|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Science
& Technology
New findings present theoretical challenge
Universe expanding faster than expected
By Peter Symonds
17 March 1999
"There are more things in heaven and earth Horatio,
than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
Hamlet, Act 1, Scene V
There are undoubtedly times when astronomers, physicists and
cosmologists are gripped by the feelings of awe and amazement
that were expressed by Shakespeare's Hamlet on seeing his
father's ghost. Over the last century, the frontiers of the known
universe have been pushed outwards, our scientific understanding
of the underlying physical laws has been revolutionised, and the
constant development of telescopes and instrumentation has produced
a wealth of new observations and fresh theoretical challenges.
A major revolution in our comprehension of the universe took
place in the 1920s. The American astronomer Edwin Hubble demonstrated
in 1924 that the vast collection of stars closest to us--the Milky
Way--was just one of a large number of such galaxies separated
by immense expanses of space. We now know that our galaxy is one
of about one hundred billion galaxies visible through our telescopes
each with several hundred billion stars.
Even more startling was the discovery announced by Hubble in
1929. A systemic examination of the composition of the light from
galaxies revealed a similar structure to that of nearby stars
with one significant difference--in every case the telltale black
lines in the visible spectrum, indicating the presence of different
chemical elements, were shifted towards the red end of the spectrum.
The only explanation for the "red shift" was that the
galaxies--all of them--were moving away from us at high velocity.
Furthermore, the more distant the galaxy, the larger the "red
shift" and therefore the greater the speed it was receding.
Hubble reached the inescapable conclusion that the universe
was expanding. So entrenched had been the view that the universe
was essentially static that Albert Einstein in formulating this
theory of general relativity in 1915 arbitrarily introduced a
so-called cosmological constant as a sort of "anti-gravity"
to prevent the universe from collapsing under the influence of
gravity and maintain its steady state.
One possible implication for the expanding universe was that
it had originated in a colossal big bang, which sent matter and
energy in all directions at high speeds. The "Big Bang"
theory, first elaborated through the solution of Einstein's equations,
has since been further refined and confirmed by observation. In
1965, two American physicists, Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson,
detected a low level background microwave radiation from all parts
of the sky--the "afterglow" of the Big Bang predicted
by theory.
Now it appears that cosmology and physics may be about to undergo
a new upheaval. Observations published last year by two groups
of astronomers present a radically different view of the universe--one,
which is not only expanding but expanding at an accelerating rate.
The new data challenges one of the main predictions of the "inflation"
theory--the most widely accepted variant of the "big bang"--that
the universe should be "flat," neither expanding forever,
nor contracting into the so-called "big crunch".
The findings are the result of more than a decade of painstaking
work to develop a method of accurately measuring the distance
of far-off galaxies using a certain type of exploding star or
supernova. By more exactly determining the distance of galaxies
billions of light years from us, the scientists had expected to
find the rate at which the universe was slowing down. Instead,
to their amazement, the data revealed the distant galaxies were
hurtling away at a greater and greater rate.
One possible explanation lies in resurrecting the cosmological
constant, which Einstein had famously abandoned as his "biggest
blunder" when it became clear in the 1920s that the universe
was not static but expanding. Now theoretical physicists are considering
reintroduction of Einstein's "anti-gravity" term as
a means of explaining the more rapid than expected expansion.
So astonishing was the discovery that a special conference
of leading cosmologists was convened at the Fermilab in the US
last May to discuss the findings and to thrash out the theoretical
implications. Not all the participants at the conference entitled
"The Missing Energy in the Universe" accepted the results.
In a highly unusual move, a vote of those scientists present was
taken--40 out of the 60 recognised the validity of the new findings.
In December, the US-based Science magazine conferred
their "Breakthrough of the Year for 1998" on the two
teams of astronomers--the Supernova Cosmology Project headed by
Saul Permutter at the Lawrence Berkeley Lab in the US, and the
High-Z Supernova Search Team led by Brian Schmidt of the Mount
Stromlo and Siding Spring Observatories in Australia. Both groups
involve the international collaboration of researchers from many
countries, including the US, Australia, England, France, Germany
and Sweden, and the coordination of observational facilities around
the world.
The January issue of Scientific American published a
special report entitled "Revolution in Cosmology" devoted
to explaining the significance of the findings and discussing
alternate theoretical explanations. In introducing the feature,
the magazine stated: "Cosmologists thought inflation theory
could explain all the basic processes that shaped the universe--until
new observations violated a central prediction. For the past year,
theorists have scrambled to make sense of the latest data. Either
the universe is dominated by a bizarre form of energy... or our
universe is just one strangely curved bubble of space-time in
an infinite continuum."
