Astronomers reveal a cosmic 'axis of evil'

Jun 30, 2011
The Coma Cluster: A massive cluster of galaxies in the local Universe. Credit: NASA, ESA, and the Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA). Acknowledgment: D. Carter (Liverpool John Moores University) and the Coma HST ACS Treasury Team

(PhysOrg.com) -- Astronomers are puzzled by the announcement that the masses of the largest objects in the Universe appear to depend on which method is used to weigh them. The new work was presented at a specialist discussion meeting on 'Scaling Relations of Galaxy Clusters' organised by the Astrophysics Research Institute (ARI) at Liverpool John Moores University and supported by the Royal Astronomical Society.

Clusters of galaxies are the largest gravitationally bound objects in the Universe containing thousands of galaxies like the Milky Way and their weight is an important probe of their dark matter content and evolution through cosmic time. Measurements used to weigh these systems carried out in three different regions of the : X-ray, optical and millimetre wavelengths, give rise to significantly different results.

Eduardo Rozo, from the University of Chicago, explained that any two of the measurements can be made to fit easily enough but that always leaves the estimate using the third technique out of line. Dubbed the 'Axis of Evil', it is as if the Universe is being difficult by keeping back one or two pieces of the jigsaw and so deliberately preventing us from calibrating our weighing scales properly.

More than 40 of the leading cluster astronomers from UK, Europe and the US attended the meeting to discuss the early results from the Planck satellite, currently scanning the heavens at millimetre wavelengths, looking for the smallest signals from clusters of galaxies and the in order to understand the birth of the Universe. The Planck measurements were compared with of clusters from the Sloan Digitised Sky Survey and new X-ray observations from the satellite.

ARI astronomers are taking a leading role in this research through participation in the X-ray cluster work and observations of the constituent galaxies using the largest ground-based optical telescopes.

One possible resolution to the 'Axis of Evil' problem discussed at the meeting is a new population of clusters which is optically bright but also X-ray faint. Dr Jim Bartlett (Univ. Paris), who is one of the astronomers who presented the Planck results, argued that the prospect of a new cluster population which responds differently was a 'frightening prospect' because it overturns age old ideas about the gravitational physics being the same from cluster to cluster.

Chris Collins, LJMU Professor of Cosmology, who organised the meeting said: 'I saw this meeting as an opportunity to bring together experts who study clusters at only one wavelength and don't always talk to their colleagues working at other wavelengths. The results presented are unexpected and all three communities (optical, X-ray and millimetre) will need to work together in the future to figure out what is going on.'

Explore further: Young binary star system may form planets with weird and wild orbits

Related Stories

The most massive distant object known

Apr 11, 2011

(PhysOrg.com) -- Galaxies often occur in groups. Our own Milky Way galaxy, for example, and its local neighborhood with about fifty galaxies are at the edge of the Virgo Cluster, a collection of somewhere ...

Massive galaxy cluster found 10 billion light years away

Jun 06, 2006

A University of Sussex astronomer is the lead researcher for a project that has led to the discovery of the most distant cluster of galaxies observed to date. The cluster, which is 10 billion light years from Earth, is also ...

Survey Reveals Building Block Process For Biggest Galaxies

Apr 12, 2006

A new study of the universe's most massive galaxy clusters shows how mergers play a critical role in their evolution. Astronomers used the twin Gemini Observatory instruments in Hawaii and Chile, and the Hubble Space Telescope ...

The most distant mature galaxy cluster

Mar 09, 2011

Astronomers have used an armada of telescopes on the ground and in space, including the Very Large Telescope at ESO's Paranal Observatory in Chile to discover and measure the distance to the most remote mature ...

Recommended for you

Evidence of a local hot bubble carved by a supernova

18 hours ago

I spent this past weekend backpacking in Rocky Mountain National Park, where although the snow-swept peaks and the dangerously close wildlife were staggering, the night sky stood in triumph. Without a fire, ...

Astronomers measure weight of galaxies, expansion of universe

Jul 30, 2014

Astronomers at the University of British Columbia have collaborated with international researchers to calculate the precise mass of the Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies, dispelling the notion that the two galaxies have similar ...

Mysterious molecules in space

Jul 29, 2014

Over the vast, empty reaches of interstellar space, countless small molecules tumble quietly though the cold vacuum. Forged in the fusion furnaces of ancient stars and ejected into space when those stars ...

Comet Jacques makes a 'questionable' appearance

Jul 28, 2014

What an awesome photo! Italian amateur astronomer Rolando Ligustri nailed it earlier today using a remote telescope in New Mexico and wide-field 4-inch (106 mm) refractor. Currently the brightest comet in ...

User comments : 23

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

kevinrtrs
1.6 / 5 (20) Jun 30, 2011
it is as if the Universe is being difficult by keeping back one or two pieces of the jigsaw and so deliberately preventing us from calibrating our weighing scales properly.

Ha! This is so funny! The problem stems from hanging on to the Big Bang theory and using the assumptions made there to try and fit in the actual observed data into a paradigm that's sick to the core. The more we get to see, the clearer it should be that it's time to create a new model. Most of the latest observations seem to be contradicting the bb model, yet nobody has the guts to speak out and say it's time to now bury the already dead horse. OK, it does sound a bit extreme but it's nevertheless true. The model just doesn't work.
FrankHerbert
3 / 5 (12) Jun 30, 2011
Most of the latest observations seem to be contradicting the bb model


Examples please? How do you explain redshift?
seb
3.2 / 5 (10) Jun 30, 2011
See this science paper on alternatives for redshift - http://www.newton...dex.html
lengould100
3.3 / 5 (9) Jun 30, 2011
I'd guess that the so-called "dark matter" is a made-up fudge, and the problem lies with their use of the overly-simple Einstein equations of gravity.
FrankHerbert
1.6 / 5 (7) Jun 30, 2011
See this science paper on alternatives for redshift - http://www.newton...dex.html


Thanks! I doubt I'll be convinced, but I will give it a whirl.
bluehigh
1.9 / 5 (14) Jun 30, 2011
Gee FrankHerbert, did you go see that with open mind or already doubting any possible change to your beliefs?

