Tag: cosmology

  • Could JWST solve cosmology’s big mystery? Physicists debate Universe-expansion data

    Could JWST solve cosmology’s big mystery? Physicists debate Universe-expansion data

    [ad_1]

    This image, taken with the Wide Field Planetary Camera 2 on board the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope, shows the globular star cluster Terzan 1.

    Observations of the current Universe suggest a faster rate of cosmic expansion than predictions based on early-Universe data.Credit: NASA/ESA/Judy Schmidt

    Cosmology seems to be heading for a showdown on one of its most basic questions: how fast is the Universe expanding?

    For more than a decade, two types of measurement have been in disagreement. Observations of the current Universe typically find the rate of expansion — called the Hubble constant — to be about 9% faster than predictions based on early-Universe data.

    Researchers hoped that the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), which launched in late 2021, would help to settle the question once and for all. But consensus has so far failed to materialise. Instead, two teams of cosmologists have calculated different values for the Hubble constant — despite both observing the recent Universe using the JWST.

    Wendy Freedman, an astronomer at the University of Chicago in Illinois, and her collaborators presented preliminary results from their JWST observations today at a conference at the Royal Society in London. The Hubble constant they measured was 69.1 kilometers per second per megaparsec, meaning that galaxies separated by one million parsec (around 3 million light years) are receding from each other at a rate of 69.1 km/s.

    This is only slightly larger than the 67 km/s per megaparsec predicted using early-universe data from Europe’s Planck satellite. But it is at odds with recent work by Adam Riess, an astrophysicist at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, and his collaborators, who calculated a substantially higher Hubble constant, of at least 73 km/s per Mpc1,2,3.

    Stars and supernovas

    Freedman’s team analyzed three types of star that are used as distance indicators, or ‘standard candles’, in nearby galaxies. Understanding the average brightness of standard candles helps astronomers estimate how far away the same types of star are in more distant galaxies, which appear as they were billions of years ago. Together with observations of supernova explosions in the same galaxies, standard candles can be used to measure the Universe’s current rate of expansion.

    Riess, whose observations were based on the same three types of star, warns that it is too early to draw conclusions from any of the JWST data. “The Hubble Space Telescope has collected a mountain of data over several decades, including four separate and direct calibrations of [the Hubble constant],” he says. “Our JWST programme and Wendy’s are tiny by comparison.”

    It would be premature to comment on Freedman’s results because they have not yet been published, says Kristin McQuinn, an astronomer at Rutgers University in New Jersey who is leading her own study of standard candles with JWST. “It is hard to evaluate their results without seeing their data.”

    Freedman says that multiple techniques will need to agree before the Hubble constant issue is solved. “We need more than one method, and we need more than three if we want to put this issue to rest,” she told delegates at the London meeting.

    Cosmologist George Efstathiou, a leading member of the Planck collaboration who is based at the University of Cambridge, UK, sees the glass half full, saying that the latest JWST results are remarkably close to Planck’s. “They are 4 km/s away from each other, which is not a lot,“ he says.

    Hiranya Peiris, a cosmologist also at the University of Cambridge, says that she wouldn’t be surprised if the recent-Universe observations were to end up converging towards the Planck early-Universe results. But she agrees that it will be crucial to add a completely new technique to the mix. Observations of gravitational waves could offer a ‘clean’ approach that doesn’t suffer from the confounding factors that are always present when observing stars, she adds.

    If the discrepancy is here to stay, it could mean that the current theoretical model of the expansion of the Universe — which relies on Einstein’s general theory of relativity — needs to be amended. Theorists have been busy trying to find explanations for the Hubble-constant discrepancy, but none of them are compatible with every set of observations, says cosmologist Eleonora Di Valentino at the University of Sheffield, UK. “At least 500 models have been proposed, and none of them is satisfactory.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Hubble tension: One of the biggest mysteries of cosmology may finally be solved

    Hubble tension: One of the biggest mysteries of cosmology may finally be solved

    [ad_1]

    The further galaxies are from Earth, the faster they are moving away from us

    ESA/Hubble & NASA

    A cosmic mystery that is one of the most significant open questions in physics may finally have been solved. The two main methods of measuring the universe’s rate of expansion have long been in disagreement with one another – but they seem to be coming together.

