this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2025
3 points (100.0% liked)

[Dormant] moved to !space@mander.xyz

10415 readers
2 users here now

This community is dormant, please find us at !space@mander.xyz

You can find the original sidebar contents below:


Rules

  1. Be respectful and inclusive.
  2. No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
  3. Engage in constructive discussions.
  4. Share relevant content.
  5. Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
  6. Use appropriate language and tone.
  7. Report violations.
  8. Foster a continuous learning environment.

Picture of the Day

The Busy Center of the Lagoon Nebula


Related Communities

🔭 Science

🚀 Engineering

🌌 Art and Photography


Other Cool Links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

...there are two different ways to measure this cosmic expansion rate, and they don’t agree. One method looks deep into the past by analyzing cosmic microwave background radiation, the faint afterglow of the Big Bang. The other studies Cepheid variable stars in nearby galaxies, whose brightness allows astronomers to map more recent expansion.

You’d expect both methods to give the same answer. Instead, they disagree—by a lot. And this mismatch is what scientists call the Hubble tension...Webb’s data agrees with Hubble’s and completely rules out measurement error as the cause of the discrepancy. It’s now harder than ever to explain away the tension as a statistical fluke. This inconsistency suggests something big might be missing from our understanding of the universe - something beyond current theories involving dark matter, dark energy, or even gravity itself. When the same universe appears to expand at different rates depending on how and where you look, it raises the possibility that our entire cosmological model may need rethinking.

top 20 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] BB84@mander.xyz 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

The article over-dramatizes the story. This "deeply wrong" discrepancy is less than 10%. CMB measurements predict a Hubble constant of around 68km/s/Mpc. Distance ladder measurements get around 73km/s/Mpc.

Our current understanding of the universe the Lambda-CDM model is still wildly successful and it's more likely that the true correct model of the universe will be a correction/extension to Lambda-CDM rather than a completely new theory (although if it is a completely new theory that would be pretty cool).

[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 weeks ago

I think the deeply wrong part of it is that the difference is now big enough for the error bars to stop overlapping

[–] elephantium@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

I think you're understating things. The measurements don't have to be 100 km/s/Mpc apart to cause problems for our understanding of the universe. Ruling out measurement error means we have to go back to the drawing board on cosmology. The problem isn't sloppy telescopes or anything -- it's definitely a hole in our current model.

[–] A_A@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

i agree with you that here, the difference between 68 and 73 seems very small.

For me, it's even amazing that they get, for the CBM, any number even close to the same order of magnitude, given that it seems like a linear division of speed of light divided by light travel distance at the age of the universe, is the value for Hubble parameter (H)*_ at CBM.

That seems in contradiction to the fact that, when adding relativistic velocities (and incrementally up to the speed of light !), linear addition is out of question and general relativity has to be used.

This is just one of the apparent difficulties and obviously there are much more and harder challenges than this one.

_*(... and is the age of the universe defined or measured by other means than simply :
Δt = 1/H ... ? That can't be : since we have 2 parameters to evaluate, so, we need 2 independent experimental measurement variables. )

[–] TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The majority of physics is done with very high precision. This is especially true for fundamental values that apply to everything. For example know the mass of an electron with an error of 0.3 parts per billion. I think this discrepancy is evidence of a significant hole in cosmology theory.

[–] A_A@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Yes i agree that, doing physics in a very well controlled laboratory, physicist can measure things accurately.
Unfortunately we don't have a laboratory big enough to reproduce a big bang and study it in a controlled fashion. So, in cosmology, measurement are difficult and not so precise 😋.

[–] vane@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago
[–] Bob71@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 2 weeks ago

Most rational people will completely ignore this theory, but what if it's just God fucking with us?

[–] Wahots@pawb.social 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

This is really exciting stuff, tbh. It's kinda amazing that in a world where the frontiers have been settled, most fields have had a century to a thousand years of refinement, there are still areas of science where we have giant gaps in our knowledge, like scientists first discovering gravity, or the circumference of Earth.

Someone, perhaps someone who is already alive, is going to discover new math or observations that fundamentally change how we see the universe, with far reaching implications on cosmic exploration, travel the birth and death of our universe, and (I'm sure) many commercial applications.

[–] MrsDoyle@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago

I went to this talk last night https://www.edinburghscience.co.uk/event/the-beauty-of-falling/ - Prof Claudia de Rham of Imperial College London spoke on the latest theories about the structure of the universe. I wish I could pass them on, but sadly my grasp was fleeting. Timey wimey stuff. Something something energetic vacuum! She has written a book: https://www.awesomebooks.com/book/9780691237480/the-beauty-of-falling

[–] jam12705@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Maybe its a fingerprint on the glass

[–] BestBouclettes@jlai.lu 0 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

JWST doing exactly what it was supposed to do ! That's both exciting and terrifying !

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I wouldn't be too terrified

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

But that's my resting state!

[–] Zron@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

What’s terrifying about learning more about his the universe works?

That’s just how all of science works.

It’s not kind JWST detected a black hole barreling towards us or anything.

[–] Unpigged@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 weeks ago
[–] grrgyle@slrpnk.net 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Cool.

Also, what do folks use to block ads on mobile. I've been using FF with Ublock Origin, but lately it hasn't been cutting it.

[–] systemglitch@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

FF with ublock works 100% for me. update your ublock.

[–] threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

You mean uBlock Origin, right?

[–] systemglitch@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Aye, I suppose because of the original version I should have been more clear.