Scientists have long believed that dark matter makes up about 27 percent of the universe, with ordinary matter constituting less than 5 percent, and the rest being dark energy. This understanding has helped explain the behavior of galaxies, stars, and planets.

“The study’s findings confirm that our previous work about the age of the universe being 26.7 billion years has allowed us to discover that the universe does not require dark matter to exist,” explains Gupta in a media release. “In standard cosmology, the accelerated expansion of the universe is said to be caused by dark energy but is in fact due to the weakening forces of nature as it expands, not due to dark energy.”

Gupta’s research employs a combination of the covarying coupling constants (CCC) and “tired light” (TL) theories, together known as the CCC+TL model. This innovative model posits that the forces of nature weaken over cosmic time and that light loses energy as it travels long distances. Gupta’s findings, which align with several observations about the distribution of galaxies and the evolution of light from the early universe, suggest that the universe operates differently than currently believed.

Sabine Hossenfelder always says 'dark matter, if it exists' to remind us that it's still unproven and a lot of the candidates are really hypotheses without much to back them. I say the same fo Gupta's ideas and they would contradict a lot of what we know of star formation.

She also remarked that dark energy is really the curvature of the universe and I'm not sure what she means by that, although curving space takes mass and energy and some of that energy is in the curvature.I'm still skeptical of the idea that the expansion of the universe is speeding up. It relies partly on the cosmological principle, which supposedly holds beyond a certain distance, and I have seen no evidence that that is true.

Neither of us is a physicist but when has that stopped anyone?