    The rate of the universe’s expansion is measured by a parameter called the Hubble constant. For years, the two ways we have worked it out have been in tension, which led…

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The multiverse could be much, much bigger than we ever imagined

    The multiverse could be much, much bigger than we ever imagined

    [ad_1]

    Many versions of Earth disappearing into the distance

    The many-more-worlds interpretation enlarges the multiverse

    Shutterstock/vchal

    The multiverse could be infinitely bigger than we ever imagined, according to a new interpretation of quantum mechanics that describes realms upon realms of parallel universes created with every decision we make.

    At the heart of quantum mechanics is the wave function, an infamously abstract and fuzzy mathematical tool that is extremely good at describing the behaviour of photons, electrons and other denizens of the quantum realm. But what exactly is the wave function? After almost a century of arguments, physicists still disagree on how…

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • There are hints that dark energy may be getting weaker

    There are hints that dark energy may be getting weaker

    [ad_1]

    A slice of the largest 3D map of the universe showing the underlying structure of matter

    laire Lamman/DESI collaboration; custom colormap package by cmastro

    The largest 3D map of the universe ever created is providing hints about the evolution of the cosmos, and they suggest that we may be wrong about the behaviour of dark energy, which makes up most of the universe. It seems that this mysterious force may be weakening over time.

    “If it holds up, this is a very big deal,” says Adam Riess at Johns Hopkins University in Maryland, who found the first evidence for dark energy 25 years ago. That is because the standard model of cosmology, called lambda-CDM, suggests that the strength of dark energy should be static over time.

    Dark energy is thought to cause the accelerating expansion of the cosmos – if it is not static, that could also have huge implications for our ideas about the beginning of the universe, its size and its ultimate fate. Reiss, who was not involved in the new work, says the implications could mean “we will have to do some serious soul-searching regarding [our understanding of] gravity and fields”.

    The strange findings come from the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) in Arizona – and even DESI collaborators are not quite sure what to make of the fact that their data suggests dark energy may have recently gotten weaker. “It’s all we’ve been talking in the collaboration about for months… whether this is interesting or not,” says DESI spokesperson Kyle Dawson at the University of Utah.

    DESI researchers examined the strength of dark energy by measuring the large-scale structure and distribution of galaxies in the cosmos, which illuminates how the universe has expanded over time. The researchers then combined this information with three sets of data on supernovae, which act as so-called “standard candles” to determine the distances to cosmic objects thanks to their predictable brightnesses.

    Surprisingly, each of the three samples of supernovae yielded a different answer to the change in the universe’s rate of expansion over time. All three suggested that the effects of dark energy may have decreased in recent aeons, but the strength of these suggestions varied, so researchers are not quite sure how to interpret the data.

    “Two of the supernova samples disagree with each other, and they’re very, very similar samples,” says Dawson. “I don’t know which one’s right, it’s possible that the truth lies in between, but it really looks like the differences lie in the way [the supernova researchers] evaluated the data.”

    Discrepancies in models are denoted by a factor called sigma, which measures the likelihood that a similar clash could have happened by chance if the models did disagree with one another. “About 3-sigma is the level we usually sit up and pay attention and call an ‘indication’ of something,” says Riess. Anything lower than that would not generally be particularly exciting to researchers – it would be too likely to be a simple coincidence.

    The discrepancies between lambda-CDM and the combination of supernova and DESI measurements ranged from 2.5-sigma to 3.9-sigma. “Both statements are true: it is sufficient tension, it’s interesting; and it’s not sufficient tension to say that anything is definitely there,” says Dawson.

    Dark energy makes up nearly 70 per cent of the universe, so any error in our understanding of its nature could have widespread impacts on physics. Proving whether that error is really there, though, will take more precise measurements in the coming years.

    “If [this is] true, it would be the first real clue we have gotten about the nature of dark energy in 25 years,” says Riess.

