HOMEPAGE NEWS by Camille Carlisle

Planck: Best Map Yet of Cosmic Creation

Planck mission scientists have released the first half of the spacecraft's observations of the cosmic microwave background.

On March 21st, scientists with the European Space Agency's Planck mission announced their long-anticipated results from the spacecraft’s first 15.5 months of mapping the cosmic microwave background.

The CMB is the radiation released about 380,000 years after the Big Bang, when the newborn universe cooled down enough to become transparent and let light travel free. We see this light today redshifted to microwave wavelengths, wallpapering the whole sky behind the farthest galaxies. Slight temperature variations all across it reveal how matter was distributed at that early era. These variations allow cosmologists to test theories of what was happening in the universe in the tiniest instants after its birth, including how inflation drove the first 10–35 second of the Big Bang.

Planck's CMB power spectrum
The strength of temperature variations (vertical) is plotted against their angular sizes (horizontal). The green line was predicted by current cosmic-origins theory; the red dots are Planck data.
Planck Collaboration
Planck’s superbly precise new picture of the CMB (below) shows remarkable agreement with theoretical work, confirming that observations fit a simple cosmological model defined by just six numbers. (Take that in for a moment: the whole physical universe is described by six numbers. Even your phone number takes 10 digits in the U.S.)

The graph at right might not mean much to the average Joe, but it shows how much temperatures fluctuate in patches of various angular sizes all across the sky. Our inflationary model makes specific predictions about what this complex graph should look like. As you can see, Planck’s observations (red dots) trace nigh perfectly the theory (green line). My colleague Alan freaked out when he saw the tight fit at the graph's far right — you don’t appreciate the wonders of scientific progress until you have a 6-foot-3 man jumping up and down in your office.

But Planck also introduces a few surprises that need explaining.

By the Numbers

Planck launched on May 14, 2009, as successor to NASA’s phenomenal Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP), which mapped the CMB for nine years. WMAP observed in five frequency bands spanning 22 to 90 GHz, and its results form the bedrock of modern cosmology — helping nail down values such as the age of the universe (13.77 billion years) and how much of the matter in the universe is “dark” (about 84%) when combined with other measurements.

Planck’s more precise numbers are slightly different from WMAP’s. Planck covered nine bands from 30 to 857 GHz, and it’s still working in the three lowest bands. The sweet spot for observing the CMB — where the galaxy’s dusty, star-studded plane is the least bothersome — is from 70 to 150 GHz, making Planck an ideal follow-up to WMAP, Planck team member Bruce Partridge (Haverford College) said last month in Boston at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Planck cosmic microwave background
The oldest light in our universe, seen today as the cosmic microwave background, suffuses the cosmos. This all-sky map, created from all nine frequency bands of the Planck spacecraft, shows the CMB's details at a precision never before acquired. Click for high resolution (5.5 MB). See comparison with WMAP.
ESA and the Planck Collaboration
When combined with other types of measurements, the Planck data homes in on an age for the universe of 13.798 billion years, give or take a mere 0.037. And it pushes down what fraction of everything in the universe is dark energy, from 71.4% to 69.2%.

(These numbers may be slightly different from what you see reported elsewhere: the numbers are all consistent, it just depends what other information is added to the CMB data.)

One of the most notable new numbers is the value for the Hubble constant. The Hubble parameter, the ratio of a galaxy’s recession velocity (redshift) to its distance, describes the rate at which the universe is expanding. Its value has changed over time; the present value is called the Hubble constant. Looking farther into the universe — earlier in time — measures a past value, explains Adam Riess (Johns Hopkins University), who shared the 2011 Nobel Prize in Physics for discovering the the universe’s expansion is accelerating.

“There is always some extrapolation, since by definition we can’t measure anything at exactly now,” he says. “It’s always the past.”

Astronomers use various tactics to estimate the Hubble constant. In the “local” universe, meaning within tens to hundreds of millions of light-years, they use standard candles such as exploding white dwarfs or Cepheid variable stars. One candle promoted by researchers at Villanova University (my alma mater — Go ’Nova!) and also used by another team in a recent Nature paper is eclipsing binary stars, which allow observers to determine stars’ real luminosity based on exact measurements of the stars’ diameters and temperatures derived from their eclipses.

The current value for the Hubble constant based on local standard candles is 73.8 +/- 2.4 km/s per megaparsec. (All uncertainties quoted here are at the 68% confidence level.) That's slightly in tension with the value extrapolated from WMAP data. The CMB-based value depends on what other data are included and the cosmological model used; the value announced with WMAP’s final 9-year results last December is 69.32 +/- 0.80. Astronomers have been waiting to see whether Planck would uphold this tension, because if the discrepancy is real it could imply something unexpected is afoot in physics.

Planck delivered. The Hubble constant derived from Planck’s first 15.5 months of CMB observations (combined with other measurements) is 67.80 +/- 0.77.

