Tagged: Expansion of the universe Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • richardmitnick 2:34 pm on April 2, 2019 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , Expansion of the universe, , , ,   

    From University of Chicago: “How to use gravitational waves to measure the expansion of the universe” 

    U Chicago bloc

    From University of Chicago

    Mar 28, 2019
    Louise Lerner


    Prof. Daniel Holz discusses a new way to calculate the Hubble constant, a crucial number that measures the expansion rate of the universe and holds answers to questions about the universe’s size, age and history. Video by UChicago Creative

    Ripples in spacetime lead to new way to determine size and age of universe.

    On the morning of Aug. 17, 2017, after traveling for more than a hundred million years, the aftershocks from a massive collision in a galaxy far, far away finally reached Earth.

    These ripples in the fabric of spacetime, called gravitational waves, tripped alarms at two ultra-sensitive detectors called LIGO, sending texts flying and scientists scrambling.


    VIRGO Gravitational Wave interferometer, near Pisa, Italy


    Caltech/MIT Advanced aLigo Hanford, WA, USA installation


    Caltech/MIT Advanced aLigo detector installation Livingston, LA, USA

    Cornell SXS, the Simulating eXtreme Spacetimes (SXS) project

    Gravitational waves. Credit: MPI for Gravitational Physics/W.Benger

    Gravity is talking. Lisa will listen. Dialogos of Eide

    ESA/eLISA the future of gravitational wave research

    Localizations of gravitational-wave signals detected by LIGO in 2015 (GW150914, LVT151012, GW151226, GW170104), more recently, by the LIGO-Virgo network (GW170814, GW170817). After Virgo came online in August 2018


    Skymap showing how adding Virgo to LIGO helps in reducing the size of the source-likely region in the sky. (Credit: Giuseppe Greco (Virgo Urbino group)

    One of the scientists was Prof. Daniel Holz at the University of Chicago. The discovery had provided him the information he needed to make a groundbreaking new measurement of one of the most important numbers in astrophysics: the Hubble constant, which is the rate at which the universe is expanding.

    The Hubble constant holds the answers to big questions about the universe, like its size, age and history, but the two main ways to determine its value have produced significantly different results. Now there was a third way, which could resolve one of the most pressing questions in astronomy—or it could solidify the creeping suspicion, held by many in the field, that there is something substantial missing from our model of the universe.

    “In a flash, we had a brand-new, completely independent way to make a measurement of one of the most profound quantities in physics,” said Holz. “That day I’ll remember all my life.”

    As LIGO and its European counterpart VIRGO turn back on on April 1, Holz and other scientists are preparing for more data that could shed light on some of the universe’s biggest questions.

    Universal questions

    We’ve known the universe is expanding for a long time (ever since eminent astronomer and UChicago alum Edwin Hubble made the first measurement of the expansion in 1929, in fact),

    Edwin Hubble looking through a 100-inch Hooker telescope at Mount Wilson in Southern California, 1929 discovers the Universe is Expanding

    but in 1998, scientists were stunned to discover that the rate of expansion is not slowing as the universe ages, but actually accelerating over time. In the following decades, as they tried to precisely determine the rate, it has become apparent that different methods for measuring the rate produce different answers.

    One of the two methods measures the brightness of supernovae–exploding stars– in distant galaxies;

    Standard Candles to measure age and distance of the universe from supernovae NASA

    the other looks at tiny fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background [CMB], the faint light left over from the Big Bang.

    CMB per ESA/Planck

    ESA/Planck 2009 to 2013

    Scientists have been working for two decades to boost the accuracy and precision for each measurement, and to rule out any effects which might be compromising the results; but the two values still stubbornly disagree by almost 10 percent.

    2
    A neutron star collision causes detectable ripples in the fabric of spacetime, which are called gravitational waves. Photo courtesy of Aurore Simonnet

    Because the supernova method looks at relatively nearby objects, and the cosmic microwave background is much more ancient, it’s possible that both methods are right—and that something profound about the universe has changed since the beginning of time.