    Topics:

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Cosmologist Claudia de Rham on falling for gravity

    Cosmologist Claudia de Rham on falling for gravity

    [ad_1]

    The Beauty Of Falling: A Life In Pursuit Of Gravity Claudia de Rham Princeton Univ. Press (2024)

    Swiss cosmologist Claudia de Rham is best known for co-developing a theory of gravity that tweaks Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity. It could help to explain why, for the past several billion years, the Universe has been expanding at an ever faster pace — a ‘late-time’ acceleration that is usually ascribed to a mysterious force called dark energy.

    For de Rham, who also spent more than two decades training to be an astronaut and is now at Imperial College London, gravity is the key to understanding both the Universe and the arc of her own life. In her book, The Beauty of Falling, she weaves together physics and memoir in a meditation on gravity as a metaphor for human existence.

    De Rham talked to Nature about the beauty of failing and how her dream of flying into space led to her research making sense of gravity.

    Why did you want to write this book?

    Part of it is sharing. From an external point of view, what we do as theoretical physicists seems a little bit alien. We often just share our successes, and people have this picture of us as individual geniuses who make out-of-the-blue discoveries. The reality is that it is very much team-based, and fun.

    Every day, I try out an idea and it fails. And there’s something beautiful in failing, and falling. The book is about gravity, but it is also about embracing this falling, because it’s how we get better — it’s how we understand the world. With gravity, failing has an even deeper meaning. The way that we describe gravity at the moment is with Einstein’s general theory of relativity, which predicts its own downfall.

    How so?

    If you have a gravitational collapse of matter, the endpoint will be in a black hole, with a singularity at its centre. The singularity means that, if you agree with Einstein’s theory, some quantities you can measure would be infinite. What that really means is that the theory has stopped working there, and it gives a prediction that doesn’t make any sense. So the theory itself is telling you that you shouldn’t trust it any more. And that is not something to be ashamed of. It is an opportunity to learn something more.

    In the book, you describe how, as a child, you had a sudden realization. What was it?

    The “wow!” moment I had as a kid was when my family and I travelled in Peru, first to Iquitos and then the Amazonian forest. I must have been four years old. At some point, we were staying in hammocks, and as I was swinging there, just staring at the stars through the trees — some of which were a thousand years old, and so tall — I almost had a feeling of weightlessness.

    My mother always tells me that I said “now I know I want to belong there, I want to be in the sky”. It wasn’t phrased as “I want to become an astronaut”, but in terms of “I want to belong to this greater thing”.

    Claudia de Rham overlooking small village in Peruvian Andes near city of Ayacucho, circa 1981.

    At the age of four, traveling in Peru, Claudia de Rham realized she wanted to go to space.Credit: Ellen de Rham

    This did turn into a dream of becoming an astronaut. This is notoriously difficult, and the European Space Agency (ESA) has held only three recruitments since 1978. How close did you get to being selected?

    For ten years, I waited for the ESA astronaut selection. Then finally, in 2008, the announcement came. There were some pre-selection processes, then different batches of psychological and psychometric tests. You were also tested on how you behave in a team, how you work with others and how you react to stressful situations. More than 8,000 people submitted an application with all the required documents. By the end, only 42 were left to go through medical tests.

    I was in a group with six others in Toulouse, France, in a medical centre for a full week of non-stop tests, one after the other, through every single hole of your body. And at the end of the week, I had a meeting with the chief doctor. Everything seemed well, he said; we are just missing the tuberculosis (TB) test. I was laughing — I said, ”Clearly I don’t have TB, it’s going to be fine.“

    I went to the airport to catch my flight back to Canada, where I was living at the time. Just when I was boarding the plane, I saw an e-mail from the doctor. The TB test had come up positive.

    I had been training for 20–25 years. I had never thought I would get so close. I had big dreams, but I was always very realistic: I knew that the chances would be very small, and I had set up a whole other career path just in case. But when I talked to the doctor, it was the first time I thought, “This really can happen.”

    Your ‘fallback’ career is itself very selective.

    Being a theoretical physicist is not exactly something you just fall into because you can’t think of doing anything else. It required a lot of work. But I think it wasn’t as high-pressure for me as it might’ve been for others who had always thought that that’s what they wanted to be.

