“Now, I didn't believe it for a second, because I was sure the observations were wrong. Because it's crazy that empty space has energy. It means if you take a part of space and you get rid of all the matter and all the radiation, anything, it weighs something. And that's absurd… And I was more shocked than anyone else that our prediction was correct.”

…of that mathematical form, and it's nothing. If you put energy in empty space, and only if you put energy in empty space, will you produce a term like this? But if you put enough energy in empty space, then you could explain a flat universe. And we argued that if you put 70% of the energy of a flat universe in empty space and 30% in matter, that it would agree with observations. And only that. Now, I didn't believe it for a second, because I was sure the observations were wrong. Because it's crazy that empty space has energy. It means if you take a part of space and you get rid of all the matter and all the radiation, anything, it weighs something. And that's absurd. So when we wrote this paper, my point was that the observations must be wrong. But it has a consequence, because remember, it produces, if you put energy here, it doesn't suck, it blows. You put energy in empty space, it's repulsive. And if you think about the expansion of the universe, so 70% is what we argued. And if you look at the expansion of the universe, this is what Hubble measured…