Voyager Clue Points To Origin of the Axis of Evil 293
KentuckyFC writes "Cosmologists have been scratching their heads over the discovery of a pattern imprinted on the cosmic microwave background, the radiation left over from the Big Bang. This pattern, the so-called Axis of Evil, just shouldn't be there. Now an independent researcher from Canada says the pattern may be caused by the boundary between the Solar System and interstellar space where there is a sharp change in pressure, temperature and density of ions in space. Known as the termination shock, astronomers had thought this boundary was spherical. But last year, data from the Voyager spacecraft which have crossed the boundary, showed it was asymmetric. The new thinking is that the termination shock acts like a giant lens, refracting light that passes through it. Any distortion of the lens ought to show up as a kind of imprinted pattern on an otherwise random image. But the real eye-opener is that as the shape of the termination shock changes (as the Solar Wind varies, for example), so too should the pattern in the microwave background. And there is tentative evidence that this is happening too (abstract)."
Why should we care? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Why should we care? (Score:5, Funny)
It means that the end of the world is imminent.
Quick, grab that towel!
Re:Why should we care? (Score:5, Funny)
It means that in the next two to five years we can confidently expect the development and release of FTL travel, zero-point energy, a cure for mortality, replicator technology and hot green alien nymphomaniac bikini chicks. From Mars.
Now do you care?
Re:Why should we care? (Score:5, Funny)
Only if I hear about it in a Steve Jobs keynote.
Re:Why should we care? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Why should we care? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Go away! I'm 'bating!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Replicators... because in America, I totally need another way to get junk food conveniently without moving from my couch.
Not to mention "Build Your Own Cheetos" and "Any-color Any-texture M&Ms". We don't just want junk food, we want designer junk food that we can design ourselves.
It helps remind us that we are special snowflakes.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Goatos?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
A replicator (ST) could be used to make a replicator (SG).
Correct me if you have an encyclopaedic knowledge of startrek, but self-replicating machines only seem to have featured in the form of the mines in DS9.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I think Tubal-Cain's choice of the spelling on the word implies its disambiguation.
Or it's a typo.
Re:Why should we care? (Score:4, Interesting)
It means that in the next two to five years we can confidently expect the development and release of FTL travel, zero-point energy, a cure for mortality, replicator technology and hot green alien nymphomaniac bikini chicks. From Mars.
If I'm immortal, what need do I have for hot green alien nymphomaniac bikini chicks? I'd be popping saltpeter pills and working on time travel science (since all the other super-science would be done, and being assured that I'd see the future via immortality, only the past would be of interest).
Re: (Score:2)
and flying cars, right? There's going to be flying cars. There has to be. Cuz hot green alien nymphomaniacs dig flying cars.
Re: (Score:2)
No... just classic Corvettes that get driven over cliffs.
Re:Why should we care? (Score:4, Funny)
Or ones that get released from the space shuttle and re-enter the atmosphere to land and drive home.
I prefer the South Park treatment, Trans-Am, big Boobie girl wearing a jaunty hat.
Re: (Score:2)
Now do you care?
No. Green doesn't turn me on.
Re:Why should we care? (Score:5, Funny)
Having someone modded 'Troll' calling another person racist for not liking green skin... ...actually, makes a sort of sense.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Depending on the size and nature of the effect, all of our earth observations could be tainted. While observing simple things like galaxies with Hubble are barely affected, it could possibly upset the belief that the universe is expanding. If photons are being slowed as they cross the terminal shock boundary, it would make it look like the universe was expanding in all directions, which is a belief we currently hold. If the effect is strong enough, it could even tell us its expanding when it is contracting.
Re:Why should we care? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Why should we care? (Score:4, Interesting)
It's obvious why....I'm the center of the universe.
Assume the universe is infinite. If I look left, there is an infinite distance between me an the restaurant in that direction. If I look up, same thing, infinite distance. Right, down, forward, backward, same thing. The center of something is defined as the point where the distance between all opposing points is the same. Therefore, I am the center of the universe.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The current robot mission (New Horizon) to Pluto should provide better answers in the future. The New Horizon mission is going to reach Pluto in 2015, so it should be at the boundary at 2020 or 2025, I am not sure about the exact date in that manner. But it is somewhere along those years.
http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/ [jhuapl.edu]
Re:Why should we care? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
actually, before the big bang, "here" (space) didn't exist yet. "before the big bang" (time) also didn't exist.
Your evidence, Watson?
