Isotropy refers to uniformity in all directions and orientations. Anisostropy is therefore a lack of uniformity--things in different directions may not be the same. One of the basic elements of Big Bang cosmology is that the Universe is isotropic at a large scale. This article describes some findings that may overturn that understanding.
"New Tests Suggest a Fundamental Constant of Physics Isn't The Same Across The Universe" |
ScienceAlert (https://www.sciencealert.com/new-tests-suggest-the-fundamental-forces-of-nature-aren-t-constant-across-the-universe)
QuoteScientists have found evidence that a fundamental physical constant used to measure electromagnetism between charged particles can in fact be rather inconstant, according to measurements taken from a quasar some 13 billion light-years away.
Electromagnetism is one of the four fundamental forces that knit everything in our Universe together, alongside gravity, weak nuclear force, and strong nuclear force. The strength of electromagnetic interaction between elementary particles is calculated with the help of what's known as the fine-structure constant.
However, the new readings – taken together with other readings from separate studies – point to tiny variations in this constant, which could have huge implications for how we understand everything around us.
The latest data also show the Universe may have previously hidden 'north' and 'south' bearings, a definitive direction upon which these variations in electromagnetism can be mapped.
"[The new study] seems to be supporting this idea that there could be a directionality in the Universe, which is very weird indeed," says astrophysicist John Webb (https://newsroom.unsw.edu.au/news/science-tech/new-findings-suggest-laws-nature-not-constant-previously-thought), from the University of New South Wales (UNSW) in Australia. "So the Universe may not be isotropic in its laws of physics – one that is the same, statistically, in all directions."
"But in fact, there could be some direction or preferred direction in the Universe where the laws of physics change, but not in the perpendicular direction. In other words, the Universe in some sense, has a dipole structure to it."
[Continues . . . (https://www.sciencealert.com/new-tests-suggest-the-fundamental-forces-of-nature-aren-t-constant-across-the-universe)]
From what I understand, at least some scientists do not assume that the universal constants are all that Universal, the argument being that we can observe and measure the conditions in our part of the larger puzzle, but that those observations and measurements are in themselves not absolute indicators for the state of the wider Universe.
One wonders if those constants are on some sort of gradient/wave and in that case, whether or not their increments are discrete on some level. If they are... That means something profound, though I'm not physicist nor astronomer enough to know precisely what.
there are immediate implications for thefine tuning arguments for special creation.
ive had lengthy discussions with theists on the argument, and it often breaks down on the premise of whether universal tunedconstants can be seen to exist in the first place.
the universal dipole stuff might point the other way.
Very interesting.
I see on another atheist forum that there is a Muslim claiming that the koran predicted dark matter and energy. Enough word-wrangling can achieve a lot.
BoT. I'm not surprised that the universe is anisotropic. We learn as we go and try to figure out mathematical descriptions. I've seen people describe this anisotropy situation as a "crisis". It's only a crisis for those heavily invested in one theory or another. It reminds me of the joke where the experimental physicist goes to a mathematician and asks him to explain some data. The mathematician says, "Piece of cake", lays the data out on the table and derives a formula that describes the shape of the curve. The experimental physicist then realizes that the sheet was upside down, so spins it around. The mathematician says, "Piece of cake" and derives a different formula.
Of course it's a joke, because any physicists worth their weight in #2 pencils would be able to derive the formula themselves.
I read about this elsewhere. I think together with the doubt that has been expressed about standard candles that in turn brings the whole concept of dark energy into doubt, we are in the midst of a new revolution of our understanding of the cosmos. Add to that the issues with the standard model revealed by the proton radius problem I think we are seeing a complete revolution of physics. Exciting time to be a science geek!
Frontier stuff, interesting!
Quote from: Bluenose on May 02, 2020, 01:30:29 AM
I read about this elsewhere. I think together with the doubt that has been expressed about standard candles that in turn brings the whole concept of dark energy into doubt, we are in the midst of a new revolution of our understanding of the cosmos. Add to that the issues with the standard model revealed by the proton radius problem I think we are seeing a complete revolution of physics. Exciting time to be a science geek!