“I think this is one of the most exciting parts of the data that came out,” says Planck scientist Martin White (University of California, Berkeley, and Lawrence Berkeley National Lab). The fact that astronomers starting at opposite ends of cosmic history and moving toward the middle aren’t getting quite the same value for this parameter is going to attract a lot of attention, he says. It could signal a problem with the models or funky new physics — or even that the amount of dark energy somehow increases with time in a given volume of space. “That’s a pretty radical thing to propose, and so this is not something that we should take lightly,” he cautions.

A Boatload, In Brief

Planck’s results will be far-reaching — the project's scientists released more than two dozen papers today, and other researchers have already started downloading the raw data to work with. Some other noteworthy results in today’s announcement are:

  • No extra neutrinos. According to the Standard Model, there should be three and only three flavors of neutrinos, nearly massless particles speeding through the universe at ultrarelativistic speeds. Planck upholds that expectation.

  • The universe isn’t as uniform on the largest scales as expected. Previous work had hinted that the northern and southern hemispheres of the sky don’t look as much like each other (statistically speaking) as they should, and that there’s an anomalous cool spot in the CMB. (Anomalous in terms of shape, not temperature or overall size). Planck upholds these results. Furthermore, you get slightly different values for the fundamental six parameters when you fit each half of the sky separately. Assuming these effects are real, they may hint at unpredicted structure that's larger than our cosmic horizon and originating before inflation, even before the Big Bang.

  • Similarly, the wiggly power spectrum graph (shown above) may have some problems over large patches of the sky. While the agreement between observation and theory is extraordinary at small angular scales, temperature fluctuations in the CMB at the largest scales don’t behave as well. The team can’t maneuver the graph to fit these points without losing the beautiful fit elsewhere.

  • When inflation ended in the infant universe (about 10-35 second after the Big Bang, 10 nano-nano-nano-nanosecond), microscopic quantum fluctuations were slightly stronger on larger scales than smaller ones. These fluctuations served as the seeds of today's large-scale cosmic structure. Simple inflation predicts what this slight "tilt” of the fluctuations' size distribution should be. WMAP found this tilt, but Planck confirms its value to high accuracy. Score a big win for standard inflation.

  • No polarization announcement yet. Planck will not be able to detect the "E-mode" polarization patterns that would be the real test of inflation, which cosmologists eagerly await from other experiments. (These patterns in the CMB should be the remnants of inflation's gravitational waves in the first instants. Other theories of what caused the Big Bang, such as colliding "branes" in higher-dimensional space, predict that there will be no such polarization patterns.) Planck is taking polarization data that will be useful for other things, but mission scientists said that this data is not clean enough yet to be usable; it will have to await analysis of a longer span of Planck's observations.


The next release of results is planned for early 2014.

If you’d like the dirty details, you can find all the Planck papers online. The summary of results is in Section 9 of Paper I.

The European Space Agency has put up many excellent graphics and explanations. Start here and see the sidebar on the right.

Posted by Camille Carlisle, March 21, 2013
Share this story:

Other links: + digg | + reddit | + del.icio.us | + rss

comments (27)

Post a Comment


The following comments do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Sky Publishing.
By posting a comment, you agree to our Rules of Conduct and Terms of Use.

First comments (from 27)

Misstatement in "Best Map Yet of the Universe"

Posted by Roland Dechesne March 21, 2013 At 01:30 PM PDT
"The CMB is the radiation released about 380,000 years ago" Actually, the author likely meant, the CMB is the radiation released about 380,000 years after the Big Bang. Cheers, Roland RASC Calgary


380,000 years

Posted by Camille Carlisle March 21, 2013 At 01:50 PM PDT
*face palms* This is what I get for writing with a head cold. Thanks!


Dipole Anisotropy

Posted by Robert L. Oldershaw March 21, 2013 At 03:05 PM PDT
One possible explanation for the newly verified dipole anisotropy in the CMB is that the structure of the cosmos has a fractal geometry and nature's hierarchy extends far beyond the observable universe. Unlike the radical idea of a multiverse of 10^500 different universes with random properties, the discrete fractal paradigm proposes one unified physics for the entire cosmos. It is a new paradigm that is based on enlarging the symmetry properties of nature, rather than invoking ad hoc and thoroughly untestable speculations. Robert L. Oldershaw http://www3.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw Discrete Scale Relativity/Fractal Cosmology


Meet "Maxwell"

