Slashdot Mirror


NASA and DoE Team On Dark Energy Research

Roland Piquepaille writes "NASA and the U.S. Department of Energy have teamed up to operate the future Joint Dark Energy Mission. As you probably know, recent astronomical measurements have showed that about 72% of the total energy in the universe is dark energy, even if scientists don't know much about it, but speculate that it is present almost since the beginning of our Universe more than 13 billion years ago. The JDEM 'mission will make precise measurements of the expansion rate of the universe to understand how this rate has changed with time. These measurements will yield vital clues about the nature of dark energy.' The launch of a spacecraft for the JDEM mission is not planned before 2015."

14 of 106 comments (clear)

  1. Need a better marketing department by MosesJones · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Come on.... "Dark Energy" this should have everyone wearing some form of mask and a black uniform with just a simple white spark on it or something. We complain about not getting kids into science and then when we get something with one of the coolest sounding names around we make it into something dull and boring.

    "Dark Energy has been around for 13 billion years but no-one has been able to harness it. Do you have what it takes to join the Legion of Dark Scientists?"

    --
    An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
    1. Re:Need a better marketing department by Andr+T. · · Score: 3, Funny
      The mascot could be Darth Vader!

      Mechanical voice:

      - Come join us understand the real nature of the Universe. Together we will understand the deepest secrets of matter and energy...

      Darth Vader approaches a group of scientists wearing white clothes, looking at a telescope and talking to each other.

      - And you can be sure the smartest minds of the planet will be with you in this journey. May the energy, dark and bright, be with you, my friend.

      --

      Any life is made up of a single moment, the moment in which a man finds out, once and for all, who he is.

  2. Department of Dark Energy by EachLennyAPenny · · Score: 3, Funny

    Once they form the Department of Dark Energy they could post job ads reading "Come to the dark side".

  3. what i don't get is... by Ignis+Flatus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    if there's so much dark energy in the universe, then why don't we have any local in our own little solar system or planet? how come dark energy only makes the science of things far away off-kilter, yet all our science locally we can measure to 9 or more decimal places? seems like an awfully big fudge factor, if you ask me.

    1. Re:what i don't get is... by boot_img · · Score: 3, Informative

      According to the current theory, dark energy does exist in our solar system, its just that you need many, many more than only 9 decimal places to measure it.

      Its repulsive effect however increases with scale, so the larger distances you probe, the easier it is detect.

  4. Re:The realm of the DoE by boot_img · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually DOE has always been deeply involved in high energy (particle physics) research. They fund a number of accelerators, including Fermilab. Its not clear that any of that research would lead to usable energy sources either.

    You can see the Dark Energy research as the intersection of high energy physics (DOE) and cosmology (NASA).

  5. Re:It's a silly thing to measure. by blancolioni · · Score: 4, Informative

    Of course being a couch-scientist (worse than amateur scientist), I might be hugely wrong, but somehow, I don't think I am (surprisingly).

    Unfortunately, you are wrong, and I guess it's not that surprising, considering your ... interesting take on cosmology. Einstein's work was intimately concerned with the nature of spacetime, so saying that "he looked soley[sic] at matter" is flat-out wrong.

    Space and matter are the same? Then either space has a gravitational effect, or they're the "same" in a way that doesn't include a fundamental property of matter, which is to say that they're not the same at all (you'll recognise the quote "in exactly the same way that bricks don't" -- it speaks to nature of classification rather elegantly I think).

    So why hasn't the gravitational effect of space been detected? Oh, wait, because the scientists missed something. Silly scientists!

  6. Dark Matter/Emergy Does Not Exist by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I was always a skeptic when it came to Dark Matter(I am not an astronomer, so this all technically an uniformed opinion). But now I know that it really is all a load of idle speculation coupled with incomplete investigation, and an excessive dose of hype. It only took a few minutes of googling to come up with this paper.

    One of the biggest pieces of evidence for Dark Matter is the Galaxy Rotation Problem. Basically the rotations of Galaxies do not behave as astronomers expect them to do, leading to the hypothesis that there is more matter in them that we cannot see, "Dark Matter". The velocity profiles that Astronomers expect to see are Keplerian. That is, they expect star systems in galaxies to behave like planets in solar systems when it comes to orbit speed and distance from the focus of rotation.

    The bottom line is, as shown in the paper, this assumption is totally unjustified. The integrals in the 2D galactic disc case do not work out using Shell Theorem, which cannot be applied. They are instead quite nasty singular integrals, but twenty minutes with MATLAB and the "QUAD" function will be all it takes to see that basic gravitational theory most certainly does not predict that Galaxies should have Keplerian(Solar System-like) rotation curves, and there is no reason whatsoever for astronomers to assume this. It's all basic mathematical physics well withing the reach of many reading this post.