Ingenious observational techniques
To determine whether the expansion of the universe is speeding
up or slowing down requires an accurate measurement both of the
velocity and distance of far-off galaxies. The red shift provides
an accurate determination of velocity but the measurement of distances
in the order of billions of light years has proven elusive. In
the past, astronomers have simply assumed that there was a direct
relationship between the red shift of a galaxy and its distance
from us--the ratio of the two is known as Hubble's constant. The
relationship has been verified for relatively close galaxies but
not for more distant ones.
Since the early 1970s, astronomers have been searching for
a method of more accurately determining large distances using
a so-called "standard candle". The method appears relatively
simple--the further away a light-emitting object, the dimmer it
appears. If one can measure its brightness accurately then it
is possible to calculate the distance--providing one knows its
intrinsic brightness, that is the brightness measured at its origin.
The great difficulty lies firstly, in finding an astronomical
object that can be seen at such huge distances and secondly, in
determining its intrinsic brightness, which can vary greatly.
Looking for a "standard candle," therefore, becomes
the hunt for an extremely bright astronomical object with virtually
identical light emission behaviour wherever it is found in space.
If one finds such a "standard candle" then its inherent
brightness can be determined for nearby samples and thus used
to measure the distance to its more far-off kin.
Astronomers initially considered quasars as possible candidates.
These strange immensely energetic sources, first discovered in
the 1960s, are now thought to be huge black holes sucking in vast
amounts of gas, dust and stars. Quasars are certainly visible
at great distances but were found to be far too variable to serve
as distance measuring markers.
Attention turned to supernovae--relatively rare stellar explosions
brighter than the light from a billion suns. A supernova explosion
occurs after a star has used up all its nuclear fuel and is compressed
by the force of gravity to densities a million times greater than
ordinary matter. Many simply fade away. A few begin to swallow
up matter from nearby space, growing denser and denser until they
erupt in cataclysmic thermonuclear explosions.
Although exploding stars are also highly variable, astronomers
have found that one type--the Ia supernova--is relatively constant
in its behaviour. It is readily identified from its spectrum,
particularly the absence of hydrogen lines. Moreover, the brighter
a Ia supernova the longer it lasts. So by carefully studying the
duration of the explosion, scientists can deduce its inherent
brightness within an accuracy of 12 percent.
The problem is to find Ia supernovae, and early enough in their
cycle so that their duration and other characteristics can be
accurately measured. On average, two or three such supernovae
explode roughly every 1,000 years in a galaxy. Their brilliance
reaches a peak in about three weeks then fades away over a number
of months. Scientists have had to develop highly sophisticated
techniques to monitor thousands of distant galaxies at once and
rapidly identify Ia supernovae so that their brightness can be
tracked by major telescopes around the world.
Furthermore, astronomers have had special difficulties in gaining
access to the world's largest telescopes and the Hubble telescope.
As Saul Permutter, head of the Supernova Cosmology Project, put
it: "It was a chicken and egg problem. To get telescope time,
you had to guarantee you were going to find a supernova. But without
time on a major telescope, it was impossible to show that they
were there, and that we could find them."
Both groups developed highly ingenious techniques that would
virtually guarantee that exploding stars could be found on demand.
By using specially designed electronic light detectors on large
telescopes, a broad swathe of the night sky could be quickly and
accurately imaged. A single exposure with the Big Throughput Camera
used on the four-metre Blanco Telescope at Cerro Tololo Inter-American
Observatory in Chile creates a picture of about 5,000 galaxies
in 10 minutes.
By taking and comparing exposures of the same area of sky a
few weeks apart, sudden changes in the brightness and thus possible
Ia supernovae can be identified. The whole process has been automated
through the use of digital cameras, which count the number of
photons in each faint object. Computers are then used to "subtract"
the first image from the second, removing all but the images of
objects, which have varied markedly in brightness during the period.
Computers also automatically correct for different atmospheric
conditions and different image size. A final examination with
the human eye is necessary to distinguish possible Ia supernovae
from other objects such as variable stars, quasars and asteroids.
The technique has been successfully used to identify a number
of Ia supernovae with high red shifts. The best images have come
from the Hubble Space Telescope, which has been able to distinguish
the exploding star from its host galaxy. The Supernova Cosmology
Project has fully analysed 42 of the more than 80 Ia supernovae
it has discovered. The red shifts or Z-values vary from 0.18 to
0.86--a Z-value of 0.5 indicates that the object is being viewed
as it was about one third of the way back in time to the initial
Big Bang. The High-Z team submitted a paper last March based on
the discovery of 16 Ia supernovae.
A challenge to present cosmological theories
Once the data was assembled an unexpected picture of the universe
emerged. As astronomers Craig Hogan, Robert Kirshner and Nicholas
Suntzeff commented in their Scientific American article:
"The big surprise is that the supernovae we see are fainter
than predicted even for a nearly empty universe... Taken at face
value, our observations appear to require that expansion is actually
accelerating with time. A universe composed only of normal matter
cannot grow in this fashion, because its gravity is always attractive.
