No evidence for 'knots' in space

Jun 13, 2012
A random collection of textures taken from high-resolution, supercomputer simulations. Red indicates a positive twist in the topological charge density and blue a negative twist. Credit: V. Travieso and N. Turok

(Phys.org) -- Theories of the primordial Universe predict the existence of knots in the fabric of space - known as cosmic textures - which could be identified by looking at light from the cosmic microwave background (CMB), the relic radiation left over from the Big Bang.

Using data from NASA's (WMAP) satellite, researchers from UCL, Imperial College London and the Perimeter Institute have performed the first search for textures on the full sky, finding no evidence for such knots in space.

As the Universe cooled it underwent a series of phase transitions, analogous to water freezing into ice. Many transitions cannot occur consistently throughout space, giving rise in some theories to imperfections in the structure of the cooling material known as cosmic textures.

If produced in the , textures would interact with light from the CMB to leave a set of characteristic hot and cold spots. If detected, such signatures would yield invaluable insight into the types of that occurred when the Universe was a fraction of a second old, with drastic implications for .

A previous study, published in Science in 2007, provided a tantalising hint that a CMB feature known as the "Cold Spot" could be due to a cosmic texture. However, the CMB Cold Spot only comprises around 3% of the available sky area, and an analysis using the full microwave sky had not been performed.

The new study, published today in Physical Review Letters, places the best limits available on theories that produce textures, ruling out at 95% confidence theories that produce more than six detectable textures on our sky.

Stephen Feeney, from the UCL Department of Physics and Astronomy and lead author, said: "If textures were observed, they would provide invaluable insight into the way nature works at tremendous energies, shedding light on the unification of the physical forces. The tantalizing hints found in a previous small-scale search meant it was extremely important to carry out this full-sky analysis."

Co-author Matt Johnson, from the Perimeter Institute, Canada, said: "Although there is no evidence for these objects in the WMAP data, this is not the last word: in a few months we will have access to much better data from the Planck satellite. Whether we find textures in the Planck data or further constrain the theories that produce them, only time will tell!"

Explore further: Spin-based electronics: New material successfully tested

More information: ArXiv preprint: arxiv.org/pdf/1203.1928v2.pdf

Related Stories

First observational test of the 'multiverse'

Aug 03, 2011

The theory that our universe is contained inside a bubble, and that multiple alternative universes exist inside their own bubbles – making up the 'multiverse' – is, for the first time, being tested by physicists.

Planck Satellite ready to measure the Big Bang

May 11, 2009

(PhysOrg.com) -- The last tests of the Ariane 5 rocket system have been finished and ESA's Planck satellite is sitting ready for launch at the Guiana Space Centre in Kourou. Together with ESA's space telescope ...

Introducing the 'coolest' spacecraft in the universe

Feb 09, 2007

The European Space Agency's Planck mission, which will study the conditions present in our Universe shortly after the Big Bang, is reaching an important milestone with the integration of instruments into the satellite at ...

Recommended for you

Spin-based electronics: New material successfully tested

23 hours ago

Spintronics is an emerging field of electronics, where devices work by manipulating the spin of electrons rather than the current generated by their motion. This field can offer significant advantages to computer technology. ...

A transistor-like amplifier for single photons

Jul 29, 2014

Data transmission over long distances usually utilizes optical techniques via glass fibres – this ensures high speed transmission combined with low power dissipation of the signal. For quite some years ...

