Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Big Bang's Smoking Gun Found

samzenpus posted about 5 months ago | from the lets-have-a-look dept.

Space 269

astroengine writes "For the first time, scientists have found direct evidence of the expansion of the universe, a previously theoretical event that took place a fraction of a second after the Big Bang explosion nearly 14 billion years ago. The clue is encoded in the primordial cosmic microwave background radiation that continues to spread through space to this day. Scientists found and measured a key polarization, or orientation, of the microwaves caused by gravitational waves, which are miniature ripples in the fabric of space. Gravitational waves, proposed by Albert Einstein's General Theory of Relativity nearly 100 years ago but never before proven, are believed to have originated in the Big Bang explosion and then been amplified by the universe's inflation. 'Detecting this signal is one of the most important goals in cosmology today,' lead researcher John Kovac, with the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, said in a statement."

cancel ×

269 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Gravity waves from the first inch of expansion (5, Funny)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | about 5 months ago | (#46507701)

Pretty damn cool.

Re:Gravity waves from the first inch of expansion (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46507785)

"Pretty damn cool."

Yes, Antarctica!

I like the quote from project co-leader Clem Pryke (University of Minnesota) "This has been like looking for a needle in a haystack, but instead we found a crowbar,"

The even better news is that more teams are working on studying the cosmic microwave background polarisations!

Re:Gravity waves from the first inch of expansion (2)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | about 5 months ago | (#46507985)

We just had a guest speaker discuss his role in the Ice Cube neutrino detector. He also commented on this, since they were also working at the South Pole at the time.

Re:Gravity waves from the first inch of expansion (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about 5 months ago | (#46509077)

This is no more proof of Big Bang, than it is an indicator of "living" in a computer simulation. [discovery.com]

In fact, this is EXACTLY the kind of "evidence" they'd hide in such a model, to create a consistency and verisimilitude. :-)

Where is the center? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46508437)

Can we use the orientation of these waves to calculate a point of origin relative to ourselves?

That would be awesome. I would like to face that direction when I pray.

Re:Where is the center? (3, Insightful)

ZorglubZ (3530445) | about 5 months ago | (#46508751)

Technically, you're there, since the "first inch of expansion" contains the entire universe... literally.

Re:Where is the center? (4, Insightful)

dfsmith (960400) | about 5 months ago | (#46509091)

Remarkably, the oldest baryons in the* universe are in your head.

* From your reference frame. And only by a nanosecond or so.

Re:Gravity waves from the first inch of expansion (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46508439)

Your mom had wave from my first
Wait. That sentence wouldn't end well. Carry on. Nothing to see here. Wait! That was worse!

old news (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46507719)

news two years ago

Re:old news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46508305)

Well, I'm sure you have a citation to prove it, then.

Re:old news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46508605)

news 14 billion years ago

FTFY

new news (4, Informative)

slew (2918) | about 5 months ago | (#46508807)

This was the old news [sciencemag.org] ...

Basically sifting through information gathered from older CMB detectors, they discovered a statistical B-mode [slashdot.org] in the data that could have come from gravitational wave that occurred during inflation, but the data was really too noisy to be sure.

The new news is they used a new detectors [caltech.edu] which are capable of making cleaner measurements to convince themselves that the detected B-mode was unlikely to come from gravitational lensing after the big-bang. The current evidence apparently is consistent with the B-mode coming from a gravitational waves that are predicted to occur during the inflationary period of the universe.

Re:new news (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 5 months ago | (#46509007)

Even by your link:

The telescope successfully deployed to the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station in November 2005 and will take data until the end of 2008.

This isn't exactly "news". More like "oldz".

Re:old news (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 5 months ago | (#46508977)

And here I was going to respond "1964 called, they want their news back".

Seriously, this is cool, but astroengine's teaser above "For the first time" is nowhere near correct.

Astrology is amazing (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46507725)

My hat's off too all the hard-working, dedicated cosmetologists that made this possible.

Re: Astrology is amazing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46507759)

Cosmetology? Errr...

Re: Astrology is amazing (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 5 months ago | (#46508361)

How would this kind of research ever move forward if we did not have the make-up team who makes the cosmologists look good during their speeches.

