backtop

Science Gaping Hole Found in Universe
Michael Asher (Blog) - August 25, 2007 10:14 AM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 165 comment(s) - last by jtemplin.. on Sep 7 at 8:12 PM

A false-color view of the hole, imaged with both the WMAP satellite and a radio telescope array  (Source: NASA)
Unexpected results baffle our understanding of the universe

Astronomers have found a giant "hole" in the universe that measures nearly a billion light-year across. The large galactic void is empty of galaxies, stars, dust clouds and, oddly enough, even dark matter. The discovery has left scientists clambering for a plausible explanation, however, as of right now one hasn't arisen. Scientists claim that a galactic void this large is far from a normal occurrence.

The region was intially discovered by NASA's Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Satellite. At that time, scientists had no idea that it would turn out to be a giant space void.

The WMAP satellite measures the temperature of cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB) over the entire sky. CMB radiation is a form of electromagnetic radiation that fills the entire universe and can be detected in all regions of space. This radiation is remnant heat from the Big Bang and is very cold, measuring just 2.725° above absolute zero.

On the map of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) radiation produced by the WMAP satellite, the void came up as a cold spot. Since the temperature of CMB radiation is quite uniform in all of space, scientists already knew there was something special about the region.  Lead researcher Lawrence Rudnick of the University of Minnesota said "we already knew there was something different about this spot." Due to its cooler appearance on the CMB Map, the void was dubbed the "WMAP Cold Spot."

Further inspection of the hole was made using the Very Large Array (VLA) radio telescope funded by the National Science Foundation, after which it was discovered by University of Minnesota researchers that the cold spot is devoid of nearly all forms of matter. Many galactic voids exist in space, however, the WMAP Cold Spot Void is an especially unique occurrence considering that it is nearly 1,000 times larger than any other observed void.

Rudnick refers to the results as "suprising."

Also involved in the research of the region was Associate Professor Liliya Williams, who stated, "What we’ve found is not normal, based on either observational studies or on computer simulations of the large-scale evolution of the Universe".

The void is roughly 6-10 billion light years from Earth, in the constellation Eridanus.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Center of the universe?
By Nexworks on 8/25/2007 6:23:07 PM , Rating: 2
Could this be the center of the universe? Id imagine there would be a big void where the big bang went off.




RE: Center of the universe?
By noirsoft on 8/25/2007 6:31:04 PM , Rating: 2
That's not an accurate way to think of it. Where is the "center" on the surface of a sphere? There isn't one. As the sphere gets bigger, things on the surface move farther apart, but there is no "empty center"

The universe is the same way, except that whereas the surface of an expanding sphere is a 2d surface expanding in 3d, the universe is a 3d space expanding in a fourth dimension.

At least, that's how I understand it from a bit of mild reading. Experts may correct me if I'm wrong.


RE: Center of the universe?
By pyr0m on 8/25/2007 6:49:46 PM , Rating: 2
The surface of a 4-d hypersphere is a "normal" 3-d sphere. As such, it is relatively easy to define its center.

I do agree with your semi-apparent skepticism about that area being the center, because if one places a large amount of particles with the same charge in one place, one at the very center will remain mostly stationary, and the ones at the far edge will be shot off much faster, leaving (essentially) a high-charge/mass area at the center of charge/mass.


RE: Center of the universe?
By Zurtex on 8/25/2007 9:02:15 PM , Rating: 3
Eh?

I think you're thinking of the cross section of a 4-d hypershpere. That's like saying the surface of a 3-d sphere is a cricle, it's not it's a 2-sphere.


RE: Center of the universe?
By pyr0m on 8/25/2007 10:12:47 PM , Rating: 2
Dang, thanks for catching that. It's been far too long since I've studied geometry.

I was under the impression, however, that the universe was the inside of a sphere, not the surface of a 4-hypersphere (the 3-sphere is the geometer's term for this). Locally, at least (referring to how much of the universe we can see), the radius of curvature is essentially zero, which corresponds to a euclidean, instead of spherical, geometry.


RE: Center of the universe?
By Zurtex on 8/25/2007 10:41:43 PM , Rating: 5
I think it's essentially too hard to tell, locally we appear to be in Eucledian Space, but locally the surface of a sphere is Eucleadian space, the curvature is 1/R, so for very large R it appears to be a plain.

As far as my diffential geometry lessons go, the only way to accurately tell is to get a really big triangle in space (say measurable size of the universe, so would span millions of galaxies). Work out its area and the sum of its angles, if the angles add up to Pi (180 degrees) and the area is 1/2*b*h, we live in Eucledian Space, if not then we live in some other topologically distinct space and there are appropriate formulae to work it out. This ofcourse all assumes we live on a smooth manifold of some form, which may find out some day just isn't right and general relativity goes down the toilet.

A 3-sphere is actually the surface of a 4-D hypershpere, it sounds a bit pedantic but there's some important gemmetric reasons for keeping these 2 objects distinct.


RE: Center of the universe?
By pyr0m on 8/25/2007 11:39:34 PM , Rating: 2
It's a wonderful thing that we'll probably never need to know the exact Gaussian curvature of space (at least, not until we have inter-galaxy travel).

I can almost guarantee that the person who finds proof of the exact curvature of space will get the Nobel Prize in physics. Of course, there's also a theory that the curvature changes (even discounting gravity wells and such)...