    The galactic rotation problem is not evidence for Dark Matter. It is only evidence of the need for more applied mathematics courses in astronomy undergraduate degrees. Of course the Galactic rotation problem is not the only evidence for Dark Matter, but it is a big part. The other big piece of evidence was the Galactic Cluster mass problem. It's been a while since I read the relevant papers, but as I recall, Zwicky played hard and fast with the virial theorem, in particular making assumptions about the stability of Galactic clusters.

    Again of course, I am not an astronomer. I am essentially a lay person in these matters, so my posts and opinions (not only in this thread) should be taken with a pinch of salt. Still, I stand by my overall skepticism of Dark Matter theories, and I stand quite firmly on my objections to the interpretation of the Galactic rotation problem. I expect that in the near future, as our ability to analyse and simulate galatic dynamics improves, Dark Matter will finally be debunked.

    --
    May the Maths Be with you!
    1. Re:Dark Matter/Emergy Does Not Exist by Andr+T. · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Dark matter is not the same thing as Dark energy. There are separate theories about each one of them.

      And even if Dark Matter/Dark Energy really does not exist, I think it's justifiable that people search for it. If the experiments don't match what the scientists say about it, we'll know we need another explanation. The money will not be spent in vain.

      --

      Any life is made up of a single moment, the moment in which a man finds out, once and for all, who he is.

    2. Re:Dark Matter/Emergy Does Not Exist by Xelios · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My problem with both theories is that they seem to be band-aids applied to current physics to tweak the result to something that matches our observations. For example, we assume that general relativity works the same for superclusters of galaxies as it does here in our solar system. Problem is the results it gives don't match our observations. So is this evidence that the theory breaks down over very large scales? Nope, it just means the universe is mostly made of invisible energy with negative pressure that only interacts through gravitation.

      The whole situation reminds me of the aether theories of early physics. The problem then was that Newton's explanation of light provided a very good explanation for reflection, but not refraction or diffraction. The assumption was that since the theory worked well on one set of problems, it must work equally well on another similar set. It didn't, but no matter. By assuming light travels through a medium, the aether, you could tweak the equations to give results close to the observations.

      Over the next 200 years this aether gained more and more 'magical' properties to tweak the results of other theories. It had to be a fluid, but also millions of times more rigid than steel. It had to be massless, completely transparent, incompressible and a whole host of other things all at the same time. Everyone was aware of the obvious problems here, but because so many physical theories (theories that gave pretty accurate predictions) were based on it it was just assumed to exist.

      In the end aether theory was made obsolete when Einstein re-wrote the incomplete physics that relied on it to deliver accurate predictions. Physics was stuck in a rut for 200 years because it assumed aether must exist, and everyone's efforts were aimed at incorporating aether into physical theories. I just hope this isn't happening again with Dark Matter/Energy.

      Disclaimer: I am not a physicist or cosmologist, I just have a passing interest in this stuff, so take what I've said as nothing more than an opinion.

      --
      Murphey's fighting Occam, and we're in the stands.
    3. Re:Dark Matter/Emergy Does Not Exist by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Does this temper your skepticism any?

      I find it hard to accept the idea that some lone guy on slashdot has found a problem in the maths used by all the astronomers in the world who describe galaxy rotation, or indeed that even if you had, it seems galaxy rotation is not the sole piece of evidence for dark matter.

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
  7. What do you have against aether? by blancolioni · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The idea of a luminiferous aether followed naturally from the observation that light acted like a wave, and one of the fundamental things about waves is that they travelled in a medium.

    This lead to experiments designed to detect the medium of light (like the famous Michelson-Morley one), to the Lorentz transformations and the Theory of Relativity. The aether conjecture is science at its best: hypothesis, experiment, falsification, paradigm shift. Why it's used as a metaphor for stupidity has always been a mystery to me.

  8. Re:The realm of the DoE by Shag · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually DOE has always been deeply involved in high energy (particle physics) research. They fund a number of accelerators, including Fermilab. Its not clear that any of that research would lead to usable energy sources either.

    Good so far.

    You can see the Dark Energy research as the intersection of high energy physics (DOE) and cosmology (NASA).

    Yes, but don't forget that DOE has its own cosmologists, too. The DOE end of JDEM is being handled by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, which has quite a bit of stuff going on in cosmology, mostly under its physics division.

    (I do some work with one of the collaborations based there.)

    --
    Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
  9. Oblig. Simpsons by SpectreBlofeld · · Score: 3, Funny

    Lindsay: Yes. For example, no one was showing up for jury
                    duty, so we made the experience more exciting by
                    synergizing it with his comic book collection.

                    [cut to Moe's tavern. Moe opens an envelope]
    Moe: [reading] You have been chosen to join the Justice
                    Squadron, 8 a.m. Monday at the Municipal Fortress of
                    Vengeance. Oh, I am *so* there!