    And yet here you are. What drew you to study gravity?

    Initially, I was much more interested in higher dimensions, and why we seem to experience three dimensions of space. There could be more, and if so, there must be some phenomenon that explains why we experience only three. One of the questions I was trying to understand was how a particular model with extra dimensions could be related to the late-time acceleration of the Universe.

    And the model, I realized at the time, did manifest some features which — from our three-dimensional point of view — looked like massive gravity. ‘Massive gravity’ is a theory that states that the fundamental particle that carries the gravitational force, called the graviton, has an inertial mass.

    In general relativity, the graviton is massless, similar to the photon, the particle responsible for electromagnetic waves. And when the fundamental particle carrying a force is massless, the force has infinite range, so can propagate across the entire Universe.

    What sort of mass are we talking about?

    The graviton shouldn’t be very massive, because otherwise we wouldn’t even experience gravity. But we do feel gravity on Earth, and it can be detected in the Solar System, in our Galaxy and in clusters of galaxies — so the range of gravity should be larger than that. If you translate this distance scale to energy units, that corresponds to roughly 10−32 electronvolts (eV). [That is 38 orders of magnitude lighter than an electron.]

    Can the massive graviton be tested experimentally?

    Yes. Current observations in gravity and cosmology already put constraints on it. For instance, observations of gravitational waves mean that the graviton’s mass must be less than 10−22 eV. If the graviton had a larger mass than that, then the speed of propagation for gravitational waves of different frequencies would be slightly different, and the signals we have seen would have been slightly different. It’s not a huge effect, but enough to put a constraint.

    However, perhaps the best way to probe that in the future would be to detect gravitational waves with much longer wavelengths than those now known.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Early galaxy seen by JWST contains giant young stars and supernovae

    Early galaxy seen by JWST contains giant young stars and supernovae

    [ad_1]

     

    New Scientist Default Image

    GLASS-z12, a very early galaxy viewed by the James Webb Space Telescope

    Naidu et al, P. Oesch, T. Treu, GLASS-JWST, NASA/CSA/ESA/STScI

    Astronomers have used the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) to reveal extraordinary details about a galaxy in the early universe, seen as it was just 360 million years after the big bang.

    Since JWST launched, it has been finding galaxies that are so distant the light now reaching us from them was emitted during the early life of the cosmos. These galaxies have been more numerous and appear brighter than expected, suggesting there is something missing in our…

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Some of the greatest cosmic discoveries have come about by accident

    Some of the greatest cosmic discoveries have come about by accident

    [ad_1]

    New Scientist Default Image

    FOR a $10 billion instrument, the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) spends a lot of its time staring at nothing. The shots of deep space this produces are remarkably beautiful, transforming an apparently empty sky into a field flecked with thousands of distant galaxies, some seen as they were just a few hundred million years after the big bang.

    The first results of these surveys of the early universe have surprised astronomers, as the galaxies seem brighter than had been expected, with more star formation and larger black holes. Yet maybe we shouldn’t have been too startled to find…

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • observatory will map Big Bang’s afterglow in new detail

    observatory will map Big Bang’s afterglow in new detail

    [ad_1]

    An image of the front of the Large Aperture Telescope Receiver (LATR) just before the final closing.

    The front of the Simons Observatory’s Large Aperture Telescope Receiver, the largest receiver for observing the cosmic microwave background built so far.Credit: Mark Devlin/University of Pennsylvania

    Cosmologists are preparing to cast their sharpest-ever eyes on the early Universe. From an altitude of 5,300 metres on Cerro Toco, in northern Chile’s Atacama Desert, the Simons Observatory will map the cosmic microwave background (CMB) — sometimes called the afterglow of the Big Bang — with a sensitivity up to ten times greater than that of the previous gold standard, Europe’s Planck space probe.

    “It will be the best view of the CMB that we’ve ever had,” says Jo Dunkley, a cosmologist at Princeton University in New Jersey and one of the leading researchers in the observatory’s team. Construction of the US$109.5-million observatory is due to be completed in a matter of weeks.

