Albert Einstein c. 1921: Photo by Ferdinand Schmutzer
Courtesy Public domain via WikimediaScientists at Princeton University and elsewhere spent the last couple years testing Albert Einstein's Theory of General Relativity and have come to the conclusion that the theory holds up just as well in the vast and distant regions of the universe as it does in our own solar system. First published in 1915, the landmark theory describes the very fabric of time and space, and gravity, and the way they interact with each other. It was further confirmed with experiments done during a total eclipse of the sun in 1919. The new research findings appear in the recent issue of Nature.
SOURCES.
Princeton University story
Tags : This comes from the American Museum of Natural History.
How to torture a physicist
in Physical Science, History and Nature of Science, Scientific World View, Structure of Matter, Energy Transformations, The Universe, and Forces of Nature
For me, the greatest mystery in the universe is Lindsay Price, and how she continues to find work.: Not that great a mystery, I guess…
Courtesy catechism
And, let’s face it, who hasn’t had the urge now and then? At the “Quantum to Cosmos” physics conference in Waterloo, Canada, seven physicists were asked, "What keeps you awake at night?" (Apparently, they meant “what issue in science” as opposed to love, money, or lack thereof.) The panel came up with some pretty heavy questions:
Why are the fundamental laws of nature the way that they are? There doesn’t seem to be any reason why they couldn’t be some other way. Are there, perhaps, other universes with other rules?
How does the Observer Effect work? This is a little deep for me, but apparently at the sub-atomic level, simply observing a particle over here can effect another particle thousands of miles away. How does nature do that?
What is the nature of matter, anyway? Especially the “dark matter” which is theorized to exist in outer space, messing up all our gravity calculations.
On a related note, will string theory ever be proven? String theory is the latest theory for how matter and energy interact at the sub-sub-sub-atomic level. And while it is very elegant and seems right on paper, no one has any idea how to conduct an experiment to prove or disprove it.
How do complex systems arise out of simple, basic particles and forces? You know, complex systems. Like life, the universe, and everything.
How did the universe begin, anyway? Physics can only take us back to a few fractions of a second after the Big Bang, a moment at which the universe was very small, very hot, and very dense. Before that, the laws of physics break down. No one knows how to describe the Bang itself, or how / why it happened.
Which brings us to, what are the limits of science? Science is based on observation and experiment. But, at some point, you run into ideas that can’t be tested. In theory, it’s entirely possible that there are other universes. But we’re stuck in this one—how would we ever know?
If anyone has answers to any of these questions, please send them to Canada ASAP. It sounds like there’s a bunch of scientists up there who could use a good night’s sleep.
Birth of a planet in a binary star system: Could such a star system throw a planet into retrograde orbit?
Courtesy NASA/JPL-Caltech A newly detected planet about twice the size of Jupiter circling a distant star seems to be orbiting in the opposite direction the star is spinning. This is a first for astronomers, and goes against conventional wisdom since planets and stars are thought to form out of the same swirling nebulous gas. Scientists aren't sure why it's acting this way, but they speculate the planet could have been sent into retrograde orbit by an external force such as a near-miss with another undetected planet in the system or by a passing star. Kind of interesting whatever the case. The study has been submitted for publication in the Astrophysical Journal, but you can read more about it here right now.
Cool article that describes how dark matter will be able to be studied since it might glow.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20081106/sc_space/mysteriousdarkmattermigh...
Swedish cosmologist Max Tegmark thinks so.
Is anybody out there?: If not, it'd be fine by me!
Courtesy NASA
Is there intelligent life elsewhere in the Universe? That’s a hot topic, both among astronomers and right here on Science Buzz. The argument goes like this:
• There are about 100 billion galaxies in the known Universe
• Each galaxy has about 100 billion stars.
• Even if only a small fraction of them have planets, that’s still an awful lot. Ya gotta figure at least some of them developed intelligent life.
And thus we go looking for signs of life in outer space: probes to Mars, searches for organic molecules, even scanning the skies for radio signals. So far… nothing.
Nick Bostrom is glad. This Oxford professor argues that finding life on other planets would be bad news for us here on Earth.