User comments : 24

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

TabulaMentis
3 / 5 (1) Jun 13, 2012
Anyone out there know where I can find a graphic illustration of these cosmic textures this article is talking about?
Terriva
1 / 5 (4) Jun 13, 2012
Cruz, M.; N. Turok, P. Vielva, E. Martínez-González, M. Hobson (2007). "A Cosmic Microwave Background Feature Consistent with a Cosmic Texture" (Science 318 (5856): 16124). Apparently everyone can publish about it, what he wants. Image of alleged textures generated with computer simulation(?) is for example here and it's equivalent to the article illustration.
Terriva
1 / 5 (5) Jun 13, 2012
In dense aether model similar structures should exist as a result of hypersphere packing geometry described with E8 Lie group. It's root vectors follows nested dodecahedral geometry. Illustratively speaking, if we would compress the pile of mutually repulsive particles, then their density fluctuations will get nested dodecahedron geometry until they become fully random, so that this geometry belongs into predictions of dense aether model. It's visible both like so-called "Penrose circles" on the sky directly, both as a tiny peaks at the CMBR power spectrum.
Terriva
1 / 5 (5) Jun 13, 2012
The astrophysicists are definitely aware of these features - but because they point to the dense aether model and they're not consistent with Big Bang cosmology, they're essentially ignored and occasionally revealed again (Penrose and Gurzadyan) in another context.
TabulaMentis
not rated yet Jun 13, 2012
@Terriva:
Thanks for the feedback. I prefer squares over dodecahedrons grouped and/or layered together in sheets, or twisted shapes.

I'm fairly sure someone will say cosmic textures can only be described in math and not by illustration. The graphic illustrations I have seen so far do not make any sense at all.
Terriva
1 / 5 (2) Jun 13, 2012
I prefer squares
The Nature doesn't ask, what the people like. The Universe is no place for ad-hoced concepts. If you have no explanation for the matter of your preference, then you're a religious creature - nothing less and nothing more. You should always have some reasoning for the subject of your belief, or you're not better than the Christians who barbecued first philosophers.
TabulaMentis
not rated yet Jun 13, 2012
@Terriva:
If spacetime fabric is not square at the Planck length, then I will eat my poo. I can backup what I say, not eat it!
Terriva
1 / 5 (1) Jun 13, 2012
..I'm fairly sure someone will say cosmic textures can only be described in math and not by illustration...
The dodecahedral hypersphere packing geometry is closely related to the Kelvin's conjecture and the Poincare dodecahedral space, which are described well by itself with formal math. But just the fact, they're handled separately indicates, that the people aren't aware of how these concepts are related mutually. The pile of math rather makes such a connection more obscured, especially for laymans.
If spacetime fabric is not square at the Planck length, then I will eat my poo
A single matter of fact argument would count more, than the pile of shitty promises...;-) You know, I'm not wasting my time with people, who cannot argue their opinion.
TabulaMentis
not rated yet Jun 13, 2012
@Terriva:
You are talking about another scale and not the Planck length. Now stop it with the math shit!
Terriva
1 / 5 (5) Jun 13, 2012
At the water surface the transverse surface ripples disperse in similar way both at microscopic scale into longitudinal Brownian noise), both at macroscopic scale into longitudinal gravitational waves. Analogously, the appearance of Universe at the quantum scale should be a miniaturized version of the Universe at the cosmological scale. So I presume, the geometry of dark matter foam (the largest regular structure observable at the visible Universe) will correspond the structure of space-time at the Planck scale. We, as a human observers are in the middle of this dimensional scale. Best of all, we have already some indicia for it in search of Higgs boson, the power spectrum of which is similar to the power spectrum of CMBR.
TabulaMentis
1 / 5 (1) Jun 13, 2012
@Terriva:
Why would I take 21 years of research and post it on this site for people like you to steal? Think about it, punk!
Terriva
1 / 5 (4) Jun 13, 2012
The Universe is apparently symmetrical around human observer scale. At the human observer scale the Universe is fractally nested, hyperdimensional stuff. With both increasing, both decreasing size of objects it becomes composed of spheres. But with increasing distance from human observer scale this symmetry becomes broken again and the largests/smallest observable structures in it are quire random again. IMO the Universe tells us quite clearly, how it appears, if you know where to look at it.
Terriva
not rated yet Jun 13, 2012
Why would I take 21 years of research and post it on this site
Why don't you publish it somewhere else (ArXiv, ViXra, Google Knoll, etc)? But my experience is, when the people have arguments, they simply use them. When they haven't it, they do use an evasions.
TabulaMentis
1 / 5 (1) Jun 13, 2012
@Terriva:
All I can say is someday when man is able to smash quarks and see what they become will you then understand what I am talking about.
TabulaMentis
not rated yet Jun 13, 2012
Why don't you publish it somewhere else (ArXiv, ViXra, Google Knoll, etc)? But my experience is, when the people have arguments, they simply use them. When they haven't it, they do use an evasions.
Money is the problem. I do not have the funds to finish what needs to be done. Within six months or a year it should be ready. It is copyrighted, but needs to be published like you said. I am a profectionist and do not believe in publishing garbage.
TabulaMentis
not rated yet Jun 13, 2012
The Universe is apparently symmetrical around http://www.aether...ale.gif. At the human observer scale the Universe is fractally nested, hyperdimensional stuff. With both increasing, both decreasing size of objects it becomes composed of spheres. But with increasing distance from human observer scale this symmetry becomes broken again and the largests/smallest observable structures in it are quire random again. IMO the Universe tells us quite clearly, how it appears, if you know where to look at it.
Why do you wish to make things so difficult. Humans always make things more difficult for themselves. The forces of nature are not that difficult to understand. We would have gravity engines today if humans were not so stupid!
MandoZink
5 / 5 (4) Jun 13, 2012
Damn! I'm late. I was going to try and be the first poster here so I might predict this article as today's most likely candidate for a flood of "dense aether" explanations.
Darn it all! And here I was wanting my hypothesis to be able to predict the response, not fit into my theory after the fact!
IronhorseA
5 / 5 (3) Jun 13, 2012
@Mando Don't worry, Terriva is flooding us with the D.A.M. stuff to distract from the fact that the article is about findings that pretty much rule out his drivel. ;P
Terriva
1 / 5 (4) Jun 13, 2012
Of course: this article says, there are no cold spots in the CMBR on the sky, whereas I'm saying, they're forming pentagrams there... There is only one restriction, though: these structures are superposed with hyperbolic structure of the Universe, so they're visible clearly only on the portion of sky. This makes a problem for those, who want to see our Universe pretty regular.