Posted by Robert L. Oldershaw March 21, 2013 At 06:08 PM PDT
Imagine a “Maxwell Demon” of infinitesimal size deep in the interior of a type-II supernova event. Surveying his observable environment of about 10^-18 cubic centimeters, he draws the following conclusions. 1. There is global expansion, as he can see from the velocities of the 10^11 gigantic particles. 2. Superimposed upon this global expansion there are random velocities of about 700 km/sec that he calls “peculiar velocities” and indicate some unexplained very high-energy and chaotic phenomena. 3. The unusual "weblike" filamentary/void distribution of the particles reminds him of high energy plasma phenomena. 4. The overall distribution of the gigantic particles looks very homogeneous, at least statistically speaking, but there is a small dipole anisotropy, i.e., slightly more particles and slightly higher temperatures in one direction and slightly lower values in the opposite direction. We then move “Maxwell” by about 10^15 centimeters to a location far outside of the supernova event. With mouth and eyes wide open, he utters two 4-letter words. The first is “Holy” and the second begins with “S”. Robert L. Oldershaw http://www3.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw Discrete Scale Relativity/Fractal Cosmology


Nigh Perfect

Posted by Peter Wilson March 21, 2013 At 09:41 PM PDT
The graph with the “nigh perfect” fit is a mathematical function, like a power law, that is physically generic. That is why, as Oldershaw points out, a supernova explosion seen from the inside would look the same.


What's that 6th number?

Posted by Peter Wilson March 21, 2013 At 09:46 PM PDT
“…confirming that observations fit a simple cosmological model defined by just six numbers.” The sixth number being lambda (dark energy), nature unknown. As I’ve pointed out before, this model is TOO simple; it’s missing two parameters, distance-between-clumps, R, and energy coupling, (the Greek letter) eta. Mainstream cosmologists are in complete denial that anything is missing from their six-parameter model, dismissing as “coincidence” the fact that eta/R^2 has the same dimensions--per square meter--as lambda. The theoretical reasons why we should expect eta to be divided by R^2 in the solution are beyond the scope of the comments section. Suffice it to say, I don’t trust the six-number model when I can count seven!


Northern and Southern

Posted by Pete Jackson March 22, 2013 At 07:48 AM PDT
Your map and text don't explain the context of 'northern' and 'southern'. Presumably, you mean in galactic coordinates since virtually all CMB maps are rendered in galactic coordinates, not least because the Milky Way and its associated microwave emissions that need to be subtracted from these maps, runs along the equator in these maps. While considered a given for readers familiar with this subject, it may not be immediately apparent for many S & T readers. The deviation of the amplitude of the temperature variations from the predictions, at the lowest multipole number 2 (the quadrupole) has been known since the days of COBE (1992) which made the first all-sky CMB maps at large angular scales. Whether it says something significant about isotropy at the largest angular scales, or whether we happen to just be in a 'local' part of the universe that has a large random deviation from the mean has been long debated/speculated.


Age of Universe

Posted by Danielle March 22, 2013 At 01:49 PM PDT
As a person that enjoys reading about the heavens and marvels at the universe when I look up into the heavens at night, I wondered for years about the Creation or Evolution philosophies. I have enjoyed the Hubble telescope images that display some incredible photos. My curiosity led me to Bible studies. It was hard for me to believe that a giraffe and an ant came from some cell oozing around in water. The complexity of the human eye and the fact that man has been able to see for thousands of years sold me on a Creator. Just finishing up a great quarter in our Bible study guides which can be found online here: http://ssnet.org/daily-lessons/ One other issue is that Mt. St. Helens is a treasure trove for the scientist. We can see how layer upon layer of sediment formed in just a few hours after the explosion occurred back in May 1980. Carbon 14 radiometric dating is not a perfect way to date any living thing as there is far more carbon in the atmosphere now thanks to man and human progress. It is easier for me to believe the Biblical flood story and that our earth is around 6,000 or so years old. Believing that the earth is billions of years old is not based on scientific fact. There are some things that man just cannot comprehend about the Creator God. “‘The secret things belong unto the Lord our God; but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children forever.’ [Deuteronomy 29:29.] Just how God accomplished the work of creation he has never revealed to men; human science cannot search out the secrets of the Most High.


thanks!

Posted by Anthony Barreiro March 22, 2013 At 02:28 PM PDT
Thank you for this clear and contextualized report. When I heard on the BBC world service and NPR that ESA had reported Planck findings that the universe is older than previously believed, I knew I could wait for Sky and Telescope to explain these findings in depth but at a level I would be able to understand. [paragraph break]P.S. to Danielle -- I also believe that we humans will never completely understand the creation of the universe. But there is great value in trying, and we have made a lot of progress over the centuries. These empirical data about the state of the universe 380,000 years after the mysterious big bang 3.8 billion years ago are quite an accomplishment!


No polarization announcement yet

Posted by Rod March 22, 2013 At 04:18 PM PDT
If Planck finds no evidence of this, does this mean there is no inflation epoch? If we have no inflation epoch, what happens to the horizon problem? This is a light-travel-time problem in explaining the smoothness of the CMBR.


Search:
 
Tag:
 
Author:
 
Date:  
 









Sky Publishing, a New Track Media Company
Copyright © 2013 New Track Media. All rights reserved.
Sky & Telescope, Night Sky, and SkyandTelescope.com are registered trademarks of New Track Media