Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
Galaxy Clusters Move Contrary to Big Bang Predictions?
Share:
by mgmirkin | September 23, 2008 at 07:21 pm
721 views | 44 Recommendations | 17 comments
Photos
We'd like to think that astronomical science has it all "down pat," but the universe is steadfastly determined to keep throwing astronomers curve balls that undermine even their best theories. First, it was a possible fractal large-scale distribution of matter in the universe, now it's galaxy clusters exhibiting motions not predicted by the Big Bang.
The standard model has it that the universe "started" in an extremely compressed state, which "inflated" (drifted explosively apart, one point from all other points). In the standard view, everything should be drifting apart from everything else, and displaying no preferred direction of motion outside of that.
Cosmologists view the microwave background - a flash of light emitted 380,000 years after the big bang - as the universe's ultimate reference frame. Relative to it, all large-scale motion should show no preferred direction.
Enter Alexander Kashlinsky and his research team at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center. Apparently, data from WMAP (the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe), when combined with a catalog of galaxy clusters, shows that a large swatch of galaxy clusters do show a preferred direction.
"The clusters show a small but measurable velocity that is independent of the universe's expansion and does not change as distances increase," says lead researcher Alexander Kashlinsky at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. "We never expected to find anything like this."
Using the cluster catalog and WMAP's three-year view of the microwave background, the astronomers detected bulk cluster motions of nearly 2 million miles per hour. The clusters are heading toward a 20-degree patch of sky between the constellations of Centaurus and Vela. What's more, this motion is constant out to at least a billion light-years. "Because the dark flow already extends so far, it likely extends across the visible universe," Kashlinsky says.
If confirmed, this finding appears to undermine prior standard model theories, which predicted no such motion.
The finding flies in the face of predictions from standard cosmological models, which describe such motions as decreasing at ever greater distances.
"The distribution of matter in the observed universe cannot account for this motion," [Kashlinsky] says.
So, it would seem that the standard model has "some explaining to do." Kashlinsky and his team intend to pursue more in-depth research on the subject by expanding the list of galaxy clusters surveyed and including the latest WMAP data, released in March of this year
The next step is to narrow down uncertainties in the measurements. "We need a more accurate accounting of how the million-degree gas in these galaxy clusters is distributed," says Atrio-Barandela.
"We’re assembling an even larger and deeper catalog of X-ray clusters to better measure the flow," Ebeling adds. The researchers also plan to extend their analysis by using the latest WMAP results, released in March.
Anecdotal evidence seems to be piling up against the standard model. If the unexpected motion turned up in this new research is confirmed, it seems to put the standard model on the defensive. Likewise, if the recent research showing a fractal distribution of matter on the universe's largest scales also turns out to be true, it's unclear where the standard model will have left to run. Perhaps into the arms of Plasma Cosmology, which purports to predict a filamentary, fractal universe and to match galaxy rotation curves without resort to 'dark matter' and other 'new physics'?
For now, it's too early to tell what will come of either recent revelation. The astronomical / astrophysical communities may have to wait with bated breath to see how this all plays out. For now, they may have to simply content themselves with two papers issued by Kashlinsky et al [1 , 2].
See also:
A Fractal Distribution of Matter in the Universe May Topple the Big Bang. If So, What's Next?
Big Bang vs. Plasma Cosmology: Competing Approaches to Understanding the Universe
An Argument for the Consideration of Electrodynamics in Cosmology (Opinion)
Advertisement
NowPublic on Facebook
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Crowd Power
mgmirkin
Beaverton, Oregon, United States
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (17)
at 19:53 on September 23rd, 2008
mgmirkin, I like this story. It's good stuff.
That would if confirmed even put into question the Universe end theory and maybe we wound freeze and may still collapse after all or even encounter another big bang Universe.
It is fascinating and amazing how little we actually know and still have to learn and understand as well as discover. It would be great is we could defy mass and energy and travel be on the speed of light to learn more and observe our Universe somewhat closer and in real time so to speak. I do enjoy reading your post here as always, thank you.
at 20:00 on September 23rd, 2008
Thanks for the note. Yeah, it'll be interesting to see how this is spun. Is it a Big Bang killer? Does it somehow conform to the Big Bang, or give us information about it? Does it fit another model better? When taken with other anecdotal evidence?
Hard to say. Should be interesting, one way or the other... Seems the universe is always intent on teaching us something.