BTW The dark matter geometry can be modeled with illuminating of transparent beads packed under the water.
TabulaMentis
not rated yet Jun 13, 2012
Of course: this article says, there are no cold spots in the CMBR on the sky, whereas I'm saying, they're forming pentagrams there... There is only one restriction, though: these structures are superposed with hyperbolic structure of the Universe, so they're visible clearly only on the portion of sky. This makes a problem for those, who want to see our Universe pretty regular.
It sounds like you are talking about Strange Attractors.

See link: http://en.wikiped...ttractor

Deesky
5 / 5 (4) Jun 13, 2012
LOL, a battle of wits!
Archea
1 / 5 (1) Jun 14, 2012
It sounds like you are talking about Strange Attractors.
Nope, the dark matter streaks are merely a density fluctuations of vacuum. If you would sit at the water surface and if you would observe it with its own waves, then these streaks would be the farthest structures, which you could observe before all surface ripples would scatter into underwater waves at distance. What we can see at the cosmological distances are the light waves scattered into longitudinal waves in such a way, these streaks are traces of inverse space-time (with time and space coordinates exchanged). They're of negative gravitational charge.
CardacianNeverid
5 / 5 (2) Jun 14, 2012
Nope, the dark matter streaks are merely a density fluctuations of vacuum. If you would sit at the water surface and if you would observe it with its own waves, then these streaks would be the farthest structures, which you could observe before all surface ripples would scatter into underwater waves at distance. What we can see at the cosmological distances are the light waves scattered into longitudinal waves in such a way, these streaks are traces of inverse space-time (with time and space coordinates exchanged). They're of negative gravitational charge -ArcheaTard

Awooooga, Awooooga, Zephyr sockpuppet alert, Awooooga, Awooooga!
TkClick
1 / 5 (1) Jun 14, 2012
The physicists are trying to use the water surface model in their illustrations (not very consequentially yet, though) Is Dark Matter a Glimpse of a Deeper Level of Reality?.

Anyway, it's surprising how some trivial connections are difficult to grasp with physicists, who were learned that the aether is bad and the math is perfect whole their life. They're psychologically detached from these analogies and explanations as a single man.