    “We don’t know if one or both of the other methods have some kind of systematic error, or if they actually reflect a fundamental truth about the universe that is missing from our current models,” said Holz. “Either is possible.”

    Holz saw the possibility for a third, completely independent way to measure the Hubble constant—but it would depend on a combination of luck and extreme feats of engineering.

    The ‘standard siren’

    In 2005, Holz wrote a paper [NJP] with Scott Hughes of Massachusetts Institute of Technology suggesting that it would be possible to calculate the Hubble constant through a combination of gravitational waves and light. They called these sources “standard sirens,” a nod to “standard candles”, which refers to the supernovae used to make the Hubble constant measurement.

    But first it would take years to develop technology that could pick up something as ephemeral as ripples in the fabric of spacetime. That’s LIGO: a set of enormous, extremely sensitive detectors that are tuned to pick up the gravitational waves that are emitted when something big happens somewhere in the universe.

    The Aug. 17, 2017 waves came from two neutron stars, which had spiraled around and around each other in a faraway galaxy before finally slamming together at close to the speed of light. The collision sent gravitational waves rippling across the universe and also released a burst of light, which was picked up by telescopes on and around Earth.

    Neutron star collision-Robin Dienel-The Carnegie Institution for Science

    3
    Prof. Daniel Holz writes out the formula for the Hubble constant, which measures the rate at which the universe is expanding.

    That burst of light was what sent the scientific world into a tizzy. LIGO had picked up gravitational wave readings before, but all the previous ones were from collisions of two black holes, which can’t be seen with conventional telescopes.

    But they could see the light from the colliding neutron stars, and the combination of waves and light unlocked a treasure trove of scientific riches. Among them were the two pieces of information Holz needed to make his calculation of the Hubble constant.

    How does the method work?

    To make this measurement of the Hubble constant, you need to know how fast an object—like a newly collided pair of neutron stars—is receding away from Earth, and how far away it was to begin with. The equation is surprisingly simple. It looks like this: The Hubble constant is the velocity of the object divided by the distance to the object, or H=v/d.

    Somewhat counterintuitively, the easiest part to calculate is how fast the object is moving. Thanks to the bright afterglow given off by the collision, astronomers could point telescopes at the sky and pinpoint the galaxy where the neutron stars collided. Then they can take advantage of a phenomenon called redshift: As a faraway object moves away from us, the color of the light it’s giving off shifts slightly towards the red end of the spectrum. By measuring the color of the galaxy’s light, they can use this reddening to estimate how fast the galaxy is moving away from us. This is a century-old trick for astronomers.

    The more difficult part is getting an accurate measure of the distance to the object. This is where gravitational waves come in. The signal the LIGO detectors pick up gets interpreted as a curve, like this:

    4
    The signal picked up by the LIGO detector in Louisiana, as it caught the waves from two neutron stars colliding far away in space, forms a distinctive curve. Courtesy of LIGO

    The shape of the signal tells scientists how big the two stars were and how much energy the collision gave off. By comparing that with how strong the waves were when they reached Earth, they could infer how far away the stars must have been.

    The initial value from just this one standard siren came out to be 70 kilometers per second per megaparsec. That’s right in between the other two methods, which find about 73 (from the supernova method) and 67 (from the cosmic microwave background).

    Of course, that initial standard siren measurement is only from one data point, and large uncertainties remain. But the LIGO detectors are turning back on after an upgrade to boost their sensitivity. Nobody knows how often neutron stars collide, but Holz (along with former student Hsin-Yu Chen and current student Maya Fishbach) wrote a paper estimating that the gravitational wave method may provide a revolutionary, extremely precise measurement of the Hubble constant within five years.

    “As time goes on, we’ll observe more and more of these binary neutron star mergers, and use them as standard sirens to steadily improve our estimate of the Hubble constant. Depending on where our value falls, we might confirm one method or the other. Or we might find an entirely different value,” Holz said. “No matter what we find, it’s gonna be interesting—and will be an important step in learning more about our universe.”