    One of the project’s goals is to find fingerprints left in the CMB by gravitational waves that originated from the Big Bang itself. These would provide the first incontrovertible evidence for cosmic inflation, a brief moment in which expansion is thought to have proceeded at an exponential rate. During that time, quantum fluctuations on a microscopic scale are thought to have seeded the Universe with what became its large-scale structure — including the current distribution of clusters of galaxies across space.

    The scientific collaboration is led by five US universities and the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in Berkeley, California. The project is named after Jim Simons, a mathematician, billionaire hedge-fund investor and philanthropist, and his wife Marilyn. The Simons Foundation in New York City contributed grants of around $90 million to build the observatory.

    Once construction is complete, engineers will begin the months-long processof fine-tuning and testing the observatory’s instruments before its science programme can fully begin.

    Signs of inflation

    The Simons Observatory is an array of four telescopes. Three are identical 0.4-metre small aperture telescopes (SATs) and one is the 6-metre Large Aperture Telescope (LAT). Together, they will map minuscule variations in the temperature of the CMB from one patch of the sky to the next, as well as the CMB’s polarization, which is a preferential direction in which the radiation’s electric fields wiggle as the microwaves propagate through space.

    The three SATs will concentrate on a patch covering 20% of the southern sky. The aim is for them to study large-scale swirls — spanning an area several times the apparent size of the Moon in the sky — in the polarization field of the CMB. (Polarization maps look like arrays of sticks, and the orientations of the sticks can form specific swirling patterns called vortices.) It is here that the signals of cosmic inflation, known as B-mode patterns, are expected to show up.

    Many cosmologists see inflation as the most plausible mechanism for the process that gave the Universe its structure, caused by an energy field called the inflaton. The nature and properties of the inflaton are mysterious. Many theories have been proposed, predicting gravitational-wave signatures of a wide range of intensities.

    It is therefore not guaranteed that the signal, if it exists, is strong enough for the Simons Observatory to see it, says Suzanne Staggs, another Princeton cosmologist who is the observatory’s co-director. “But oh my gosh — if they were right there, it would be amazing.”

    A picture of the Simons Observatory site from the side of Cerro Toco in northern Chile.

    The Simons Observatory site photographed from the side of Cerro Toco in the Atacama Desert, Chile.Credit: Mark Devlin/University of Pennsylvania

    The known physics of quantum fields suggests that the signatures should be within theSimons Observatory’s sensitivity range, or close to it, says Marc Kamionkowski, a theoretical astrophysicist at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, who was among the first researchers to predict the existence of B-mode patterns in 19971,2.

    While the SATs focus on a relatively small area, the LAT will map 40% of the sky, at much finer resolution, and record temperature fluctuations in the CMB, as well as the CMB’s polarization. Cosmologists working on Planck and other past CMB projects have been able to extract troves of information by plotting the intensity of those temperature fluctuations against the area of sky that they span. Such graphs enabled cosmologists to produce precise estimates of both the Universe’s age (13.8 billion years) and its composition (only around 4% of which is ordinary matter).

    The LAT data could help researchers to detect signals of cosmic inflation in low-resolution polarization maps made by the smaller telescopes. In particular, they will be crucial for separating that pattern from spurious signals produced by effects such as dust in the Milky Way, explains Mark Devlin, a cosmologist at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia who is co-director of the observatory. The experiment will be six times more sensitive to the polarization patterns than any previous attempts3 to measure them.

    Exploring unknowns

    However, searching for signals of inflation is only one of the project’s goals: the Simons team plans to get much more science from the observatory’s high-resolution map of the CMB. It will enable researchers not only to visualize the Universe at an early age, but also to study how its primordial radiation was affected during the 13.8 billion years it spent travelling in space, before it got to Earth.

    In particular, the CMB is diverted by the gravity of large clumps of galaxies and dark matter — a phenomenon known as gravitational lensing — and this can be exploited to produce 3D maps of those clusters. Devlin, Staggs and their collaborators pioneered this technique with an earlier high-precision CMB project called the Atacama Cosmology Telescope, which was in operation from 2007 to 2022, also at Cerro Toco, and has yet to publish its final results. The Simons team will reconstruct the gravitational lensing experienced by the CMB, and determine how much of this is due to the Universe’s neutrinos. This will enable them to calculate the mass of these particles, which is still unknown. “It is a guaranteed signal,” says Brian Keating, an astrophysicist at the University of California, San Diego, who is the project’s principal investigator.