Re:Why should we care? (Score:4, Insightful)
asking whether time and space existed 'before the big bang' is like asking what's north of the north pole.
Re:Why should we care? (Score:5, Interesting)
The singularity, or big bang, is the lowest common denominator state of the mass/energy of the multiverse. This universe is an expression of one of many higher order patterns which the multiverse can assume. Entropy and gravity are expressions of the universes inevitable degeneration back to the singular state. "Before" the big bang, there was another universe, and "After" the big bang, there will be another universe. Although that is misleading, because time is just another spatial dimension, and all of these universes exist simultaneously, connected at the singularity. None of this is infinite, just incredibly large and complex.
Understanding the shape of the multiverse is synonymous with understanding the laws of reality. Where the multiverse came from is beyond human experience, and not really a useful question to contemplate.
Re:Why should we care? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
We get "something from nothing" all day long, sir.
Here's some things to read about for fun:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirac_sea [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_particles [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Path_integral_formulation [wikipedia.org]
Of course, the 'somethings' we get don't stick around for long, but (I am not a physicist!) I think that phenomena similar to this is how most physicists account for the big bang.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I think it means that we now don't have to worry about the inflationary theory, so it will be easier to solve the economic crisis with Obama bucks.
Or something like that. But I'm no rocket surgeon.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Or we could just say that if it doesn't interest you enough to give it a five-minute read, you can just move on.
So? (Score:4, Interesting)
to get a good view of the cosmos (Score:2)
you need to position yourself outside of the milky way galaxy, and far from the andromeda galaxy too
and even then, the light pollution from these gaudy neighborhood photon hogs spoils the good view
but take heart: nasa already has a plan to send a telescope outside the galaxy to get a good view, and it should be fully operational in 25,000 years
of course, there's the issue of the slight lag between taking a picture and the picture being transmitted back to earth, but top minds are working on that small probl
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:So? (Score:5, Informative)
Not necessarily, we just need glasses. Knowing our observations are being altered by what is in effect a lens is the first step. Once we know the actual shape and properties of that lens we can mathematically apply alterations to our observations to correct for the distortion and end up with representations of our galaxy, other galaxies, and the background photons and radiation of the universe with much more accuracy than ever before.
Of course, stationing observatories beyond the field would be the best option, much like observatories like Hubble that are outside our atmosphere are better than ground-based telescopes. It is possible that not everything is actually making it through this lens, so even applying corrections won't yield a 100% perfect picture.
Wikipedia (Score:4, Informative)
too (abstract) (Score:3, Funny)
I tried to understand this, but it was too (abstract)
Re:too (abstract) (Score:5, Informative)
Short version: You know how stars twinkle because of the Earth's atmosphere? Something similar happens at the boundary of the solar system. The difference there is that the boundary is due to the solar wind as opposed to an atmosphere.
The actual distortion is similar to the ripples of light you see on the bottom of a swimming pool due to ripples in the surface of the water. Because the surface is uneven, the light gets bent unevenly and bunches together in some places and spreads out in others. So, instead of even lighting across the bottom of the pool, you see a pattern of light and dark areas.
Same thing's happening to the cosmic background radiation. It should be evenly distributed, but instead it's brighter and darker in places, and they think it's due to the uneven surface of the termination shock.
Re: (Score:2)
So I picked up that much. What I'm unclear on is shouldn't the distortions (from Earth's perspective anyway) be moving? As we observe a point outside our solar system through the year, we'd be looking through a slightly different part of the heliopause "lens". So the distortions should move as Earth does (or whatever our observation platform is).
If the "ripples" are fast (relative to a solar year) we should see them, and be able to correct them over a short period of time. If they're slow, then a longe
Re: (Score:2)
They mentioned that directly in the last paragraph of the second link.
So yes, they should fluctuate, and we have hints that we've seen it fluctuate. I imagine the fluctuations would be a function of both solar output and variations of density of interstellar mass. It'd be really cool if someone could correlate something like a CME [wikipedia.org] to a "pinch" i
And it should be easy to test (Score:4, Insightful)
Just like the bottom of a swimming pool, the uneven pattern should change over time as the termination shock fluctuates.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously though, excellent explanation.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It should be evenly distributed, but instead it's brighter and darker in places, and they think it's due to the uneven surface of the termination shock.
However, in a paper linked from the first article there is a second effect that optical phenomena at the termination shock won't account for: there appears to be a preferential handedness of spiral galaxies, and the handedness exhibits itself along an axis that is close to the Axis of Evil.