The way he sees it is this:
• The Universe is about 14.5 billion years old.
• Earth is about 4.5 billion years old.
• That’s plenty of time for intelligent life anywhere else in our galaxy, or even a nearby galaxy, to come pay a visit.
• They haven’t.
This convinces Bostrom that interstellar travel must be impossible – if it wasn’t, someone would have stopped in by now, if only to ask for directions.
What makes interstellar travel impossible? Bostrom and economist Robin Hanson theorize (or “theorise” – they are British, after all) the existence of one or more “Great Filters.” The evolution of life, from primordial ooze to galactic explorer, requires a vast number of steps, some so complicated as to be virtually impossible. Obviously, one of those steps has been preventing interstellar travel for the past 14.5 billion years, so it must be pretty good.
What does all this have to do with life here on Earth? Simply this: the identity of this filter, and whether it lies ahead of us or behind us, may very well determine the fate of all humanity.
If the filter lies behind us—especially if the filter lies wayyyy behind us—then we’re in good shape. We’ve passed the barrier that has stopped everybody else. But if the filter lies close to us—or, worse yet, ahead of us—then it spells big trouble. For example, perhaps the only way to travel the stars is to harness some great energy source: nuclear power, or perhaps something we haven’t discovered yet. And perhaps every civilization in the history of the Universe that discovered this power ended up blowing themselves up. It’s unlikely that we would be any different.
Bostrom’s conclusion is counter-intuitive but compelling. If, as we explore the Universe, we find life is rare, then that’s good news—Earth succeeded where every other planet failed. But if we find that life, especially complex, intelligent life, is common, then that doesn’t bode well at all. Whatever stopped those planets is likely going to stop us, too.
*(PS: The answer is, Tommy James and the Shondells, later covered by Tiffany -- both proof that intelligent life is exceedingly rare, even here on Earth.)
On March 19, there was a tremendous explosion in outer space. The massive gamma-ray burst was faintly visible to the naked eye, despite being 7.5 billion light years away. That’s half the distance across the Universe, and 1,000 times further than the previous record for most distant visible object. Gamma-ray bursts occur when giant stars run out of fuel and collapse, releasing huge amounts of energy.
Google Sky now works in a web browser (without a download). From within a web browser one can navigate the sky in a way similar to using Google Maps. Zoom or drag your way through a universe of stitched together images from telescopes and satellites. Try it out. It is lots of fun.
Artist rendition of newly formed planet orbiting its young star
Courtesy NASA/JPL-Caltech/R. Hurt (SSC)Astronomers in Germany have announced the discovery of a newborn planet in a distant solar system.
Johny Setiawan, of the Max Planck Institute for Astronomy in Heidelberg, discovered the extrasolar planet using the 2.2m Max-Planck-Gesellschaft telescope in Chile. He said it’s the first and so far earliest example of a planet observed during its formation process.
Planets are thought to form out of the disks of dust and gas swirling around newly created stars. The new planet, catalogued as TW Hydrae b, is situated in the constellation Hydrae some 180 light years from Earth, and is only about 8 or so million years old – a mere baby in terms of planetary formation. In fact, the star it circles isn’t much further along in its own development.
"This demonstrates that planets can form within 10 million years, before the disk has been dissipated by stellar winds and radiation," the researchers explained in a recent issue of the journal Nature.
The gaseous newborn’s mass is about 10 times that of Jupiter in our own solar system, and orbits at a distance of about 4 million miles, just inside the inner edge of its star’s disk of gas and dust.
"The discovery shows that what we always call as 'protoplanetary' disks are indeed protoplanetary; they form planets," Setiawan said. "There are many 'protoplanetary' disks detected around young stars, but no planets so far have been detected within such young systems."
MORE INFORMATION
BBC.com story
Story at SpaceRef.com
The Extrasolar Planets Encyclopaedia
Max Planck Institute for Astronomy
Subscribe
I want to learn about
Science Buzz is supported by the National Science Foundation.Copyright © Science Museum of Minnesota, 2004-2010, except where noted.
Add a new comment