe.  This it does without resorting to magical emerging of photons or fantastical hypotheses.  The recent Dark Matter discoveries regarding galaxies and Dark Energy with respect to the accelerating expansion of the universe are explained by my theory.  There was a time very recently when scientists confidently asserted that from the moment of the Big Bang, the amount of mass/energy in the universe is constant.  Then came the notion of the accelerating expanding universe.  Those assertions have been quietly removed from eminent web sites because of the 'Cosmological Constant'.  Now hugely elaborate ideas are postulated for how the universe works but there was no need to change the original sound logic because there is an answer which reconciles with the steady state hypothesis. My laws don't so much require a constant mass/energy quantity in the universe but have no need of any additional input of energy or magical quintescence to make the universe work.  Mainstream science with hundreds of millions of ££ to spend and virtually unlimited computing power plus the best brains to dwell on it has failed to unravel the mysteries of Dark Matter and Dark Energy.  Big, expensive experiments are well over 20 years down the line and they are no nearer to solving the problem.  Surely it is time to reflect on the failures and to consider some other alternatives. Has anybody wondered whether dark energy and dark matter are somehow fundamentally intertwined as they are both found together everywhere.  Or are they considered to be two entirely separate issues to resolve?  Wouldn't it be a nice tidy situation if it ends up that they are fundamentally linked. Why does there appear to be much more gravity on the edges of galaxies than there should be because the stars are moving faster than they should.  I wonder if there is another reason besides  a huge blanket  halo of gravitational Dark Matter?   Is there some logic in the fact that some galaxies spiral arms are leading edges and not trailing edges? I have derived some fundamental laws based on my observations which seems to work in the universe which I am suggesting is the one we live in.  They require no magic, caveats or constants other than perhaps acceptance that the total mass/energy in the universe is constant.  I am proposing that the universe of Newton and Einstein is severely flawed and cannot be repaired.  The problem with both is that they are missing a dimension.  Their theories work within their 2 dimensional universe of momentum and gravity but evidence has it that there is a 3rd dimension which they ignored as have everybody else since.  And this is because in the main the universe worked quite well within their theories until now.  Read this analysis of how Einstein's theories stack up and the explanations that are being mooted to patch over the crevasses:     http://www.eso.org/~bleibund/papers/EPN/epn.html      Quote: 'The opinions of cosmologists currently range from visions of ?precision cosmology? to worries about the fact that we have to add new constituents to the universe for which we have currently no explanation at all. This is not necessarily a contradiction (mm.. well yes it is). Observers have been furnished with tools over the last decade, which allow them to probe many of the cosmological questions in much more detail and with much higher precision. On the other hand, these new results have shown that our picture of the universe was (is) incomplete (wrong) and will need further scrutiny' If you get to the end of this treatise and you find that what I am saying makes sense then you will have to re-think the science of matter. Perhaps it applies even down to the sub atomic level The first question I wish to tackle is the nature of Dark Energy. So I am starting with The Accelerating Expanding Universe This is because it is postulated by mainstream science that somehow the universe is not only expanding but that the expansion is accelerating.  Neither Newton's nor Einstein's physics can deal with that phenomenon satisfactorily unless a magical constant is introduced.  In a gravity - propulsion universe, the one we live in, matter does not require that constant.  You can read all about it on my web site DARK MATTER AND DARK ENERGY EXPLAINED

Lowe’s Law of Equilibrium for Orbiting Objects

The Laws

The First Law of Equilibrium for Orbiting Objects in Stable Orbits

It states that when an object maintains a fixed stable orbit around another object, the force of gravity between the objects is counter balanced by a propulsive force generated by the orbiting object at right angles to the force of gravity in the direction of motion of the orbiting object. The propulsive force is a balancing force which tops up the momentum of the orbiting object to enable it to maintain its path around the host object and counteracts the gravitational and tidal forces acting on the orbiting object.

The First Law Modified for an Accelerating Expanding Universe

In an accelerating expanding universe the  total rotational propulsive force of matter in the universe exceeds by a small but sufficient amount the total of gravitational force resulting in an accelerative expansion of the universe by rotational motion. This should mean that all galaxies and all the spaces between galaxies are expanding at an accelerating rate.

The Second Law of Equilibrium for Orbiting Objects in Stable Orbits

It states that if an orbiting object generates a propulsive force in excess of that required to maintain a stable orbit, the surplus force will be used up in the production of rotational motion. Clearly if there is a surplus of propulsive energy in an orbital system, it has to go somewhere. That it should be dissipated by the generation of spin is not only a very nice solution for the designer of the universe but it is infinitely (almost) variable.  A large amount of surplus energy as in the case of Jupiter simply results in a higher spin rate.  If there is very little energy left for spin as in the case of Venus, the rate drops to close to Zero. If there is insufficient propulsive force to maintain a stable orbit the orbit will decay at an accelerating rate with the inevitable result that the host will eventually absorb the satellite