Slashdot Mirror


Theory-Affirming Evidence About the Universe

Bill Kendrick writes "Astronomers using a radio telescope at the South Pole have recorded a flicker of light from nearly 14 billion years ago that verifies most modern theory about the cosmos. Way back then, light and matter were only just beginning to separate from each other."

9 of 431 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Explain this to me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's not the matter in the Universe which is "expanding", but the Universe itself. The Big Bang didn't happen at just one point in space; it happened at one point which became all of space. So the Big Bang happened everywhere - Kidderminster, Baghdad, Mercury, Andromeda, everywhere. So there are parts of the Universe which are very very far away from us. Light from these parts has travelled for billions of years to reach us, hence it was intially emitted a very long time ago, at a time just after the Big Bang.

  2. Re:Explain this to me... by c_de_bugger · · Score: 5, Informative

    Many people think the Big Bang theory means that the universe expands like a conventional explosion from a sigular point. This is not correct.
    Imagine an infinite rubber sheet covered in dots. At the beginning of the universe (or as early as we can postulate) this sheet started stretching in all directions , so the dots on it became further apart. This is similar to what happened to the universe, except in the universe it was 3 dimentional. So there is no special place where the big bang happened, it was everywhere
    Since the universe was always infinite and the big bang happened everywhere on the 'sheet', as we look further away we see further back in time. This means light is always coming from every age of the universe since the big bang for us to see. The light in this case came from when the 'sheet' stretched just enough for the density of the universe to allow light to pass freely without being continually absorbed and re-emitted. This is the base microwave background radiation.
    This article is saying polarisation has been detected which means some evidence of the lights last scattering event is present, so this tells us something about the universe at the point when it became opaque to light.

  3. Re:Explain this to me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative
    Since the universe was always infinite
    Nope, the Universe doesn't have to be spatially infinite. At the beginning, it was very very small.
  4. Wrong by RobinH · · Score: 3, Informative

    How ironic that a creationist would use a scientific principle to try and prove the existence of God. If you want to use the 2nd law of thermodynamics in an argument, then go and get a physics degree. In the mean time, check out this page and call me in the morning.

    --
    "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
  5. Re:This proves God exists- it does no such thing by panurge · · Score: 3, Informative
    Total entropy of system increases. In this case the system is the entire universe. But localised entropy may go down, either by statistical fluctuation or as a result of some other process. Example: if I build a wall from bricks (small reduction in entropy) I give off heat (increase in entropy). There is nothing to stop star condensation if the net total entropy of the universe is increasing as a result of the expansion of the universe, randomisation of dust cloud particle position etc. This business about laws of thermodynamics comes from the same lamebrains that persecuted Galileo.

    Of course, the question about why there is a universe at all has to be answered. But according to Bill Ockham's Remington, entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem. God + universe = two entities, universe = 1 entity, therefore, as Laplace put it, je n'ai pas besoin de cette hypothese.

    --
    Panurge has posted for the last time. Thanks for the positive moderations.
  6. Slashdot sensationalism... by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Informative

    If anyone actually read the real article they would be appaled at the sensationalism applied to this story by the slashdot editors and the submitting person. The ONLY thing it solidifies is the polarization aspects and NOTHING ELSE.

    It is getting quite disgusting as how Slashdot's editors are allowing this site to become the new "weekly world news". what's next stories about a two headed alien worm baby and a phycic moose found in northern canada?

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  7. This is my office mate's Ph.D. thesis by cgreer · · Score: 5, Informative

    I work at UChicago (Carlstrom, the professor here, is my advisor). For more information about CMB polarisation, I reccomend Wayne Hu's (a theorists) webpages at http://background.uchicago.edu.

    He provides an excellent lay (and more complicated,
    if you're interested) introduction to what's going on here.

    Essentially, it boils down to the fact that people
    have been looking for this phenomenon for 20 years, and if someone finally said conclusively, "It's not there" that means the last few decades of cosmology would literally have been back to the drawing board.

    This really is an exciting timne in cosmology.

  8. Re:Read the bible by Aexia · · Score: 2, Informative

    Remember kids, every time a gap in fossil record is filled, two more gaps are created!

    Just because you don't know about the countless intermediary fossils that we've discovered for many species, including our own, doesn't mean they exist. We've got quite a nice progression from our common ancestor with ape to modern man, thankyouverymuch.

    The Talk.Origins FAQ Archive

  9. Re:No where does the Bible say earth's age.... by Hard_Code · · Score: 2, Informative

    Not to piss specifically on your religion, but:

    http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient& q= biblical+contradictions

    http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_bibl.htm

    This hasn't exactly been hiding since the bible was written.

    --

    It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?