RE: Center of the universe?
By Brockway on 8/26/2007 10:46:38 PM , Rating: 2
Wasn't this already worked out? That space is flat, that is.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/727073.stm


RE: Center of the universe?
By Zurtex on 8/26/2007 11:22:36 PM , Rating: 2
All smooth manifolds are locally R^n, I don't see how "a balloon" could prove the Universe is globally flat, just that the local area is in fact Euclidean or flat, which is not a surprise at all.

But I'll try and see if I can find an article with more detail on this.


RE: Center of the universe?
By SilthDraeth on 8/27/2007 9:57:50 AM , Rating: 5
Damned lot of closet astrophysicist on this board.


RE: Center of the universe?
By Nexworks on 8/25/2007 7:04:36 PM , Rating: 2
Well the explosion would go off in all directions pushing all the energy away from the center. So somewhere in the universe there should be a section of nothing no?


RE: Center of the universe?
By enthusiaster on 8/25/2007 8:13:09 PM , Rating: 2
noirsoft is somewhat correct, the universe may be expanding which means that there is nothing(?) beyond the expansion. but you are also correct in that in such an explosion, everything would leave the center. what i see is AN EXPANDING "DEAD ZONE". it is not a concentration of anything but a void. and if you want to get weird about it, space could be folding in on itself, the "perimeter" recycling right back to the void as the perimeter expands then outside the perimeter folds into the void.


RE: Center of the universe?
By mendocinosummit on 8/25/2007 9:47:32 PM , Rating: 3
Really far out, but what if that is the "eye" of the universe. Maybe we are actually slowly, very slowly, revolving around it.


RE: Center of the universe?
By TSS on 8/26/2007 12:20:13 PM , Rating: 3
if anything where moving further away form it, would it be the center of the universe. since space is expanding and where in space, the distance between us and every object gets larger over time. would you wait long enough eventually it'd be just us and our solar system.

if anything i'd say some civilization was experimenting with some really big sticks'o'TNT, set em off and got a bigger bang for their buck then they hoped for.


RE: Center of the universe?
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 8/27/2007 3:00:55 PM , Rating: 5
instead of the eye of the universe, maybe it is the butt hole of the universe. That's why everything is trying to get away from that area. If I can clear a 20 foot by 20 foot room with a small release of gas imagine what the universe can produce.... :P


RE: Center of the universe?
By The Jedi on 8/29/2007 6:49:01 PM , Rating: 2
"Most people would call this the ass end of space"...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gO6rqAJ3mGc


RE: Center of the universe?
By 16nm on 8/29/2007 8:58:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If I can clear a 20 foot by 20 foot room with a small release of gas


Hey! They should ship you off to Mars for some terraforming. You could spend the rest of your life in a state of pure flatulence all the while creating the martian atmosphere. Call NASA, problem solved.


RE: Center of the universe?
By Dragen on 8/31/2007 4:28:47 PM , Rating: 2
Are you people not paying attention? Drop everything you think you know about physics as you know it, and prepare for a very BASIC lesson on how the universe is theorized to expand.

Your assumptions on matter to be void in a center of an "explosion" make a lot of sense in a 3rd dimensional reality. But this is not what has, and IS happening in *our* Universe. The Big Bang was NOT a "Universal Explosion" INSIDE 3rd Dimensional space. It has been shown the big bang was so powerful, and so violent, the expansion of all matter from your "center" was faster than the speed of light, which completely utterly violated our theories on special relativity; which states that nothing, matter nor energy can travel faster than the speed of light in the 3rd dimension as we know it.

What happened, and IS happening is called "Inflation". Yes, like a Balloon. The Universe itself is contained within another dimension, and probably another, and another, and another. The subject matter gets so complex it will hurt your brain. The POINT is, OUR 3RD dimension that we all know and love today, and live in... is really the skin of the balloon. Therefore, it is physically IMPOSSIBLE, to reach the center without traversing dimensions. Do you understand?

That's precisely how the rate of EXPANSION was faster than the speed of light, as this didn't violate the law of special relativity in our 3rd dimension. The expansion of the galaxies contained on that spherical 3rd dimensional plane never moved away or toward each other at or beyond the speed of light? Get it?

This also answers the question why Galaxies collide with each other. When viewing the Big Bang as a 3rd dimensional event, nobody could explain why galaxies would collide with each other!!! In a true 3rd dimensional explosion, all matter would completely move in opposite directions from each other. But since we are dealing with Inflation here, the galaxies will wobble around on the "skin" of our universal bubble and create massive cosmic fireworks.

Don't believe me? Andromeda, our neighbor Galaxy.. is on a collision course for the Milky Way.

I really... REALLY hope this clears up some very very wrong preconceived notions about the Big Bang, and a very basic fundamental level.


RE: Center of the universe?
By Guigsy on 8/26/2007 4:28:29 PM , Rating: 5
Imagine you live in only 2 dimensions on the surface of a balloon, this is your entire universe. If you travel in one direction long enough, you'll eventually end up where you started. This universe is expanding, the balloon is slowly being blown up. Unfortunately, everyone living on the 2D balloon surface has no concept of where that centre is. They can't point towards it. When their universe started (the balloon was very small), everything was the 'centre', and now everything that was the centre is now more spread out.

Our universe is similar, except we live in 3d space and it's unlikely that it is 'round'. There's no centre to speak of, everywhere was the centre, just everything has spread out. To point towards the centre, we'd need another dimension... which makes my head hurt.

Yes, I know, lots of inaccuracies, but it's the best understanding I have.... :)