Yet according to Einstein's theory, the expansion can speed up
if an exotic form of energy fills empty space everywhere... Once
we admit this extraordinary possibility, we can explain our observations
perfectly, even assuming the flat geometry beloved of theorists."
So challenging are the implications of these observations that
astronomers have had to exhaust other, more prosaic explanations
for the fact that the supernovae are 25 percent dimmer than expected.
A number of possibilities have been considered and ruled out:
that the view of the supernovae is obscured by cosmic dust; that
distant supernovae behave differently from nearby ones; and that
"gravitational lensing," caused by the bending of light
rays around massive objects like galaxies, could cause the dimming.
Robert Knop, a member of the Supernova Cosmology Project, explained:
"We are now searching for more supernovae with high red shifts
in order to get more information about the early universe. But
we are also looking for supernovae with low redshifts--nearby
supernovae--to make sure that young and old type Ia supernovae
are essentially the same, and make for dependable standard candles.
We want to be sure we aren't being fooled by interstellar dust
dimming the supernovae, or that stellar explosions weren't somehow
weaker in the distant past. So far we haven't found anything to
shake our confidence, but this is such an unexpected discovery
that we'll keep looking for loopholes."
The findings are reinforced by the fact that two teams using
different techniques have independently come to the same conclusion.
But there are also deeper reasons for accepting that the universe
is expanding faster than predicted by the present models. A number
of discrepancies have been accumulating in recent years between
the theoretical predictions of cosmology and astronomical observation.
The first concerns the age of the universe. If the known universe
is the product of the Big Bang then it possible to use present
data to calculate backwards and estimate the time that has elapsed
since the initial explosion. The result can be checked against
the calculated age of astronomical objects--all of which should
be younger than the universe itself. Hubble's first figure of
two billion years was completely at odds with the age of our planet
Earth, known to be about four billion years old.
The theoretical calculations have since been developed and
refined, putting the age of the universe at around 10 billion
years. But certain globular clusters of stars appear to be older
and even according to recent reassessments may have an age of
at least 10 billion years--a very tight fit between theory and
observation. But if the universe were expanding at an accelerating
rate, then the age of the universe would be older than previously
thought and tally more precisely with information about the globular
clusters.
The second relates to the total mass of the universe. If as
the standard inflationary theory predicts, the universe is flat
then a calculation can be made of its mass. The difficulty is
that a tally of the visible matter in the universe amounts to
at most 10 percent of what is theoretically required. In recent
years, astronomers have been engaged in a search for the missing
90 percent--so-called "dark matter" either in the form
of burnt-out stars and black holes, or an abundance of exotic,
previously unobserved, nuclear particles such as WIMPS or weakly
interacting massive particles.
None of the postulated "dark matter" has accounted
for the missing mass. More recent investigations involving huge
clusters of galaxies also suggest that the density of matter in
the universe is too low to meet theoretical requirements. According
to Lawrence Krauss in his Scientific American article "Cosmological
Antigravity": "These many findings that the universe
has too little matter to make it flat have become convincing enough
to overcome the strong theoretical prejudice against this possibility.
Two interpretations are viable: either the universe is open, or
it is made flat by some additional form of energy that is not
associated with ordinary matter".
Either alternative raises fundamental new challenges to theoretical
physics and cosmology. If there is a cosmological constant or
new form of energy then physicists need to explain its existence.
In the past, attempts to combine Einstein's general theory of
relativity with quantum mechanics have raised the possibility
of a non-zero cosmological constant. But its size was so immensely
large that the consequent warping of space would make it impossible
to see objects in front of one's nose let alone distant galaxies.
Various possibilities are being examined to explain a far tinier
value.
In their Scientific American article "Inflation
in a Low-Density Universe," two theoreticians Martin Bucher
and David Spergel examine the other option--that the universe
is "open," a term referring to its particular curved
geometry. They attempt to modify the standard inflation theory
to provide for the possibility that the universe is not flat but
open. Their conjectures lead to the conclusion that the known
universe is just one self-contained "bubble universe"
of many in an infinity of time and space. Perhaps even more remarkably
their calculations suggest a possible means for testing which
of the two theoretical options is more likely by examining detailed
structure of the cosmic background microwave radiation. Two satellites
with microwave equipment sensitive enough to make the necessary
observations are due for launching--the Microwave Anisotropy Probe
by NASA next year, and its European counterpart, Planck, in 2007.
Whatever the ultimate consequences of the latest observational
findings of distant galaxies, the results have certainly opened
up a new phase in the development of cosmology and given a further
spur to theoretical physicists to develop and unify existing theories.
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |