PDA

View Full Version : Bizarre Dark Energy Theory Gets Boost From New Measurements



Max
03-15-2011, 09:31 PM
New measurements of the expansion rate of the universe lend new support for the theory of dark energy that suggests a mysterious force is pulling the cosmos apart at ever-increasing speeds.

Scientists have few ideas why such a force would exist, but the evidence for dark energy – which like dark matter has remained elusive to detection attempts – is growing, and a competing hypothesis can apparently be ruled out.

In a new study, a team of researchers led by Adam Riess of the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore, report that they've calculated how fast the universe is expanding to a greater degree of accuracy than ever before, shrinking the error bars on their measurements by about 30 percent.

The improved accuracy comes thanks to the Wide Field Camera 3 on the Hubble Space Telescope. It's a new instrument that was only installed on the orbiting observatory in 2009, during NASA's last space shuttle mission to upgrade the space telescope.

"Without the improvement in efficiency capability from the new camera, it just wouldn’t have been feasible," Riess told SPACE.com Monday (March 14). "It's just a different generation of technology than the previous camera."

The researchers used the new camera to observe a special class of exploding stars called type 1a supernovas, which are useful because they always release the same amount of light. Astronomers compare this intrinsic brightness to their measured brightness — which varies depending on how far away from Earth they are — to judge cosmic distances.

The new measurements confirm astronomers' growing consensus that the universe is not only expanding like a balloon, but picking up speed in doing so.

Based on our current laws of gravity —namely, Einstein's theory of general relativity — that's unexpected. To explain this surprising reality, scientists came up with dark energy, which would counteract the force of gravity that tries to pull the universe inward. But to date, dark energy has remained undetectable to astronomers.

Not all experts are comfortable with the idea that a strange force is mysteriously tugging the universe apart.

"Theorists have come up with very creative ways to get out of dark energy, which would be great because we don't understand dark energy very well and it would be nice to find a way that the universe was simpler," Riess said.

One such alternative is the idea that our cosmic neighborhood —the solar system and the whole Milky Way galaxy — happens to sit at the center of a relatively empty bubble of space eight billion light-years across.

If this were the case, we would measure the same accelerated expansion rate we do, except it would be an illusion created by our special position in the void.

But the new precision measurements of the universe's expansion seem to rule out that idea, which predicts a somewhat different value for the expansion rate.

"This new paper by Riess et al. reduces the errors on the measurement of [the expansion rate], and so improves even further the already high confidence that one should have in saying that these models are ruled out," said Timothy Clifton, an astrophysicist at the University of Oxford who was not involved in the new research. "In this sense, they improve the evidence for the existence of dark energy."

However, Clifton cautioned that the new measurements do not disqualify all versions of the void model. In some more complicated scenarios in which the big bang did not happen at the same time at all points in space, this hypothesis could still be valid.

Ultimately, Riess said many scientists are dubious of all the void models anyway.

"I know that a lot of people have not taken that theory very seriously because of a major problem with it," he said. "We tend to believe theories where we don’t live in any special place in the universe. That would be very strange — why should we be in a special place?"

Now that scenario is even less likely to be true, Riess said.

"But on the other hand, dark energy's pretty weird too," he said.

However, it looks like we may be stuck with it.

Riess and colleagues report their findings in the April 1 issue of The Astrophysical Journal.

FBD
03-16-2011, 02:31 PM
Still not seeing what's so strange about non luminous mass-energy :nana:

Binky
03-17-2011, 12:08 AM
Matches String Theory then?

Max
03-17-2011, 12:18 AM
Matches String Theory then?

I've heard of Silly String Theory :cheerlead:

Binky
03-17-2011, 12:21 AM
http://www.elliemay.com/images_blog/2008-01-15-yogurt.jpg

Max
03-17-2011, 01:12 AM
http://i.imgur.com/CAJO4.gif

http://i.imgur.com/vOxh9.jpg

Deepsepia
03-17-2011, 01:17 AM
I wouldn't call it "a theory". I think we have some confidence that we're measuring an anomaly. I don't see any reason to be confident that we know what the anomaly is about.

Some things you just have to say: "I heard a noise, I don't know what it was"

Binky
03-17-2011, 01:35 AM
:facepalm:

Max
03-17-2011, 01:40 AM
:facepalm:

LOL

Deepsepia
03-17-2011, 01:52 AM
:facepalm:

Not sure what the "facepalm" is for.

We have a measured value that actually doesn't fit any theory.

There are some vague speculations about what might be happening, but at a theoretical level, the correct answer to "why are we seeing these numbers? is "we don't know"

Could be some kind of measurement artifact, could be some fundamental aspect of nature-- we just don't know. And there isn't really a "theory" that has predicted these values . . . the closest you can come is some interpretations of string theory, but they're on very weak ground to start with.

Put another way, with the theory of relativity, Einstein predicted all kinds of values long before we could observe them. When we finally could observe them, the values seen matched what he said we'd see.

With "dark energy" all you can say is that we're seeing some measured values that don't "fit" any established theory.

Griffin
03-17-2011, 02:10 AM
Maybe the galaxy we know is some kids ant farm project left unchecked and the anomaly is his new science project involving electro-magnetic fields using a small battery source.

Deepsepia
03-17-2011, 02:20 AM
Maybe the galaxy we know is some kids ant farm project left unchecked and the anomaly is his new science project involving electro-magnetic fields using a small battery source.

Well, remember, gravity was an anomaly. Newton described it, and came up with good values that predicted how it worked, here and in the cosmos.

But he actually didn't have a correct explanation for why it was happening.

Dark energy is to our physical theory what gravity was to Newton (actually, Newton's gravity was more solid than our "dark energy"). Its something we seem to be able to measure, but we have no idea what's happening.

Einstein himself was very embarrassed by his kludge, the "cosmological constant", a value that was necessary to make theory match the observed universe, but for which there was no theoretical basis.

The dark energy measurements are somewhat close to that cosmological constant, but we have it from Einstein that he had no idea why the number was there, and was more than a little uncomfortable with it.

Griffin
03-17-2011, 02:24 AM
I'm comfortable with 42 being the answer.

Binky
03-17-2011, 11:57 AM
I'm comfortable with 42 being the answer.

42 is the answer.

Those physicists don't have nothing on Adams :mrgreen:

It's all good...

FBD
03-17-2011, 12:07 PM
:lol: We wouldnt be here if the answer was 42! (unless of course you solved the rest of the universe's equations around that, sorta like a lot of cosmological equations solve for c=1)

Einstein was only uncomfortable with the cc until Edwin Hubble proved that the universe was indeed accelerating.

Before you understand phenomena...you describe them....describe them enough, and soon you come to reach understandings. (Of course, that doesnt work if you ignore new information; Einstein's refusal to consider QM made the last of his years amazingly unfruitful.)

Binky
03-17-2011, 12:25 PM
cannot see into your brain, expand on that

FBD
03-17-2011, 12:52 PM
The cosmological constant is very very small but nonzero. If it were large, gravity would never be able to keep things congealed!

Max
03-17-2011, 01:51 PM
and what's really amazing, is that in 25 or 50 years, perhaps less, we'll look back at these mainstreams theories and notions we read about today, and most of them will be way off the mark...but that's part of the beauty of expanding horizons. The journey getting to that final answer is half the fun. Some of our concepts along the way may turn out to be larks, but worthwhile revelations often start off that way.

FBD
03-17-2011, 02:29 PM
dark energy's gonna be a tough one - its going to get explained theoretically well before we really understand what it is and all tests regarding it are going to be indirect....so as we get deeper and deeper into the layers of the onion, the challenges get greater because of the nature of the energies.

Deepsepia
03-17-2011, 05:42 PM
dark energy's gonna be a tough one - its going to get explained theoretically well before we really understand what it is and all tests regarding it are going to be indirect....so as we get deeper and deeper into the layers of the onion, the challenges get greater because of the nature of the energies.

Agreed.

As an example, thou humanity has spent our entire existence looking at a star, it wasn't until about 1900 that we had the faintest idea what was happening, and not until the 1930s before we had an answer for "what makes a star shine"

With dark energy, we're somewhat like a guy looking at the sun, or a star in 1850. We've got an idea, growing stronger, that what we're seeing is something which can't be explained by classical theory. And as new measurements accumulate, they tend to make the case "something's going on here".

As with stars, different theorists are taking a crack at the problem, my guess is that we do know the question, but are a long way from the answer.

FBD
03-17-2011, 05:54 PM
It was actually pretty funny some of the calculations, how young they thought the sun to be, because they hadnt conceived of nuclear happenings yet, trying to extrapolate how much fuel it could have burned or how much mass required to burn. On the order of tens of thousands of years or something as an absolute high range iirc :lol:

Softdreamer
03-17-2011, 07:14 PM
I have a strong feeling that what is causing this acceleration of explanation, is the universe itself.
Spacetime is bent by matter, and on the huge bent scale of the big picture, the universe is actually attracting itself from either end..:-k:-k

Deepsepia
03-17-2011, 07:59 PM
It was actually pretty funny some of the calculations, how young they thought the sun to be, because they hadnt conceived of nuclear happenings yet, trying to extrapolate how much fuel it could have burned or how much mass required to burn. On the order of tens of thousands of years or something as an absolute high range iirc :lol:


That's a great observation. Yes, if you looked at observed data on solar energy output, in say 1880, and you'd imagined that you were looking at some kind of combustion process-- the only exothermic reaction that a 19th century observer would have known well-- you'd have to conclude that the sun was very young, and that it would exhaust its fuel very quickly.

I think that's likely a good starting point for how to think about the cosmos. I think there are fundamental processes whose effects we can measure, but whose nature we haven't even guessed . . . and dark energy fits that idea.

"Something's making it go, but we don't know what, and we don't even know where to look to find that 'what'"

Teh One Who Knocks
03-17-2011, 09:39 PM
...how to think about the cosmos...

http://i.imgur.com/DqP3Z.jpg

Deepsepia
03-18-2011, 01:57 AM
http://i.imgur.com/DqP3Z.jpg



Hey, don't knock it . . . contemplating the cosmos brings FBD and me together on something . . .

Griffin
03-18-2011, 03:14 AM
I always thought something was fundamentally wrong with the universe.

FBD
03-18-2011, 01:43 PM
yeah, the important stuff :D

Binky
03-18-2011, 07:44 PM
I have a strong feeling that what is causing this acceleration of explanation, is the universe itself.
Spacetime is bent by matter, and on the huge bent scale of the big picture, the universe is actually attracting itself from either end..:-k:-k

I like that... pretty cool


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyzNgmaibMc&feature=fvst

:mrgreen:

Max
03-18-2011, 07:45 PM
I like that... pretty cool


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyzNgmaibMc&feature=fvst

:mrgreen:

nerd

Binky
03-18-2011, 07:50 PM
nerd


:lala:

FBD
03-18-2011, 08:17 PM
I have a strong feeling that what is causing this acceleration of explanation, is the universe itself.
Spacetime is bent by matter, and on the huge bent scale of the big picture, the universe is actually attracting itself from either end..:-k:-k

wiki "ekpyrotic universe"