Don't recall anything about a question for the standard candle, but the thing about physics, and any science in general, is that there is always more to learn. We only have approximations for whatever we observe. I suspect that by the time we figure it all out, we'll be dead, because that will be the end of the universe. :P
What I like about cosmology not only are the mysteries of the universe, but the fact that there's a vastness about the mysterious universe that just leaves me in awe. It makes us look up around and inward at the same time.
If that makes sense. Sometimes not even I understand my own rambling. :lol:
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on May 02, 2020, 02:37:20 AM
What I like about cosmology not only are the mysteries of the universe, but the fact that there's a vastness about the mysterious universe that just leaves me in awe. It makes us look up around and inward at the same time.
If that makes sense. Sometimes not even I understand my own rambling. :lol:
It's humbling and inspiring all at the same time! We're fortunate to live in a fairly non-violent cosmological neighborhood. Duck! A one-mile diameter asteroid just missed us! :P
Quote from: Dark Lightning on May 02, 2020, 03:32:42 AM
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on May 02, 2020, 02:37:20 AM
What I like about cosmology not only are the mysteries of the universe, but the fact that there's a vastness about the mysterious universe that just leaves me in awe. It makes us look up around and inward at the same time.
If that makes sense. Sometimes not even I understand my own rambling. :lol:
It's humbling and inspiring all at the same time! We're fortunate to live in a fairly non-violent cosmological neighborhood. Duck! A one-mile diameter asteroid just missed us! :P
That would have really been the the cherry to top this Disaster Cake this year has been so far, wouldn't it? Good thing the universe didn't fling an asteroid at Earth, yet. :foottap:
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on May 02, 2020, 06:49:26 PM
Quote from: Dark Lightning on May 02, 2020, 03:32:42 AM
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on May 02, 2020, 02:37:20 AM
What I like about cosmology not only are the mysteries of the universe, but the fact that there's a vastness about the mysterious universe that just leaves me in awe. It makes us look up around and inward at the same time.
If that makes sense. Sometimes not even I understand my own rambling. :lol:
It's humbling and inspiring all at the same time! We're fortunate to live in a fairly non-violent cosmological neighborhood. Duck! A one-mile diameter asteroid just missed us! :P
That would have really been the the cherry to top this Disaster Cake this year has been so far, wouldn't it? Good thing the universe didn't fling an asteroid at Earth, yet. :foottap:
:folded: How about a teeny one, about a foot across? :embarrassed:
BTW, try and stay safe down there. That idiot Bolsanaro is going to cause a lot of death. :(
Quote from: Dark Lightning on May 02, 2020, 08:11:25 PM
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on May 02, 2020, 06:49:26 PM
Quote from: Dark Lightning on May 02, 2020, 03:32:42 AM
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on May 02, 2020, 02:37:20 AM
What I like about cosmology not only are the mysteries of the universe, but the fact that there's a vastness about the mysterious universe that just leaves me in awe. It makes us look up around and inward at the same time.
If that makes sense. Sometimes not even I understand my own rambling. :lol:
It's humbling and inspiring all at the same time! We're fortunate to live in a fairly non-violent cosmological neighborhood. Duck! A one-mile diameter asteroid just missed us! :P
That would have really been the the cherry to top this Disaster Cake this year has been so far, wouldn't it? Good thing the universe didn't fling an asteroid at Earth, yet. :foottap:
:folded: How about a teeny one, about a foot across? :embarrassed:
BTW, try and stay safe down there. That idiot Bolsanaro is going to cause a lot of death. :(
:folded: I don't have to remember the formula for kinetic energy* to know that even a teeny one could cause a lot of damage if it falls on me.
(But if one falls on Bolsonaro, I will welcome it!)
* Did I get that right? It would be kinetic energy, right? :???:
ive been luck y enough to see two pretty close. one was in arizona. i was lying on a tarp watching the sky and one came right overhead and broke up. clear night, so there ws one big piece that broke into two, and then into three. then they went dark.
another in iohio came down through the cllouds at about midnight. lit them up like an explosion.
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on May 02, 2020, 08:23:38 PM
Quote from: Dark Lightning on May 02, 2020, 08:11:25 PM
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on May 02, 2020, 06:49:26 PM
Quote from: Dark Lightning on May 02, 2020, 03:32:42 AM
Quote from: xSilverPhinx on May 02, 2020, 02:37:20 AM
What I like about cosmology not only are the mysteries of the universe, but the fact that there's a vastness about the mysterious universe that just leaves me in awe. It makes us look up around and inward at the same time.