Re:Astrology is amazing (5, Funny)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | about 5 months ago | (#46507767)

and give everything a nice, healthy glow

Re:Astrology is amazing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46508213)

... and so is astronomy, which is the topic here today.

Re:Astrology is amazing (4, Funny)

skids (119237) | about 5 months ago | (#46508391)

We sould really have a holiday of appreciation for these people, like we do for veteranarians.

Re:Astrology is amazing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46507953)

I believe you meant 'Astronomy is amazing' ;-)

Re:Astrology is amazing (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46508115)

woosh

Re:Astrology is amazing (1)

bughunter (10093) | about 5 months ago | (#46508499)

followed by a sonic boom

Re:Astrology is amazing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46508955)

Considering the trend in /. over that past few years. Its neither surprising the joke would be missed, nor the someone would actually make the comment in all seriousness.

Re:Astrology is amazing (1)

hawkinspeter (831501) | about 5 months ago | (#46509237)

I could care less about the inflationary period.

Re:Astrology is amazing (2)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | about 5 months ago | (#46509257)

It didn't get interesting until the Baroque period

Re:Astrology is amazing (4, Funny)

hawkinspeter (831501) | about 5 months ago | (#46509397)

I always thought that a comma was kind of like a Baroque period,

Next up: a direct detection (5, Interesting)

SeanDS (1039000) | about 5 months ago | (#46507763)

A direct detection of a gravitational wave moving the mirrors of a large scale interferometer is up next. In the next few years, Advanced LIGO (US), Advanced Virgo (Italy) and KAGRA (Japan) will come online with the hope of directly detecting gravitational waves from sources such as supernovae and coalescing binary star systems. With this kind of network, it will then be possible to coordinate both electromagnetic and gravitational searches of our sky. This is useful for many reasons, one of which is that it lets us listen to the sound of black holes colliding where no light escapes.

Exciting times!

Re:Next up: a direct detection (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46507875)

NOTHING escapes a black hole, not matter or energy or gravity. It is impossible for merging black holes to create gravity waves after the two are both inside the Schwarzchild radius of the large one. Any energy or gravity waves created would be unable to escape the black hole, becoming trapped forever. Additionally, time dilation near the singularity would lengthen the wavelengths of any such waves to something approaching infinity as the wholes approached, rendering them undetectable (or realistically so) to anyone outside the event horizon such as us.

Re:Next up: a direct detection (2)

MightyMartian (840721) | about 5 months ago | (#46508039)

Hawking radiation?

Re:Next up: a direct detection (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 5 months ago | (#46508215)

I call it a Hawking-hole.

Re:Next up: a direct detection (4, Insightful)

exploder (196936) | about 5 months ago | (#46508129)

Are you a physicist, or have you seriously studied physics, or do you have a source for that? Because I'm sure I've read numerous times about actual physicists hoping to detect gravity waves from merging black holes.

Re:Next up: a direct detection (3, Informative)

DMUTPeregrine (612791) | about 5 months ago | (#46508303)

Black holes are the brightest objects in the universe. As far as we know nothing escapes the event horizon, but plenty of things get thrown out at very high energy from the accretion disk.

Re:Next up: a direct detection (5, Interesting)

lgw (121541) | about 5 months ago | (#46508331)

It's not contradictory. The black holes will dump a metric giga-fuckton of energy as gravity waves before merging (it's science, so we have to use these new-fangled metric units). Once they merge, well, the established theory is that no energy could escape but that's being challenged more often these days. AFAIK, no one every actually detected Hawking radiation and everything predicted about black hole decay is untested, so having any detector that can observe a black hole merger will tell us a bunch!

Re:Next up: a direct detection (1)

grep -v '.*' * (780312) | about 5 months ago | (#46508789)

black holes will dump ... gravity waves before merging. Having any detector that can observe a black hole merger will tell us a bunch!

I didn't think the Comcast/TWC merger had been completed. Wouldn't it be able to detect those 45 billions of dollar bills all sloshing around?

Or was L.A. the detection device a few days ago [cbslocal.com] ?

Re:Next up: a direct detection (4, Funny)

Zalbik (308903) | about 5 months ago | (#46509305)

metric giga-fuckton of energy as gravity waves

For our metric-impaired American friends, the conversion rate is 4.739 giga-fucktons to a mega-shitload.