    Graduate student Anna Kofman and Astrophysicist Simon Dicker from the University of Pennsylvania work on the dilution refrigerator inside the Simons Observatory Large Aperture Telescope Receiver (LATR).

    Physicists Anna Kofman and Simon Dicker at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia work on the dilution refrigerator inside the Large Aperture Telescope Receiver.Credit: Mark Devlin/University of Pennsylvania

    Because the LAT will be scanning the same regions of sky repeatedly over its lifetime, it will also be able to track the motion of asteroids in the Solar System and monitor active black holes at the centres of other galaxies — and how their output changes over time. “We’re going to be able to track 20,000 or more active galactic nuclei, which are, we think, supermassive black holes with jets,” Dunkley says.

    Ambitious follow-up

    The observatory will have two runs, each lasting about four years, with a planned $53-million upgrade in between. An even more ambitious project called CMB-S4, to be led by the US Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation, is planned as a follow-up, with observations beginning in the mid-2030s. With telescopes at both Cerro Toco and the South Pole, the $800-million array will improve sensitivity to the inflationary signal by another factor of six.

    It is hoped that some of the Simons Observatory’s hardware could be reused as part of the CMB-S4, although the details have not yet been ironed out, says John Carlstrom, an astrophysicist at the University of Chicago in Illinois who is project scientist for the CMB-S4 collaboration.

    In 2014, a team working on a CMB experiment at the South Pole called BICEP2 made a bold claim to have detected the inflationary signature, but later retracted it when it became clear that what they were seeing was galactic dust. Since then, direct detection of gravitational waves — coming not from the Big Bang, but from astrophysical phenomena such as pairs of black holes merging — has become routine. Cosmologists are excited to get another chance to spot the primordial signals. “We’re talking about 13.8 billion years ago, with energy densities 15 orders of magnitude larger than anything we can create in the lab,” says Kamionkowski. “It’s kind of remarkable that we can even talk about this.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Do black holes explode? The 50-year-old puzzle that challenges quantum physics

    Do black holes explode? The 50-year-old puzzle that challenges quantum physics

    [ad_1]

    In hindsight, it seems prophetic that the title of a Nature paper published on 1 March 1974 ended with a question mark: “Black hole explosions?” Stephen Hawking’s landmark idea about what is now known as Hawking radiation1 has just turned 50. The more physicists have tried to test his theory over the past half-century, the more questions have been raised — with profound consequences for how we view the workings of reality.

    In essence, what Hawking, who died six years ago today, found is that black holes should not be truly black, because they constantly radiate a tiny amount of heat. That conclusion came from basic principles of quantum physics, which imply that even empty space is a far-from-uneventful place. Instead, space is filled with roiling quantum fields in which pairs of ‘virtual’ particles incessantly pop out of nowhere and, under normal conditions, annihilate each other almost instantaneously.

    However, at an event horizon, the spherical surface that defines the boundary of a black hole, something different happens. An event horizon represents a gravitational point of no return that can be crossed only inward, and Hawking realized that there two virtual particles can become separated. One of them falls into the black hole, while the other radiates away, carrying some of the energy with it. As a result, the black hole loses a tiny bit of mass and shrinks — and shines.

    Unexpected ramifications

    The power of Hawking’s 1974 paper lies in how it combined basic principles from the two pillars of modern physics. The first, Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity — in which black holes manifest themselves — links gravity to the shape of space and time, and is typically relevant only at large scales. The second, quantum physics, tends to show up in microscopic situations. The two theories seem to be mathematically incompatible, and physicists have long struggled to find ways to reconcile them. Hawking showed that the event horizon of a black hole is a rare place where both theories must play a part, with calculable consequences.

    And profoundly unsettling ones at that, as quickly became apparent. The random nature of Hawking radiation means that it carries no information whatsoever. As Hawking soon realized2, this means that black holes slowly erase any information about anything that falls in, both when the black hole originally forms and subsequently as it grows — in apparent contradiction to the laws of quantum mechanics, which say that information can never be destroyed. This conundrum became known as the black-hole information paradox.