Supported by -
National Science and Engineering Research Council and
The Herzberg Institute of Astrophysics of
the National Research Council of Canada

and a whole host of substantial references.

Red Shift, the Big Bang(aka Creation) and Dark Matter are just BS masquerading as science because of mistaken intellectual investment.

Can I sue my Alma Marta for fraud?
rawa1
Jun 30, 2011
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
bluehigh
1.5 / 5 (16) Jun 30, 2011
.. or maybe I can wander up to the Dean at Sydney Uni and ask - how come you did not tell me in lectures that these so called facts are just supposition? Can I get a refund on my fees.

* me looks at worthless MSc framed hanging above desk *

rawa1
1 / 5 (2) Jun 30, 2011
"dark matter" is a made-up fudge, and the problem lies with their use of the overly-simple Einstein equations of gravity
IMO the later explanation is correct, but the first one not. Could you recognize, why is it so?
Javinator
5 / 5 (1) Jun 30, 2011
Dr Jim Bartlett (Univ. Paris), who is one of the astronomers who presented the Planck results, argued that the prospect of a new cluster population which responds differently was a 'frightening prospect' because it overturns age old ideas about the gravitational physics being the same from cluster to cluster.


Now THAT is an interesting proposition.
kaasinees
1.4 / 5 (11) Jun 30, 2011
Most of the latest observations seem to be contradicting the bb model


Examples please? How do you explain redshift?

Show me how redshift supports expansion.
bluehigh
1.2 / 5 (17) Jun 30, 2011
... doesn't matter anyway. just tick a few multiple choice questions each week and write what they want to hear .. get some gov subsidy (i did) and anyone now is a scientist.

just toe the line and you to can have letters after your name like me.

which way to the money shower?
kshultz222_yahoo_com
1 / 5 (4) Jun 30, 2011
I am guessing that the big bang theory is headed in the right direction. It is dark matter/dark energy that I think will be totally debunked.
omatumr
1.3 / 5 (16) Jun 30, 2011
Astronomers are puzzled, . . .

Red Shift, the Big Bang (aka Creation) and Dark Matter are just BS masquerading as science because of mistaken intellectual investment.


Nuclear rest mass data provide the answer [1,2].

1. "Neutron Repulsion", The APEIRON Journal, in press, 19 pages (2011)

http://arxiv.org/...2.1499v1

2. "Is the Universe Expanding?", The Journal of Cosmology 13, 4187-4190 (2011)

http://journalofc...102.html

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo
jamesrm
5 / 5 (1) Jun 30, 2011
'I saw this meeting as an opportunity to bring together experts who study clusters at only one wavelength and don't always talk to their colleagues working at other wavelengths.

I thought that was the most telling line, specialsation gone mad, or are they all really operating on different wavelengths
Starbound
not rated yet Jun 30, 2011
Best... Title.... Ever....
Deesky
5 / 5 (2) Jul 01, 2011
Think of the amount of greenhouse gas emissions that wouldn't be released if all the cranks just stopped posting for a day.
brodix
1 / 5 (1) Jul 01, 2011
Another explanation for redshift:
http://www.fqxi.o...kets.pdf
Questionable
1 / 5 (2) Jul 01, 2011
Most of the latest observations seem to be contradicting the bb model


Examples please? How do you explain redshift?


The fact that the universe is flat. The need for an inflationary period immediately after the BB without ever explaining how and why it slow down or stopped. Even the cosmic background radiation has other explanations. There is only one thing that supports the BB theory, the observed red-shift. Maybe we should try and see if there is another explanation for that.

And NO, this has absolutly nothing to do with a creation theory!
Questionable
1 / 5 (2) Jul 01, 2011
Here is another classical physics explanation for the observed red-shift, pages 15 & 16.
http://www.scribd...-Physics
gwrede
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 03, 2011
The problem with *not* supporting the Big Bang theory, is that then one should come up with an alternative story for how things got started.

And while many people have a problem with the BB, me included, no more plausible explanations seem to be around. Ask a few questions, and they shoot themself in the foot.
omatumr
1 / 5 (1) Jul 03, 2011
The problem with *not* supporting the Big Bang theory, is that then one should come up with an alternative story for how things got started.


Nor the biggest number in an infinite series!
Xob
not rated yet Jul 04, 2011
Brings to mind the idea in the very tiny quantum world where you'd like to be able to know both speed and position at the same time but you can't know both at the same time, only one or the other. Its amusing to read this and imagine that at the extreme other end in terms of size, the biggest things out there pulls a similar kind of trick in that you want to be able to make three measurements at the same time but can only know two of the measurments at any one time while the desired third measurement changes if you know the other two.

Funny. I wonder what they will find is the real answer to this problem of measuring the very large. Will be interesting to see.
Jordian1
not rated yet Jul 12, 2011
Isn't this seen in the quantum world? What you use to measure a molecule entirely changes the measurement you'll get. Could the same thing be happening here?