Re:Next up: a direct detection (1)

dissy (172727) | about 5 months ago | (#46508673)

NOTHING escapes a black hole, not matter or energy or gravity.

Strawman, since no one has claimed otherwise.

We detect the activity around and affected by the blackhole, which is not at all inside of it by any definition.

Re:Next up: a direct detection (4, Informative)

joe_frisch (1366229) | about 5 months ago | (#46508689)

It would not be possible to detect gravity waves (or anything else) from a source inside a black hole. Here we are talking about gravity waves created when two black holes interact.

Imagine to non-black holes - say neutron stars colliding (boom!). As they collide the gravitational field around them varies rapidly ( changes from 2 sources to a single source). Those variations send "ripples' (gravity waves) through space. The ripples aren't just from inside of the neutron stars, but from the fields which extend outside. If you now collide black holes, the same thing happens, gravity (and curvature of space) near the black holes changes radically as they collide and some of that is emitted as gravity waves.

The above is of course a hand-wave. The *real* answer is that you can simulate the Einstein field equations as the black holes collide, and they show the radiation of gravitational wave.

Re:Next up: a direct detection (1)

amorsen (7485) | about 5 months ago | (#46508877)

It would not be possible to detect gravity waves (or anything else) from a source inside a black hole.

As far as I know no one has managed to measure the speed of gravity yet. I would love to be mistaken about that.

If gravity is faster than light, gravity waves should be able to escape from a black hole. Of course it would mess up a lot of theoretical physics, so it is really unlikely to be true...

Re:Next up: a direct detection (1)

hawkinspeter (831501) | about 5 months ago | (#46509181)

I don't know how you'd measure the speed of gravity, but isn't it generally thought to be the same as the speed of light (and thus the same as other forces)?

Re:Next up: a direct detection (1)

amorsen (7485) | about 5 months ago | (#46509525)

You would move a really heavy object and measure when some other object gets affected by the changed gravity from the new position. Alas, to get a good measurement it would be handy to accelerate something with at least the mass of a planet to a small percentage of light speed.

I am sure astronomers will figure out how to use a natural event instead, but as far as I know that has not happened yet.

Re:Next up: a direct detection (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 5 months ago | (#46509301)

Speed of light is the fastest the universe allows information to propagate. Gravitational waves cannot move faster than light can because its not light that is the limit, but the UNIVERSE. Light doesnt go faster because the universe limits it.

Re:Next up: a direct detection (2)

slew (2918) | about 5 months ago | (#46508847)

NOTHING escapes a black hole...

Perhaps so, unless of course you believe Stephen Hawkings [nature.com] ...

Re:Next up: a direct detection (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46509325)

Einstein disagrees with you. If black holes didn't emit gravitational waves, they wouldn't be holding galaxies together.

Re:Next up: a direct detection (1)

Tumbleweed (3706) | about 5 months ago | (#46508827)

A direct detection of a gravitational wave moving the mirrors of a large scale interferometer is up next. In the next few years, Advanced LIGO (US), Advanced Virgo (Italy) and KAGRA (Japan) will come online with the hope of directly detecting gravitational waves from sources such as supernovae and coalescing binary star systems. With this kind of network, it will then be possible to coordinate both electromagnetic and gravitational searches of our sky. This is useful for many reasons, one of which is that it lets us listen to the sound of black holes colliding where no light escapes.

Exciting times!

Plus we'll finally be able properly calibrate that DHD we found...

more evidence (1)

Moblaster (521614) | about 5 months ago | (#46507775)

If they thought finding gravitational waves was hard, just wait until they try to locate a drooling autotroph.

100 years later (4, Informative)

Lucas123 (935744) | about 5 months ago | (#46507813)

Einstein's theories continue to astound.

Re:100 years later (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46509279)

Except for the Einstein didn't believe in universal expansion in 1905. Thank god for Lemaitre and Hubble....
 
Not to downplay his contributions because they were significant, but Einstein didn't magically come up with this stuff. There's a lot of scientists who were working in this same direction at that point in time and Einstein just gets all the credit from The Science Channel crowd.
 
Einstein also stood on the shoulders of giants, my boy.