    It has since turned out that black holes should not be the only things that produce Hawking radiation. Any observer accelerating through space could, in principle, pick up similar radiation from empty space3. And other analogues of black-hole shine abound in nature. For example, physicists have shown that in a moving medium, sound waves trying to move upstream seem to behave just as Hawking predicted. Some researchers hope that these experiments could provide hints as to how to solve the paradox.

    A scientific wager

    In the 1990s, the black-hole information paradox became the subject of a celebrated bet. Hawking, together with Kip Thorne at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) in Pasadena, proposed that quantum mechanics would ultimately need to be amended to take Hawking radiation into account. Another Caltech theoretical physicist, John Preskill, maintained that information would be found to somehow be preserved, and that quantum mechanics would be saved.

    But in 1997, theoretical physicist Juan Maldacena, who is now at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton , New Jersey, came up with an idea that indicated Hawking and Thorne might be wrong4. His paper now has more than 24,000 citations, even more than the 7,000 or so times Hawking’s paper has been cited. Maldacena suggested that the Universe — including the black holes it contains — is a type of hologram, a higher-dimensional projection of events that occur on a flat surface. Everything that happens on the flat world can be described by pure quantum mechanics, and so preserves information.

    Cosmologist Stephen Hawking reacts during a conversation on October 10, 1979 in Princeton, New Jersey.

    Stephen Hawking worked on the black hole information paradox throughout his life.Credit: Santi Visalli/Getty

    At face value, Maldacena’s theory doesn’t fully apply to the type of Universe that we inhabit. Moreover, it did not explain how information could escape destruction in a black hole — only that it should, somehow. “We don’t have a concrete grasp of the mechanism,” says Preskill. Physicists, including Hawking, have proposed countless escape mechanisms, none of which has been completely convincing, according to Preskill. “Here it is, 50 years after that great paper, and we’re still puzzled,” he says. (Maldacena’s ideas were enough to change Hawking’s mind, however, and he conceded the bet in 2004.)

    A quantum conundrum

    Attempts to solve the information paradox have grown into a thriving industry. One of the ideas that has gained traction is that each particle that falls into a black hole is linked to one that stays outside through quantum entanglement — the ability of objects to share a single quantum state even when far apart. This connection could manifest itself in the geometry of space-time as a ‘wormhole’ joining the inside of the event horizon with the outside.

    Entanglement is also one of the crucial features that make quantum computers potentially more powerful than classical ones. Moreover, in the past decade, the link between black holes and information theory has become only stronger, as Preskill and others have investigated similarities between what happens in holographic projections and the types of error-correction algorithm developed for quantum computers. Error correction is a way of storing redundant information that enables a computer — whether classical or quantum — to restore corrupted bits of information. Some researchers see quantum computation theory as the key to solving Hawking’s paradox. When creating a black hole, the Universe could be similarly storing several versions of its information — some inside the event horizon, some outside — so that the destruction of the black hole does not erase any history.

    But other researchers think that the full resolution of the information paradox might have to wait until another big problem is solved — that of reconciling gravity with quantum physics. Hawking continued working on the problem almost up until his death, but with no clear outcome.

    As for the title of Hawking’s paper, seeing actual black-hole explosions is a possibility that astronomers take seriously. Large black holes act like very cold bodies, but smaller ones are hotter, which makes them shrink faster; and the particles they shed should become more and more energetic, reaching a culmination when the black hole disappears. Hawking showed that ‘ordinary’ stellar-mass black holes, which form when massive stars collapse in on themselves at the end of their lives, take many times longer than the age of the Universe to get to this point. But, in principle, black holes with a range of smaller masses could have formed from random fluctuations in the density of matter during the first moments after the Big Bang. If a primordial black hole of the right mass were to fizzle into non-existence somewhere near the Solar System, it could be picked up by neutrino and γ-ray observatories.

