If the flow (out the singularity) is variable, how can we conserve it when we don’t know how it might vary at the source. But the source is about 13 billion light years away from us, so what we’re seeing in the increase is in the universe/outer-space closest to us. What can be happening there?
First, what is the vacuum of space? It is the most energetic region (meaning it has the most kinetic energy given by the whizzing about of subatomic particles there).
[The Square-Cube Law is very important in understanding how regions of our universe behave. The surface area of any specified volume size tells us how much behavior is allowed (for anything existing within that volume). Large volumes have small surfaces through which they can interact. Small volumes have much larger surface to volume ratios than larger ones, and so, they can interact with their environment with more unconstrained movements.]
Kinetic/energetic energy (subatomic particles that came from The Big Bang singularity), causing expansion to extend our universe radially, should be lost as the perimeter of the volume of our universe expands (increase in circumferential length) then we would have conservation of that energy (and that is also consistent with the Square-Cube law (above): the larger the volume the less reactivity (or, outward flow) it will have.
But we’re told that the expansion rate is increasing, or began increasing about 9 billion light years from The Big Bang. That doesn’t make sense to the physics we know, or the geometry (that the singularity source of the universe supplied/supplies a constant flow of energy into our universe, if all the energy supplied is conserved).
You suggest in your question that the acceleration of expansion might have to do with the state of matter. What are the states of matter? Supermassive black-hole stars are like super solids, and then there are solids (the density (mass/volume) we’re familiar with)), liquids, gases, plasmas, and outer-space vacuums (subatomic particles). So how can we pump up (or down the vacuum of outer space) to amp up the accelerated expansion there?
For the “vacuum of space to increase,” we need smaller and smaller subatomics, and fewer EM (Electromagnetic) fields (like electrons, photons, and quarks). But, these infinitessimal particles (only particles in their ground states (when their kinetic/energetic energy is gone)) are more characteristic of the infinitesimals that come into being at the singularity source before we can say any particles (any stable resistance to expansion) can happen. They are characteristic of the initial coherent state of energy when the universe starts to go unstable (oscillate about its singularity source).
Stephen Hawking talks about infinitesimals released by the most supermassive black holes at the end of their cycles(Hawking Radiation). But, what happens at end of the cycle (where we are)? It looks like the leading edge of our universe reverts to its coherent form, before there were any energy packets/particles existing. So, would that suggest that the expansion, though it looks like a point singularity, is really any number of points? Reminds me of the growth of a volvox (where the spherical organism reproduces on the periphery of its sphere.
Keep asking great questions, we’ll eventually find out what’s going on in our neighborhood to look like an increase in expansion. The answer may come with the James Webb Telescope data, so let’s keep an eye out for that.
[Based on my own research in boundary expansion (curvature model), dense regions (troughs) form rapidly and the more troughs (the more energy-packets/particles that resist expansion), the fewer circumferential regions available to expand, so that might look like a decrease in redshift, indicating an accelerated front.]THE EXPERIMENT