Furthermore, while this paper on optical effects is interesting and
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The two observations mentioned in the first article don't seem to rule it out.
But the termination shock has zero influence on optical photons.
The handedness paper is looking a ordinary optical images of spiral galaxies within 172 Mpc and asking, "is there any axis where if we look one way we see mostly left-handed galaxies and if we look the other way we see mostly right-handed galaxies?" Since we are in the middle of the distribution a preponderance of a particular handedness will show up as more left-han
Re:too (abstract) (Score:5, Informative)
I don't think that's quite right. You are describing small-scale fluctuations in the "surface" of the termination shock. But the main effect being considered in the scientific paper [arxiv.org] is a large-scale anisotropy in the termination shock.
The termination shock (TS) is usually assumed to be spherical: the sun emits supersonic solar wind in all directions; the point at which this solar wind is slowed by the interstellar medium should be the same in all directions. But what if it's not? The paper considers what effect a termination shock shaped like a "prolate ellipsoid of revolution" would have on an otherwise isotropic (at large scales) cosmic-microwave-background (CMB).
They quickly calculate that a prolate TS could lead to the observed quadrupole in the CMB. The authors suggest that the coupling between TS and CMB may be due to refractive index effects (basically as if the solar system is inside a gigantic lens), or possibly differences in scattering at different parts of the TS. Either way, some types of light reaching us should have a corresponding signature of the anisotropy.
Note that this isn't the first time the CMB had to be corrected. A very significant dipole in the full-sky map has to be removed to account for the relative motion of our planet in the galaxy, the motion of our galaxy with respect to the rest frame of the CMB, etc.
The authors end their paper by mentioning that if this effect is real, then small-scale fluctuations in the surface of the TS may also affect the smaller-scale fluctuations we see in a map of the CMB [wikipedia.org]. Those fluctuations are normally thought to be an imprint of the randomness in the early universe. The authors suggest that the fluctuation spectrum may be altered by, or possibly even totally an artifact of, ripples in the TS. But as the authors note this is very, very speculative at this point. (We've been mapping the CMB for many years and the maps seem roughly consistent, so any time-varying rippling in effect would have to be subtle and/or slow...)
Re: (Score:2)
Short version: everything from nothing. Film at Elveon.
A week too late. (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps Planck2, or whatever the next model is called, will have to travel outside the solar system to get a clear view. If so, we'll be waiting for a very long time for results from it.
Re:A week too late. (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it just means there's an extra factor that influences the images Planck will make. We just need to find out what the influence is of this extra factor, and then delete that factor from the images Planck makes.
Planck can make the images now, and we can compensate for the Axis of Evil afterwards.
Re:A week too late. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Gee, I can't see how being able to map out the boundary of the Solar System we live in could be beneficial to science. We should all crawl back into our caves and shine our clubs for the coming Ice Age.
Now we just need to wait... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Now we just need to wait... (Score:5, Funny)
carbon unit infestation
There are shampoos that'll fix that.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Funny, I had always just assumed that movie was in an alternate timeline... >_
Axis of Evil (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not getting it (Score:4, Funny)
So does this mean torture's ok and waterboarding might prevent the heat death of the universe?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So does this mean torture's ok and waterboarding might prevent the heat death of the universe?
Get over yourself, you twat, whoever you are. That was funny.
Changing shape? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Note to scientists: (Score:4, Insightful)
Be careful what you label your anomalous data. It may come back to be your new theory.
Try explaining to Americans why "The Axis of Evil" won out over conservative theory. Give the genius who thought that term up another grant... ;)
Fascinating stuff (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yet still probably the most appropriate technology for the mission, unless you have a fool-proof way of describing to someone who doesn't share any languages with you how to quickly build a Bluray player.
Re: (Score:2)
They would have gone with HD-DVD.
Re: (Score:2)
Come on, this is NASA we're talking about. There is no way they ever would have gone with a Blu-Ray format.
They would have gone with HD-DVD.
Whoa, whoa there buddy. That's a bit modern for NASA. They'd have opted for laserdisc or betamax.
The best technology that 1978 has to offer.
Re:Fascinating stuff (Score:5, Interesting)
Way back in the 80's I was taking a receiver design course at George Washington University. My lab partner was involved in the continual design of more sensitive receivers to listen in on the voyager craft.
It led to interesting discussions about how the pace of receiver design (sensitivity, noise floor, selectivity). At the time we were learning the state of the art, the folks at the research labs were pushing the limits further and further. It warms my heart to realize that 25 years later they are still making significant advancements.