If that makes sense. Sometimes not even I understand my own rambling. :lol:
It's humbling and inspiring all at the same time! We're fortunate to live in a fairly non-violent cosmological neighborhood. Duck! A one-mile diameter asteroid just missed us! :P
That would have really been the the cherry to top this Disaster Cake this year has been so far, wouldn't it? Good thing the universe didn't fling an asteroid at Earth, yet. :foottap:
:folded: How about a teeny one, about a foot across? :embarrassed:
BTW, try and stay safe down there. That idiot Bolsanaro is going to cause a lot of death. :(
:folded: I don't have to remember the formula for kinetic energy* to know that even a teeny one could cause a lot of damage if it falls on me.
(But if one falls on Bolsonaro, I will welcome it!)
* Did I get that right? It would be kinetic energy, right? :???:
:thumbsup: Yup, kinetic energy, and if it was only 2mm diameter when it hit him he'd be toast.
Billy, I saw a nearly stationary light in the sky one time many years ago when driving to work in the dark. It was descending very slowly. I realized that I was in nearly a direct line with a meteorite's path, which was why it wasn't streaking left or right, and apparently falling slowly-it was on a grazing path to the earth. It vanished before it hit me, striking somewhere way away from where I was. Eerie experience, and one I haven't thought of for a long time.
Quote from: Dark Lightning on May 02, 2020, 02:08:46 AM
Quote from: Bluenose on May 02, 2020, 01:30:29 AM
I read about this elsewhere. I think together with the doubt that has been expressed about standard candles that in turn brings the whole concept of dark energy into doubt, we are in the midst of a new revolution of our understanding of the cosmos. Add to that the issues with the standard model revealed by the proton radius problem I think we are seeing a complete revolution of physics. Exciting time to be a science geek!
Don't recall anything about a question for the standard candle, but the thing about physics, and any science in general, is that there is always more to learn. We only have approximations for whatever we observe. I suspect that by the time we figure it all out, we'll be dead, because that will be the end of the universe. :P
Article about standard candles not being so standard after all (https://phys.org/news/2011-01-cosmology-standard-candle.html)
Quote from: Bluenose on May 03, 2020, 06:19:22 AM
Quote from: Dark Lightning on May 02, 2020, 02:08:46 AM
Quote from: Bluenose on May 02, 2020, 01:30:29 AM
I read about this elsewhere. I think together with the doubt that has been expressed about standard candles that in turn brings the whole concept of dark energy into doubt, we are in the midst of a new revolution of our understanding of the cosmos. Add to that the issues with the standard model revealed by the proton radius problem I think we are seeing a complete revolution of physics. Exciting time to be a science geek!
Don't recall anything about a question for the standard candle, but the thing about physics, and any science in general, is that there is always more to learn. We only have approximations for whatever we observe. I suspect that by the time we figure it all out, we'll be dead, because that will be the end of the universe. :P
Article about standard candles not being so standard after all (https://phys.org/news/2011-01-cosmology-standard-candle.html)
Oh. I was thinking of a "candle" candle, not a "star sized" candle. The variability of stars is an issue. At my alma mater, the solar observatory staff try to calibrate their equipment using the sun itself. It's a problem, of course, due to the sun's variability even in the short term. The electronics are not linear enough to be calibrated at a different input power level, though. Cosmologists make half their own trouble, with assumptions like the Cepheids being "standard" in some way. :P
Quote from: Dark Lightning on May 03, 2020, 05:27:59 PM
Quote from: Bluenose on May 03, 2020, 06:19:22 AM
Quote from: Dark Lightning on May 02, 2020, 02:08:46 AM
Quote from: Bluenose on May 02, 2020, 01:30:29 AM
I read about this elsewhere. I think together with the doubt that has been expressed about standard candles that in turn brings the whole concept of dark energy into doubt, we are in the midst of a new revolution of our understanding of the cosmos. Add to that the issues with the standard model revealed by the proton radius problem I think we are seeing a complete revolution of physics. Exciting time to be a science geek!