    Astronomers have not seen any black holes explode so far, but they are still on the lookout5. Such an observation would have certainly earned Hawking the Nobel Prize that eluded him all his life. As it is, the questions produced by his simple, inquisitive paper title look set to nourish the intersection between cosmology and physics for a good few years yet.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • How dwarf galaxies lit up the Universe after the Big Bang

    How dwarf galaxies lit up the Universe after the Big Bang

    [ad_1]

    Illustration showing the reionization of the Universe.


    An illustration of the reionization of the Universe, which transitioned from a cauldron (red, right) of subatomic particles to a sea of neutral hydrogen gas dotted with early stars (middle) to its current transparent state (left).


    Credit: Mark Garlick/SPL

    Astronomers have used the

    James Webb Space Telescope
    (JWST) to show that faint miniature galaxies cleared the early Universe of its

    obfuscating fog of atomic hydrogen
    — allowing starlight to shine through the cosmos for the first time.

    The research, published today in

    Nature



    1

    , provides evidence that

    dwarf galaxies
    roughly 100 times smaller than the

    Milky Way
    triggered the process known as reionization, which changed the course of cosmic history. “The Universe became transparent,” says Hakim Atek, an astrophysicist at the Paris Institute of Astrophysics and lead author of the study. “It’s because of reionization that we are able to see distant galaxies.”

    Emerging from a cosmic dark age

    For around 380,000 years after the Big Bang, the Universe was a hot, dense furnace of subatomic particles. As the cosmos cooled, the free electrons and protons combined to form a gas of neutral hydrogen atoms.

    What followed was a dreary period of darkness. This lasted until the gas collapsed in places to fuse and form the first stars, which produced ultraviolet (UV) light. However, the remaining gas permeating the Universe either absorbed or scattered this light. As a result, the Universe resembled a foggy forest speckled with dim, flickering fireflies, and light sources were visible only for short distances.

    To render space transparent, something needed to bombard this gas with powerful ‘ionizing’ radiation, which could transform the neutral hydrogen atoms into charged particles, or ions, of hydrogen. The three candidates were energetic light jets called quasars, which are powered by supermassive black holes; massive galaxies roughly the same size as the Milky Way; and, finally, the minnows — dwarf galaxies.

    Massive galaxies would have absorbed much of their own UV light, says Claudia Scarlata, an astrophysicist at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis. And there might have been too few quasars to orchestrate the whole process. Dwarf galaxies, however, were small enough to allow easy escape of the UV light that they generated.

    Observations of

    younger dwarf galaxies,
    closer to Earth, suggest that they can emit ionizing radiation. All the same, “there’s nothing like actually having the data from the early galaxies to confirm that”, says James Rhoads, an astrophysicist at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. But dwarf galaxies from the epoch of reionization are too tiny and too dim to detect — even for the JWST.

    Tale of two telescopes

    To overcome this, the authors took advantage of a ‘natural telescope’: a cluster of galaxies located about 1.2 million parsecs from Earth. This cluster is so enormous that it warps light passing through it, thereby magnifying any light source located behind the lens, as observed from Earth.

    The authors harnessed this lens to observe eight dwarf galaxies from the era of reionization, when the Universe was less than one billion years old. The galaxies are the faintest objects ever observed from that time.

    Using data gathered by the JWST, the astronomers analysed the wavelengths of UV light from these galaxies. This allowed the team to estimate that even these faint, small galaxies could have expunged hydrogen gas around them easily. The researchers also estimate that dwarf galaxies were abundant enough up to one billion years after the Big Bang to have ionized the entire Universe, even if 5% of their ionizing radiation escaped into intergalactic space.

    Small galaxies were the first to form in the Universe, which “probably makes it easier to start the [reionization] process early” in the history of the cosmos, Rhoads says. As each galaxy emitted radiation, it effectively blew a bubble of transparency that expanded into neutral gas. Eventually, all the bubbles from all the galaxies overlapped to complete the transformation.

    Dwarf galaxies would have blown bubbles smaller than those produced by quasars and massive galaxies, and such small bubbles might have ensured that reionization proceeded homogeneously across the Universe. This, in turn, had implications for the architecture of the present-day Universe, Atek says.

    [ad_2]

    Source link