Regards,
~Michael Gmirkin
at 20:07 on September 23rd, 2008
Maybe our hole Big Bag theory will collapse as you mention here, and still what do we really know? Maybe the Universe is a lot more then we may realise at present or dare to see. I am looking forward to find out more.
at 20:17 on September 23rd, 2008
Quite... Our observational power only extends so far! Beyond that, it's anybody's guess. Does it go on forever in some repeating pattern? In a non-repeating pattern? Does it loop back on itself, or keep going forever? Does it just peter out in a gradient, or keep going strong toward infinity?
Well, it seems like we maybe know one more thing that we didn't know before... Just have to figure out what it means!
~Michael Gmirkin
at 20:08 on September 23rd, 2008
mgmirkin, I like this story. It's good stuff.
at 20:09 on September 23rd, 2008
mgmirkin, I like this story. It's good stuff.
You actually managed to make sense of this so that I understand it - great job!
at 20:18 on September 23rd, 2008
Thankee muchly! Hopefully it's not too wide of the mark...
Regards,
~Michael Gmirkin
at 22:16 on September 23rd, 2008
Everything is moving contrary to the big bang theory because the big bang never happened. In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. When we try to exclude God and come up with guesses on how every thing began we always end up with the wrong conclusion. It's no wonder that our greatest scientist believed in God and it was because they believed in Him that they were able to discover things long before they were accepted.
at 02:38 on September 24th, 2008
Who is this "greatest" scientist that you speak of?
at 08:03 on September 24th, 2008
Quite... I think, from context, he meant "scientists". Though, exactly what he claims they knew "ahead of time" 'cause of God, is unclear.
Birkeland certainly was prescient, but then again, he was an empirical scientist and not (so far as I can tell) interested in "framing hypotheses" (IE, trying to verify or validate some religious decree or mythical construct), but rather following natural evidence wherever it led him. In his case, it was the supposition that the Earth and sun were involved in an electrical exchange. This he predicted WAY back in ~1908. It took until 1973's Triad satellite was put in orbit to verify that there were currents inflowing at the poles. Now they're called "field-aligned currents" or "Birkeland currents" (since he'd predicted them so long ago). In Dec of last year, THEMIS appears to have rediscovered exactly the same thing! But, they ascribe to the "new physics" of "magnetic reconnection" rather than just calling it an electric current in space plasma, like Birkeland would if he were alive today.
Anyway, just a little bit of fun history. Woowoo! *Wink*
Regards,
~Michael Gmirkin
at 23:49 on September 23rd, 2008
mgmirkin, I like this story. It's good science stuff. Opinion : The universe is in a dynamic balance between dying stars collapsing in black holes, emitting energy, getting "rebirthing" the Big Bang just a millisecond of what ? our brain can not think it. Why are we so interested to create Big Bang 2 with the LHC collider ? We want to know what's behind. The particles we are searching for called "the particles of god". Untill spring 2009 no chance the BigBang machine on hold. Every approach with classic science must fail. To understand ourselves we need associative thinking, a more female life creating thinking, not to proof always, but on the way. Good luck to see us on the next planet of our journey through the universe...
p.s. our live is not depending on black holes, but solar energy, the sun called RA in Egypt's pyramides
at 04:30 on September 24th, 2008
Mgmirkin, what could be bigger than what this story is about?
at 08:08 on September 24th, 2008
Precisely! This is one of those "big picture" questions... A possible "pivot point" in theoretical terms. IE, if it does in some way undermine the current theory of things, it may be a finding that could turn an entire discipline in a new direction. Assuming it's not brushed aside as an "inconvenience" to prevailing thought. I say "follow the evidence wherever it leads; nothing is 'sacred' in science." Otherwise science would simply fall into a quasi-religious doctrine... Free inquiry, debate and falsifiability are the cornerstones of science.
Regards,
~Michael Gmirkin
at 05:56 on September 24th, 2008
mgmirkin, I like this story. It's good stuff. You articulate potentially opaque material very well.
at 18:29 on September 24th, 2008
mgmirkin, I like this story. It's good stuff.
Hope the Big Bangers don't come up with another dodgy mathematical formula to get out around Kashlinsky's observations. It's reassuring that these observations are coming from a NASA research centre.
at 07:58 on September 25th, 2008
Well, parts of the original article already have dodgy ad hoc speculation that somehow "matter outside of the observable universe" is causing an attraction with the "dark flows." Purely speculative, of course... They the suppose that the universe is bigger than what we can currently observe and/or somehow the "dark flows" can give us information about the state of the universe "before the Big Bang" or "in the earliest moments of the Big Bang." Again, purely speculative...
Regards,
~Michael Gmirkin
at 17:48 on September 26th, 2008
mgmirkin, I like this story. Very cool, it's good stuff!