    See the full article here .

    five-ways-keep-your-child-safe-school-shootings

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    Stem Education Coalition

    U Chicago Campus

    An intellectual destination

    One of the world’s premier academic and research institutions, the University of Chicago has driven new ways of thinking since our 1890 founding. Today, UChicago is an intellectual destination that draws inspired scholars to our Hyde Park and international campuses, keeping UChicago at the nexus of ideas that challenge and change the world.

    The University of Chicago is an urban research university that has driven new ways of thinking since 1890. Our commitment to free and open inquiry draws inspired scholars to our global campuses, where ideas are born that challenge and change the world.

    We empower individuals to challenge conventional thinking in pursuit of original ideas. Students in the College develop critical, analytic, and writing skills in our rigorous, interdisciplinary core curriculum. Through graduate programs, students test their ideas with UChicago scholars, and become the next generation of leaders in academia, industry, nonprofits, and government.

    UChicago research has led to such breakthroughs as discovering the link between cancer and genetics, establishing revolutionary theories of economics, and developing tools to produce reliably excellent urban schooling. We generate new insights for the benefit of present and future generations with our national and affiliated laboratories: Argonne National Laboratory, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, and the Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole, Massachusetts.

    The University of Chicago is enriched by the city we call home. In partnership with our neighbors, we invest in Chicago’s mid-South Side across such areas as health, education, economic growth, and the arts. Together with our medical center, we are the largest private employer on the South Side.

    In all we do, we are driven to dig deeper, push further, and ask bigger questions—and to leverage our knowledge to enrich all human life. Our diverse and creative students and alumni drive innovation, lead international conversations, and make masterpieces. Alumni and faculty, lecturers and postdocs go on to become Nobel laureates, CEOs, university presidents, attorneys general, literary giants, and astronauts.

     
  • richardmitnick 8:57 am on October 22, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , Expansion of the universe,   

    From Oxford: “The universe is expanding at an accelerating rate — or is it?” 

    U Oxford bloc

    Oxford University

    21 October 2016
    Stuart Gillespie

    1
    Researchers analysed a database of supernovae — the spectacular thermonuclear explosions of dying stars. Image credit: University of Oxford; Shutterstock.

    Five years ago, the Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to three astronomers for their discovery, in the late 1990s, that the universe is expanding at an accelerating pace.

    Their conclusions were based on analysis of Type Ia supernovae – the spectacular thermonuclear explosions of dying stars – picked up by the Hubble space telescope and large ground-based telescopes. It led to the widespread acceptance of the idea that the universe is dominated by a mysterious substance named ‘dark energy’ that drives this accelerating expansion.

    Now, a team of scientists led by Professor Subir Sarkar of Oxford University’s Department of Physics has cast doubt on this standard cosmological concept. Making use of a vastly increased data set – a catalogue of 740 Type Ia supernovae, more than ten times the original sample size – the researchers have found that the evidence for acceleration may be flimsier than previously thought, with the data being consistent with a constant rate of expansion.

    The study is published in the Nature journal Scientific Reports.

    Professor Sarkar, who also holds a position at the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen, said: ‘The discovery of the accelerating expansion of the universe won the Nobel Prize, the Gruber Cosmology Prize, and the Breakthrough Prize in Fundamental Physics. It led to the widespread acceptance of the idea that the universe is dominated by “dark energy” that behaves like a cosmological constant – this is now the “standard model” of cosmology.

    ‘However, there now exists a much bigger database of supernovae on which to perform rigorous and detailed statistical analyses. We analysed the latest catalogue of 740 Type Ia supernovae – over ten times bigger than the original samples on which the discovery claim was based – and found that the evidence for accelerated expansion is, at most, what physicists call “3 sigma”. This is far short of the 5 sigma standard required to claim a discovery of fundamental significance.

    An analogous example in this context would be the recent suggestion for a new particle weighing 750 GeV based on data from the Large Hadron Collider at CERN. It initially had even higher significance – 3.9 and 3.4 sigma in December last year – and stimulated over 500 theoretical papers. However, it was announced in August that new data shows that the significance has dropped to less than 1 sigma. It was just a statistical fluctuation, and there is no such particle.’

    There is other data available that appears to support the idea of an accelerating universe, such as information on the cosmic microwave background [CMB] – the faint afterglow of the Big Bang – from the Planck satellite.

    CMB per ESA/Planck
    CMB per ESA/Planck

    However, Professor Sarkar said: ‘All of these tests are indirect, carried out in the framework of an assumed model, and the cosmic microwave background is not directly affected by dark energy. Actually, there is indeed a subtle effect, the late-integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect, but this has not been convincingly detected.

    ‘So it is quite possible that we are being misled and that the apparent manifestation of dark energy is a consequence of analysing the data in an oversimplified theoretical model – one that was in fact constructed in the 1930s, long before there was any real data. A more sophisticated theoretical framework accounting for the observation that the universe is not exactly homogeneous and that its matter content may not behave as an ideal gas – two key assumptions of standard cosmology – may well be able to account for all observations without requiring dark energy. Indeed, vacuum energy is something of which we have absolutely no understanding in fundamental theory.’

    Professor Sarkar added: ‘Naturally, a lot of work will be necessary to convince the physics community of this, but our work serves to demonstrate that a key pillar of the standard cosmological model is rather shaky. Hopefully this will motivate better analyses of cosmological data, as well as inspiring theorists to investigate more nuanced cosmological models. Significant progress will be made when the European Extremely Large Telescope makes observations with an ultrasensitive “laser comb” to directly measure over a ten to 15-year period whether the expansion rate is indeed accelerating.’

    See the full article here .

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    STEM Icon

    Stem Education Coalition

    U Oxford campus

    Oxford is a collegiate university, consisting of the central University and colleges. The central University is composed of academic departments and research centres, administrative departments, libraries and museums. The 38 colleges are self-governing and financially independent institutions, which are related to the central University in a federal system. There are also six permanent private halls, which were founded by different Christian denominations and which still retain their Christian character.

    The different roles of the colleges and the University have evolved over time.

     
  • richardmitnick 1:01 pm on September 1, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , Expansion of the universe, Super light particles?,   

    From Symmetry: “Universe steps on the gas” 

    Symmetry Mag

    Symmetry

    09/01/16
    Shannon Hall

    Universe map Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey
    Universe map Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey

    1
    Dark Energy Survey

    A puzzling mismatch is forcing astronomers to re-think how well they understand the expansion of the universe.

    Astronomers think the universe might be expanding faster than expected.

    If true, it could reveal an extra wrinkle in our understanding of the universe, says Nobel Laureate Adam Riess of the Space Telescope Science Institute and Johns Hopkins University. That wrinkle might point toward new particles or suggest that the strength of dark energy, the mysterious force accelerating the expansion of the universe, actually changes over time.

    The result appears in a study published in The Astrophysical Journal this July, in which Riess’s team measured the current expansion rate of the universe, also known as the Hubble constant, better than ever before.

    In theory, determining this expansion is relatively simple, as long as you know the distance to a galaxy and the rate at which it is moving away from us. But distance measurements are tricky in practice and require using objects of known brightness, so-called standard candles, to gauge their distances.

    The use of Type Ia supernovae—exploding stars that shine with the same intrinsic luminosity—as standard candles led to the discovery that the universe was accelerating in the first place and earned Riess, as well as Saul Perlmutter and Brian Schmidt, a Nobel Prize in 2011.

    The latest measurement builds on that work and indicates that the universe is expanding by 73.2 kilometers per second per megaparsec (a unit that equals 3.3 million light-years). Think about dividing the universe into grids that are each a megaparsec long. Every time you reach a new grid, the universe is expanding 73.2 kilometers per second faster than the grid before.

    Although the analysis pegs the Hubble constant to within experimental errors of just 2.4 percent, the latest result doesn’t match the expansion rate predicted from the universe’s trajectory. Here, astronomers measure the expansion rate from the radiation released 380,000 years after the Big Bang and then run that expansion forward in order to calculate what today’s expansion rate should be.

    It’s similar to throwing a ball in the air, Riess says. If you understand the state of the ball (how fast it’s traveling and where it is) and the physics (gravity and drag), then you should be able to precisely predict how fast that ball is traveling later on.

    “So in this case, instead of a ball, it’s the whole universe, and we think we should be able to predict how fast it’s expanding today,” Riess says. “But the caveat, I would say, is that most of the universe is in a dark form that we don’t understand.”

    The rates predicted from measurements made on the early universe with the Planck satellite are 9 percent smaller than the rates measured by Riess’ team—a puzzling mismatch that suggests the universe could be expanding faster than physicists think it should.

    David Kaplan, a theorist at Johns Hopkins University who was not involved with the study, is intrigued by the discrepancy because it could be easily explained with the addition of a new theory, or even a slight tweak to a current theory.

    “Sometimes there’s a weird discrepancy or signal and you think ‘holy cow, how am I ever going to explain that?’” Kaplan says. “You try to come up with some cockamamie theory. This, on the other hand, is something that lives in a regime where it’s really easy to explain it with new degrees of freedom.”

    Kaplan’s favorite explanation is that there’s an undiscovered particle, which would affect the expansion rate in the early universe. “If there are super light particles that haven’t been taken into account yet and they make up some smallish fraction of the universe, it seems that can explain the discrepancy relatively comfortably,” he says.

    But others disagree. “We understand so little about dark energy that it’s tempting to point to something there,” says David Spergel, an astronomer from Princeton University who was also not involved in the study. One explanation is that dark energy, the cause of the universe’s accelerating expansion, is growing stronger with time.

    “The idea is that if dark energy is constant, clusters of galaxies are moving apart from each other but the clusters of galaxies themselves will remain forever bound,” says Alex Filippenko, an astronomer at the University of California, Berkeley and a co-author on Riess’ paper. But if dark energy is growing in strength over time, then one day—far in the future—even clusters of galaxies will get ripped apart. And the trend doesn’t stop there, he says. Galaxies, clusters of stars, stars, planetary systems, planets, and then even atoms will be torn to shreds one by one.

    The implications could—literally—be Earth-shattering. But it’s also possible that one of the two measurements is wrong, so both teams are currently working toward even more precise measurements. The latest discrepancy is also relatively minor compared to past disagreements.

    “I’m old enough to remember when I was first a student and went to conferences and people argued over whether the Hubble constant was 50 or 100,” says Spergel. “We’re now in a situation where the low camp is arguing for 67 and the high camp is arguing for 73. So we’ve made progress! And that’s not to belittle this discrepancy. I think it’s really interesting. It could be the signature of new physics.”

    See the full article here .

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    STEM Icon

    Stem Education Coalition

    Symmetry is a joint Fermilab/SLAC publication.


     
  • richardmitnick 9:32 am on May 8, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , Expansion of the universe, ,   

    From Science Alert: “The Universe is expanding faster than the laws of physics can explain, new measurements reveal” 

    ScienceAlert

    Science Alert

    15 APR 2016
    BEC CREW

    1
    M101, one of the galaxies in the study. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech

    Time for some new physics?

    The most precise measurement ever made of the current rate of expansion of the Universe has been achieved by physicists in the US, and there’s a problem: the Universe is expanding 8 percent faster than our current laws of physics can explain.

    If confirmed by independent tests, this new measurement will force us to rethink how dark matter and dark energy have been influencing the evolution of the Universe for the past 13.8 billion years, and that means something in the standard model of particle physics has to change.

    The Standard Model of elementary particles , with the three generations of matter, gauge bosons in the fourth column, and the Higgs boson in the fifth.
    The Standard Model of elementary particles , with the three generations of matter, gauge bosons in the fourth column, and the Higgs boson in the fifth.