Don't recall anything about a question for the standard candle, but the thing about physics, and any science in general, is that there is always more to learn. We only have approximations for whatever we observe. I suspect that by the time we figure it all out, we'll be dead, because that will be the end of the universe. :P
Article about standard candles not being so standard after all (https://phys.org/news/2011-01-cosmology-standard-candle.html)
Oh. I was thinking of a "candle" candle, not a "star sized" candle. The variability of stars is an issue. At my alma mater, the solar observatory staff try to calibrate their equipment using the sun itself. It's a problem, of course, due to the sun's variability even in the short term. The electronics are not linear enough to be calibrated at a different input power level, though. Cosmologists make half their own trouble, with assumptions like the Cepheids being "standard" in some way. :P
LOL about the candles thing...
It will prove to be a big embarrassment for cosmologists, because the Nobel Prize was awarded for the so called discovery of an accelerating expanding universe. That is where the idea of dark energy was spawned to try to explain the acceleration. But if the cepheid variables are not as consistent as had previously been thought then there may well be no acceleration and hence no dark energy. Oh how embarrassment.
Variables won't, constants aren't- Osborn's Law.
It's still a guessing game with cosmology. Maybe I should stick around 'til the end of the universe to see who's right. :)
Quote from: Dark Lightning on May 04, 2020, 03:31:15 PM
Variables won't, constants aren't- Osborn's Law.
It's still a guessing game with cosmology. Maybe I should stick around 'til the end of the universe to see who's right. :)
:rofl:
Thought there were previous posts about these structures but the search function failed to find them. No matter--
"A Giant Structure in Space Challenges Our Understanding of The Universe" |
Science Alert (https://www.sciencealert.com/a-giant-structure-in-space-challenges-our-understanding-of-the-universe)
QuoteA colossal structure in the distant Universe is defying our understanding of how the Universe evolved.
In light that has traveled for 6.9 billion years to reach us, astronomers have found a giant, almost perfect ring of galaxies, some 1.3 billion light-years in diameter. It doesn't match any known structure or formation mechanism.
The Big Ring, as the structure has been named, could mean that we need to amend the standard model of cosmology.
The discovery, led by astronomer Alexia Lopez of the University of Central Lancashire, was presented at the 243rd meeting of the American Astronomical Society in January, and has been published in the Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics.
(https://www.sciencealert.com/images/2024/01/big-ring-body.jpg)
The Big Ring (blue) and Giant Arc (red).
Image Credit: University of Central Lancashire
It's the second giant structure discovered by Lopez and her colleagues. The first, called the Giant Arc, is actually in the same part of the sky, at the same distance away. When the arc's discovery was announced in 2021, it puzzled astronomers. The Big Ring only deepens the mystery.
"Neither of these two ultra-large structures is easy to explain in our current understanding of the universe," Lopez said in January (https://www.uclan.ac.uk/news/big-ring-in-the-sky).
[Continues . . . (https://www.sciencealert.com/a-giant-structure-in-space-challenges-our-understanding-of-the-universe)]
The paper is open access:
"A Big Ring on the sky" |
Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics (https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1475-7516/2024/07/055)
QuoteAbstract:
We present the discovery of `A Big Ring on the Sky' (BR), the second ultra-large large-scale structure (uLSS) found in Mg II-absorber catalogues, following the previously reported Giant Arc (GA). In cosmological terms the BR is close to the GA — at the same redshift z ∼ 0.8 and with a separation on the sky of only ∼ 12°.
Two extraordinary uLSSs in such close configuration raises the possibility that together they form an even more extraordinary cosmological system. The BR is a striking circular, annulus-like, structure of diameter ∼ 400 Mpc (proper size, present epoch).
The method of discovery is as described in the GA paper, but here using the new Mg II-absorber catalogues restricted to DR16Q quasars. Using the Convex Hull of Member Spheres (CHMS) algorithm, we estimate that the annulus and inner absorbers of the BR have departures from random expectations, at the density of the control field, of up to 5.2σ.
We present the discovery of the BR, assess its significance using the CHMS, Minimal Spanning Tree (MST), FilFinder and Cuzick & Edwards (CE) methods, discuss it in the context of the GA+BR system, and suggest some implications for the origins of uLSS and for our understanding of cosmology. For example, it may be that unusual geometric patterns, such as these uLSSs, have an origin in cosmic strings.