SciAm Lineweaver cosmology article, March issue

  • Thread starter Thread starter marcus
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    article Cosmology
AI Thread Summary
The March issue of Scientific American features an article by Charles Lineweaver and Tamara Davis, which is praised for its clarity and accessibility. The article addresses common misconceptions about cosmology through visual sidebars that pose questions and provide correct answers. Key topics include the nature of the Big Bang as an expansion of space, the ability of galaxies to recede faster than light, and the reasons behind cosmic redshift. The article emphasizes that the observable universe is significantly larger than 14 billion light-years, and it discusses the expansion of space without affecting the size of coherent structures like galaxies. Overall, the article reinforces current cosmological understanding while inviting discussion on potential future models.
marcus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Messages
24,753
Reaction score
794
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=1&articleID=0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147

we've referenced the clear and useful journal articles of Charles Lineweaver and Tamara Davis a lot at PF over the past couple of years

Glad to see that they now have a feature article in SciAm, and that it is available free online!
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
that's where I got the information for the test I wrote in here a couple of days ago.
 
Good going tribdog!

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=1&articleID=0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147

we've referenced the clear and useful journal articles of Charles Lineweaver and Tamara Davis a lot at PF over the past couple of years

Glad to see that they now have a feature article in SciAm, and that it is available free online!

The gist of the article is contained in a few visual "sidebars" which ask a question, give a "popular misconception" wrong answer, and then give the right answer:

http://www.sciam.com/media/inline/0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147_p39.gif
What kind of explosion was the big bang?

http://www.sciam.com/media/inline/0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147_p40.gif
Can galaxies recede faster than light?

http://www.sciam.com/media/inline/0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147_p42.gif
Can we see galaxies receding faster than light?

http://www.sciam.com/media/inline/0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147_p43.gif
Why is there a cosmic redshift?

http://www.sciam.com/media/inline/0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147_p44.gif
How large is the observable universe?

http://www.sciam.com/media/inline/0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147_p45.gif
Do objects inside the universe expand, too?
 
Surely you don't expect all those 'mainstream' answers to be correct.
 
there are 6 mainstream answers here. Only #5 is quantitative: "how large".
Even #5 is essentially qualitative, saying that the radius of the observable is substantially larger than the estimated age expressed in lightyears (14 billion LY)

I consider these 6 qualitative propositions to be reasonable and not especially model-specific. I suspect that any new model which could succeed in replacing the current consensus model is likely to have at least these six qualitative features..

And so I hope anyone here who disagrees will say explicitly which of these features he expects not to hold in whatever replacement consensus model when such a model has been tested and has prevailed

http://www.sciam.com/media/inline/0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147_p39.gif
What kind of explosion was the big bang? (an expansion of space, not an explosion localized in space)

http://www.sciam.com/media/inline/0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147_p40.gif
Can galaxies recede faster than light? (yes)

http://www.sciam.com/media/inline/0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147_p42.gif
Can we see galaxies receding faster than light? (yes)

http://www.sciam.com/media/inline/0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147_p43.gif
Why is there a cosmic redshift? (stretching of light in transit)

http://www.sciam.com/media/inline/0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147_p44.gif
How large is the observable universe? (substantially larger than 14 billion LY, i.e. than the estimated age expressed in lightyears)

http://www.sciam.com/media/inline/0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147_p45.gif
Do objects inside the universe expand, too? (in a qualitative sense, coherent objects like galaxies or the things in them are not at present expanding)
 
One of my usual wisecrack answers. I would argue Q5 is not really relevant. I'm thoroughly comfortable with the BB model, as you probably suspect.
 
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top