    “I think that there is something in the standard cosmological model that we don’t understand,” lead researcher Adam Riess from Johns Hopkins University, who also co-discovered dark energy back in 1998, told Davide Castelvecchi at Nature.

    So… wtf just happened? Well, right now, physicists explain the gradual expansion of the Universe – which has been in effect since the Big Bang – by the presence of dark matter and dark energy.

    While invisible dark matter is thought to make up 27 percent of the Universe, and visible matter a measly 5 percent, dark energy is estimated to make up a whopping 68 percent of the known Universe, and the way all three interact could explain why everything has been expanding since the beginning of time.

    According to the accepted model of cosmology, the biggest influence on the evolution of the Universe is the competition between dark matter and dark energy. While the gravitational pull of dark matter appears to be slowing down the expansion of the Universe, dark energy seems to be tugging it in the opposite direction to make it accelerate.

    Astrophysicists were able to figure all this out thanks to measurements of radiation left over from the Big Bang, which we can now observe as the Cosmic Microwave Background, or CMB.

    Cosmic Microwave Background per ESA/Planck
    Cosmic Microwave Background per ESA/Planck

    ESA/Planck
    ESA/Planck

    Earlier observations of the CMB made by Riess and other astrophysicists around the world have suggested that the pull of dark energy on the Universe has remained constant since the Big Bang, Castelvecchi reports.

    This hypothesis was backed up by the most comprehensive analysis of the CMB, performed recently by the European Space Agency’s Planck Observatory, and scientists have since used Planck’s measurements to estimate the rate of expansion at any point in the Universe’s history.

    “For years, those predictions have disagreed with direct measurements of the current rate of cosmic expansion – also known as the Hubble constant,” says Castelvecchi. “But until now the error margins in this constant were large enough that the disagreement could be ignored.”

    Now Riess and his colleagues have found another way to measure the rate of expansion – the brightness of certain types of celestial objects, such as stars and supernovae, known as ‘standard candles’.

    As Kelly Dickerson explains for Mic.com, standard candles are thought to emit the exact same level of brightness, which means physicists can use them as markers to measure how fast the Universe is expanding away from us.

    Riess’s team analysed 18 standard candles using hindreds of hours of data from the Hubble Space Telescope, and calculated that the speed of expansion is about 8 percent faster than the Planck’s measurements predicted.

    “If this new measurement is accurate – and our maps of the CMB are also accurate – then something about our fundamental understanding of the Universe is wrong,” says Dickerson.

    These results, which have been posted* to pre-print website arXiv.org and are awaiting peer-review, have the potential of “becoming transformational in cosmology”, cosmologist Kevork Abazajian from the University of California, who was not involved in the study, told Nature.

    We’re going to have to sit tight and wait for these results to be independently confirmed or disproved, but we’ve been hearing pretty often recently of things happening out in our Universe that challenge our current laws of physics, so something’s probably gonna have to give eventually.

    One thing’s for sure – it’s an exciting time to be a physicist.

    *Science paper:
    A 2.4% Determination of the Local Value of the Hubble Constant

    See the full article here .

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.

    STEM Icon

    Stem Education Coalition

     
  • richardmitnick 7:10 am on March 1, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , Expansion of the universe   

    From AAAS: “Conditions for life may hinge on how fast the universe is expanding” 

    AAAS

    AAAS

    Feb. 29, 2016
    Ilima Loomis

    Neutron star merger depicted Goddard
    Neutron star mergers like this produce gamma ray bursts—beams of radiation that can destroy planets or make them inhospitable to life.
    NASA/GSFC

    Scientists have known for several years now that stars, galaxies, and almost everything in the universe is moving away from us (and from everything else) at a faster and faster pace. Now, it turns out that the unknown forces behind the rate of this accelerating expansion—a mathematical value called the cosmological constant—may play a previously unexplored role in creating the right conditions for life.