Come on journalists... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46507851)

"Inflation" and "expansion" are VERY different when talking about cosmology - some journalist flipped those two words. They supposedly found evidence of inflation, which is a big deal. Finding evidence of expansion is very very old news - like first half of the 20th Century old.

Summary wrong (sigh) (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46507855)

We already have plenty of direct evidence for the expansion of the universe. See redshifting of galaxies etc.

This announcement is about inflation - a particular period of rapid expansion immediately after the big bang.

Re:Summary wrong (sigh) (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46509157)

Correct. The extensive data collected about galactic motion, is the real "smoking gun" about the Big Bang. Spacetime is expanding. It's simple to propose that going back in time, it expanded from a smaller volume. And that volume just got smaller. Therefore there's a singularity event. That can only be something like an explosion.

Even an IQ of 80 can follow that logic.

Re:Summary wrong (sigh) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46509307)

Well mine is 79 asshole. And I just don't get it. Ah well. Ima hop in muh chevy truck and go finger my sister.

Creationists (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46507879)

Creationists will now say the Big Bang was part of God's plan.

Re:Creationists (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46507911)

C'mon, we all know from centuries ago it just was God's wet farting...

Re:Creationists (1)

canadiannomad (1745008) | about 5 months ago | (#46508043)

No, we all know that the Universe was sneezed out of the nose of a being called the Great Green Arkleseizure.

Re:Creationists (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 5 months ago | (#46508269)

I live in perpetual fear of The Coming of the Great White Handkerchief.

Re:Creationists (4, Funny)

TheCarp (96830) | about 5 months ago | (#46508045)

I think you have it wrong. You see, these creationists...they have a book which describes exactly how the world was created. It is called the Bible and it states pretty clearly how it happened. The problem here is that this so called "evidence" contradicts the very strong evidence they have...namely, their book.

Since it contradicts their book by claiming to take billions of years, it must (by very definition) be wrong. So what you really have is the Big bang is a bad interpretation of the natural world.

Now excuse my while I go wash my hands for typing that.

Re:Creationists (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about 5 months ago | (#46508249)

That's silly. Everyone knows the universe was danced into existence by Shiva, the Lord of the Dance. You cannot deny the power of dance. Lose yourself to dance.

Re:Creationists (3, Funny)

jasonrice22 (3458571) | about 5 months ago | (#46508721)

Perhaps if the Bible said '7 units of time' then there wouldn't be such a big emotional fuss over such a meaningless argument.

Re:Creationists (2)

dfsmith (960400) | about 5 months ago | (#46509235)

The word typically translated "day" or "days" in Genesis is originally "Yowm" (root meaning "hot"). Strong's translates this variously as "period"—it's a very general term that I usually read as "era".

My limited understanding is that most of Jesus' contemporaries believed in an ancient universe. It was Ussher's bestseller that, ahem, fixed that problem.

Concordance here. [biblestudytools.com]

Ingenious inventions here. [wikipedia.org]

Re:Creationists (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about 5 months ago | (#46509335)

Perhaps if the bible didn't try to anthropomorphize the universe there wouldnt be such a big emotional fuss over it.

Re:Creationists (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 5 months ago | (#46509095)

Better yet, it's a misinterpretation by, wait for it.....

A Roman Catholic Priest, and thus, a creationist! [wikipedia.org]

Nah, he couldn't possibly know what the Bible means......

Re:Creationists (1)

Dog-Cow (21281) | about 5 months ago | (#46509255)

Why wouldyou believe that priest has a better idea of what the Bible says than a random 3 year old from down the street?

Re:Creationists (1)

rahvin112 (446269) | about 5 months ago | (#46509285)

The silliest part of it is where the book comes from. The bible is a creation of a committee of the early catholic church that sat down with more than 1500 spiritual texts and decided on 300 that were important enough to include in a book given to all priests. Now ask a young earth creationist what they think of the catholic church and the typical response is the whore of Babylon, yet the book they so revere as the accurate word of god was creating by a committee of early members of the catholic church. It's terribly ironic.

Re:Creationists (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46509451)

It's all a matter of units and applying the correct conversion - imperial, metric, BIBILE.

Re:Creationists (1)

bob_super (3391281) | about 5 months ago | (#46509453)

I have video proof that a runaway queen can freeze her whole country and create a giant ice castle in less time than a pop song.
My kids strongly believe it's really cool, therefore global warming science is wrong.

Re:Creationists (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46509475)

All evidence of the big bang, and anything else that isn't as it says in the bible is because of either:

1) God testing your faith to prove you are worthy of heaven.
2) The Devil trying to trick you so you will be damned to hell.

From my point of view it looks like God and the Devil are both trying to get everyone to hell.

Re:Creationists (1)

PPH (736903) | about 5 months ago | (#46508081)

At least lets see what the NRA has to say about this.

Re: Creationists (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46508379)

Or they'll say that Genisis is a book of the Old Testament that was written but not observed and therefore open to interpretation...as it is.

Re:Creationists (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46508421)

We've been saying that. What's your point?

Todays scores (-1)

Sla$hPot (1189603) | about 5 months ago | (#46507923)

Astro physics 1 Theoretical physics 0
I think we should spend more resources on astro physics.
Better ten new super space telescopes than one new super proton smasher.

100 trillion trillion times ! (1)

hfuzzin (522823) | about 5 months ago | (#46507933)

Ok, fine. But is it webscale ?

Problems inflation solves (4, Informative)

mdsolar (1045926) | about 5 months ago | (#46507941)

There are three problems in cosmology that inflation solves: flatness: the universe is very close to its critical density, the horizon problem: the universe looks like it is in thermal equilibrium for no good reason, and absence of magnetic monopoles.

Comp.misc on Usenet is the new Slashdot (0)

RocketRabbit (830691) | about 5 months ago | (#46507949)

While it is unlikely that anybody will bother to attempt to replicate the discovery of these gravity waves, as nobody wants to realize it was just a unit conversion error, what people do know is that Dice has sucked the life out of Slashdot. Come join us on comp.misc, and if your ISP no longer provides Usenet look up Eternal September.

Brian Greene is going to be there defending his hare-brained "predictions" so it should be a lot of fun for everybody.

Indirect measurement of gravitational waves (5, Informative)

photonic (584757) | about 5 months ago | (#46507967)

Note that this the second indirect evidence for the existence of gravitational waves, the first one was the orbital decay of a binary system that included a pulsar, discovered by Hulse and Taylor [wikipedia.org] (Nobel Prize 1993 [nobelprize.org] ). Today's result, if confirmed, seems pretty spectacular, and might be rewarded with a second Nobel Prize. For a first direct detection of gravitational waves, we have to wait for first detections by LIGO [ligo.org] , Virgo [virgo.infn.it] and eLISA [elisascience.org] .

Re:Indirect measurement of gravitational waves (-1, Troll)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about 5 months ago | (#46508265)

Of course it'll get a Nobel Prize. You get a Nobel Prize for anything these days. Vladimir Putin has a Nobel Prize for having contributed so much shirtless Russian pictures to Google.

Gravity Waves! (0)

NEDHead (1651195) | about 5 months ago | (#46508013)

I think we should all wave back!

Re:Gravity Waves! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46508147)

Thanks, gravity, for keeping me grounded.

Re:Gravity Waves! (2)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | about 5 months ago | (#46508229)

I feel them after every Thanksgiving meal.

Matt Strassler perspective (5, Informative)

mghiggins (61851) | about 5 months ago | (#46508029)

Some interesting perspective [profmattstrassler.com] from Matt Strassler, who's a particle physicist at Harvard.

He points out that this is still an *indirect* observation of gravitational waves (and not the first one) and that the results look sensibly in line with some predictions from inflation. And that while this is a tremendous experiment, it's not any kind of "smoking gun", and we really need to wait for replication to get properly excited.

gravity waves (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46508093)

If gravity waves exist, wouldn't that imply that gravitrons exist as well? Otherwise it would be like having water waves without water...

Re:gravity waves (5, Informative)

HonIsCool (720634) | about 5 months ago | (#46508167)

Gravitational waves are a prediction of general relativity and not related to gravitons (assuming that's what you meant) that are theorized to be the carrier of gravity in quantum gravity theories.

That means Neil Turok's elegant cyclic model is... (2)

DaveyJJ (1198633) | about 5 months ago | (#46508307)

Incorrect. Or, rather, been shown to be false by the evidence. And it was such a damn elegant model, too. Bravo to the team of researchers who've been working a decade on this satellite and these observations. I believe Neil and another scientist had a small bet about this, so he's also out of pocket a few dollars. Now we just have to hypothesise new ideas that will eliminate the many kludgy math bits out of Big Bang model. This news, and 120 more BlackBerry jobs lost today, means a sad day here in Waterloo (at the Perimeter Institute).

Re:That means Neil Turok's elegant cyclic model is (1)

sveni (49189) | about 5 months ago | (#46509463)

Yes, if the measurments can be confirmed for different (and hopefully bigger parts of the sky), the cyclic model of Turok and Steinhardt seems to be very unlikely now, as it has predicted a very small polarisation of the cosmic microwave background.

What puzzles me, is that neither the WMAP probe nor the Planck probe have found a polarisation and now the polarisation was found with a ground based telescope? The resolution of the WMAP probe was probably too low, but the planck probe has had a much higher resolution.

Sven

P.S.: An explanation and comparison of both, the big bang inflationary model and the cyclic model featuring Dr. Paul J. Steinhardt:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... [youtube.com]

"Crowbar" detected by BICEP? (1)

Crayz9000 (2783019) | about 5 months ago | (#46508461)

Crowbar? BICEP? What's next, the theoretical physicist responsible for the discovery just happens to be named Gordon Freeman?

Big Kahuna!!! (0)

ubersoldat2k7 (1557119) | about 5 months ago | (#46508539)

Man I would love to ride one of those waves... to infinity and beyond!

Big Bang's Smoking Gun Found (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46508599)

"I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded" (Isaiah 45:12.) God is very far ahead of you in saying this is what happened.

Re:Big Bang's Smoking Gun Found (2)

Ron Goodman (465764) | about 5 months ago | (#46508885)

Except your quote says exactly nothing of any use about what happened.

Re:Big Bang's Smoking Gun Found (2)

hawkinspeter (831501) | about 5 months ago | (#46509321)

Well, it does say about commanding their hosts. Physics has nothing to say about whether or not the universe had their hosts commanded during inflation, so this could be a valuable addition to our knowledge.

Re:Big Bang's Smoking Gun Found (1)

flaming error (1041742) | about 5 months ago | (#46509213)

"God is very far ahead of you"
In my own defense, God did have a head start.

I'll bet I'll type "waka wama wana" before He does. So there.

ok now that we have inflation down... (1)

epiccollision (1373095) | about 5 months ago | (#46508749)

its time to get rid of the silly but widespread idea of inflation coming from a singularity point source. The universe was hot, dense and still probably infinite, it just started to inflate locally. We probably will never know exactly what was before, but thinking it all came from a point source seems a little silly.

http://scienceblogs.com/starts... [scienceblogs.com]

Just one stupid question (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46508861)

If I understand correctly they measured the polarization of the 2.73 background radiation of the Universe. But at these temperature you only have radio waves, how do you detect their polarization? Moreover with an instrument that looks like e telescope on the picture? Can someone enlighten me?

What was that noise? (2, Funny)

ZorinLynx (31751) | about 5 months ago | (#46509023)

Did you hear that? That was the sound of millions of religious zealots pressing their palms harder against their ears and screaming LA LA LA even louder.

FirsT (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46509215)

They only found smoke (1)

Lacompa Cida (3396233) | about 5 months ago | (#46509299)

The gun is the universe. These people only found the smoke. Not the smoking gun.

Re:They only found smoke (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46509535)

The gun is the universe. These people only found the smoke. Not the smoking gun.

Where there is a gun, there is also gun smoke.

Guns don't kill people. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46509337)

Collasping universes do.

2 issues with that (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 5 months ago | (#46509531)

First of all, how is it that all stars moving apart from each other rapidly is not "first direct evidence" of the universe's expansion? And secondly, how could the expansion of the universe amplify gravitational waves? Space stretching would thin out the waves because they would be expressed over a wider area. Also, you don't create more gravity without adding mass or energy. Neither is occurring due to universe expansion, and of course the fact that mass and energy can't be "created" under any circumstances anyway.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>