What it will take to monitor the weakening transmissions from the Pioneers and Voyagers five years from now doesn't exist today. Kudos to everyone involved in the process.
Re:Fascinating stuff (Score:4, Funny)
Tell that to the audiophiles.
Re: (Score:2)
Gotta use Alien Cables(TM) too
Re: (Score:2)
Oh really? [google.com]
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm more impressed that we can still get signals from the thing. The radio only emits 20 watts. By the time the signal reaches earth, it's been attenuated to 0.00000000000000001 watts. Being able to grab that signal is equivalent to reading morse code transmitted by an ordinary light bulb 200 million miles away!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why? I still drive a vehicle that was manufactured in the '60s.
Yes, but how many times has it been serviced since? How many parts replaced?
Hubble 2.0 (Score:2)
But the big one will be Hubble 3.0, outside our galaxy, sending us the images of the Big Bang that suffered Earth a bit after it got lauched.
Re: (Score:2)
What I'm wondering is if anyone has proposed such a thing, perhaps with one of those Japanese ion drives?
Observable universe wrong? (Score:2)
Does this mean that the lensing effect alters what we can observe from the universe?
How about what we think of the size and distribution of this universe? Or it's "expansion speed"? Could those be somewhat distorted due to this effect and the fact that the solar system itself moves at great speed?
Re: (Score:2)
Its all a lie (Score:2)
Its all a lie, I tell you...
If anyone has seen the Truman show then they will know what I mean when I say we all being fooled. The boundary is simply the painted wall of our illusion chamber. There is just a lot of goo before the wall to keep our hopes up. Now I want my Nobel Prize.
Just kidding.
Shouldn't? (Score:2, Interesting)
just shouldn't be there.
Sorry, but that's religious talk. Science revels in unexpected results.
Re:Shouldn't? (Score:5, Interesting)
Nah, that's good and scientific.
Religious: "According to my faith, that shouldn't be there. So it's not. la-La-LA, I can't HEAR YOU!"
Scientific: "According to my theory, that shouldn't be there. But it is. So what's wrong with my theory?"
There's not necessarily a conflict between "shouldn't be" and "unexpected". It's "unexpected" because it "shouldn't be".
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Fixed
Epoch Fail (Score:4, Informative)
I hardly know where to begin, but the physics, as described in the original post, is wrong. I am going to read the article now, but just remember that Arxiv articles are not peer reviewed before they are posted.
Re: (Score:2)
Having read the paper, there is basically no physics in it. A lot of handwaving and references to various effects, but no physics.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I took a cow to church one Sunday. After, I asked it what it thought. It said it was Moooving.
Am I the only one... (Score:2)
that spent several seconds trying to figure out how a deep space probe could possibly have found clues to the origin of a piece of bush administration war propaganda?
A third way (Score:2)
So, what they are saying is that their choices aren't simply limited to:
Either you are with us, or you are against us.
Now the axis of evil can chose to be around us instead.
Why Evil? (Score:2)
Is change evil in science now? Or is the implication that the big crunch is on, and Armageddon's next Thursday?
Heliosheath... Galactiosheath? (Score:2)
OK, it's probably silly given that the heliosheath has a drop-off, but...
How do we know there isn't a similar sheath around the galaxy that's similarly affecting observations?
Axis of Evil? (Score:3, Funny)
I could've sworn that 'yaw' was the axis of evil.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It is left as an exercise for the user to determine why the word 'of' was included in the name.
Re: (Score:2)
Because cosmologists read the news and have a sense of humor.
Some of the basic Axis of Evil papers are
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0502237 [arxiv.org]
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0611518 [arxiv.org]
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0604410 [arxiv.org]
Note the date on the first one.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Let's test that theory: start a rumor that Michael Vick is starting a website called "slashdog".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It would be interesting to know whether the apparent red/blue shifts from galaxy observations could be accounted
Minutely.
it could call for a revision of many theories regarding the topology of the Universe, and its ultimate fate.
Possible, but at nothing like the scale which the confirmed existance of the Axis of Evil would have.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Voyager (Score:5, Informative)
I completely agree - and it's worth noting that we're talking about a spacecraft launched in 1977 - so it's flying tech is even older.
Not only that - our ground tech is truly incredible.
The power received at an earth antenna is 1e-16 watts - imagine finding and holding that signal in the cosmic background noise!
http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/mission/didyouknow.html [nasa.gov]