    That’s the conclusion of a group of physicists who studied the effects of massive cosmic explosions, called gamma ray bursts, on planets.

    They found that when it comes to growing life, it’s better to be far away from your neighbors—and the cosmological constant helps thin out the neighborhood.

    “In dense environments, you have many explosions, and you’re too close to them,” says cosmologist and theoretical physicist Raul Jimenez of the University of Barcelona in Spain and an author on the new study. “It’s best to be in the outskirts, or in regions that have not been highly populated by small galaxies—and that’s exactly where the Milky Way is.”

    Jimenez and his team had previously shown that gamma ray bursts could cause mass extinctions or make planets inhospitable to life by zapping them with radiation and destroying their ozone layer. The bursts channel the radiation into tight beams so powerful that one of them sweeping through a star system could wipe out planets in another galaxy. For their latest work, published this month in Physical Review Letters, they wanted to apply those findings on a broader scale and determine what type of universe would be most likely to support life.

    The research is the latest investigation to touch on the so-called anthropic principle: the idea that in some sense the universe is tuned for the emergence of intelligent life. If the forces of nature were much stronger or weaker than physicists observe, proponents note, crucial building blocks of life—such fundamental particles, atoms, or the long-chain molecules needed for the chemistry of life—might not have formed, resulting in a sterile or even completely chaotic universe. Some researchers have tried to gauge how much “wiggle room” various physical constants might have for change before making the cosmos unrecognizable and uninhabitable. Others, however, question what such research really means and whether it is worthwhile.

    Jimenez and colleagues tackled one, large-scale facet of the anthropic principle. They used a computer model to run simulations of the universe expanding and accelerating at many different speeds. They then measured how changing the cosmological constant affected the universe’s density, paying particular attention to what that meant about gamma ray bursts raining down radiation on stars and planets.

    As it turns out, our universe seems to get it just about right. The existing cosmological constant means the rate of expansion is large enough that it minimizes planets’ exposure to gamma ray bursts, but small enough to form lots of hydrogen-burning stars around which life can exist. (A faster expansion rate would make it hard for gas clouds to collapse into stars.)

    Jimenez says the expansion of the universe played a bigger role in creating habitable worlds than he expected. “It was surprising to me that you do need the cosmological constant to clear out the region and make it more suburbanlike,” he says.

    Beyond what they reveal about the potential for life in our galaxy and beyond, the findings offer a new nugget of insight into one of the biggest puzzles in cosmology: why the cosmological constant is what it is, says cosmologist Alan Heavens, director of the Imperial Centre for Inference and Cosmology at Imperial College London.

    In theory, Heavens explains, either the constant should be hundreds of orders of magnitude higher than it appears to be, or it should be zero, in which case the universe wouldn’t accelerate. But this would disagree with what astronomers have observed. “The small—but nonzero—size of the cosmological constant is a real puzzle in cosmology,” he says, adding that the research shows the number is consistent with the conditions required for the existence of intelligent life that is capable of observing it.

    Lee Smolin, a theoretical physicist at Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Canada, and a skeptic of the anthropic principle, says the paper’s argument is a novel one and that on first reading he didn’t see any obvious mistakes. “I’ve not heard it before, so they’re to be praised for making a new argument,” he says.

    However, he adds, all truly anthropic arguments to date fall back on fallacies or circular reasoning. For example, many tend to cherry-pick by looking only at one variable in the development of life at a time; looking at several variables at once could lead to a different conclusion.

    Jimenez says the next step is to investigate whether gamma ray bursts are really as devastating to life as scientists believe. His team’s work has shown only that exposure to such massive bursts of radiation would almost certainly peel away a planet’s protective ozone layer. “Is this going to be catastrophic to life?” he says. “I think so, but it may be that life is more resilient than we think.”

    See the full article here .

    The American Association for the Advancement of Science is an international non-profit organization dedicated to advancing science for the benefit of all people.

    Please help promote STEM in your local schools.
    STEM Icon
    Stem Education Coalition

     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel
%d bloggers like this: