The Genesis of Relativity

The distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion.” – Albert Einstein

A comprehensive overview of the theory of relativity and its applications in astronomy would require a course in itself. The purpose of this post will be to give a brief overview of the subject and in particular, the history of its development as a theory. What I would like to stress that despite its fearsome reputation as being difficult to understand, the major concepts of the theory can be understood by the public. In its most advance form, the mathematics of relativity can provide a challenge to any student of physics. However, this is true of any area of physics. You will not find many physics students tell you that a graduate level electricity & magnetism course is a breeze. However, the subject of electricity & magnetism can be presented in a manner that the public can understand. The difficulties of relativity lie in that it deals with phenomena we do not ordinarily observe in our lives. Relativity provides accurate predictions in two areas where Newton’s Laws do not. These are when matter has velocity near the speed of light and/or is located near a large gravity well (such as a star or a black hole). However, I do want to stress that outside of these two situations, Newton’s Laws and Einstein’s Theory of Relativity give essentially the same results.

Beginnings

In the latter part of the 1800’s, physics was thought by many to be a dead science. Newton’s Laws were considered the final say in predicting the behavior of matter in motion. James Clerk Maxwell, using four equations, successfully provided a comprehensive explanation of the properties of electricity and magnetism. The major problems in physics and astronomy seemed to be solved. However, as the century came to a close, cracks were appearing in this assumption. One was the failure of Newton’s Laws to accurately predict the orbit of Mercury around the Sun. The perihelion (closest approach to the Sun) advanced 574″ (about 1/6 of a degree) per century, which is 43″ more than the 531″ advance predicted by Newton’s Laws. This advance is caused by the presence of the other planets in the solar system. For a time, scientists thought the extra advance in Mercury’s orbit was due to the presence of an undiscovered planet. As none was found, a new explanation was required. An image of the advance is depicted below. It is exaggerated to demonstrate the effect.

Credit: Rainer Zenz/Wiki Commons

Einstein’s Papers

In 1905, Albert Einstein, who was working as a technical expert in a Swiss patent office, published four landmark papers (in addition to his doctoral dissertation) revolutionizing physics.  This year is often called “annus mirabilis” or miracle year. The topics of these four papers are the following:

1. The photoelectric effect demonstrating light behaves as a stream of particles as well as waves. It was known at the time that a beam of light would knock electrons off a metal surface. This is similar to a baseball thrown on a beach. The impact of the ball will knock sand in the air. The accepted theory at the time was light consisted as a series of waves and this could not explain the photoelectric effect. Einstein showed that light behaves as a stream of discrete particles as well. Thus, light has a duality in that it behaves as a stream of particles as well as waves. This discovery is the foundation of quantum physics.

2. The second paper concerned the nature of Brownian motion explaining that heat is created by the motion of atoms and molecules. It was this paper that put the rest the ongoing debate if atoms existed as the constituent particles of matter.

3. The Special Theory of Relativity. This paper was concerned with the motion of objects in non-accelerating frames of reference.  This means gravity is not a factor in the Special Theory as opposed to the later developed General Theory of Relativity.

4. The mass-energy equivalence principle. This paper gave us that famous equation E = mc2.

The last two papers will be discussed below.

Albert Einstein circa 1905, Credit: Einstein Archives/Wiki Commons

 

The Special Theory of Relativity

As mentioned earlier, James Clerk Maxwell, in the mid-1800’s, formulated four basic equations outlining the properties of electricity and magnetism. One outcome of these equations is electromagnetic radiation travels at a rate of 3.0 x 108 m/s (186,282 miles per second). This rate of speed is constant regardless of the observer’s velocity relative to the radiation. What exactly does this mean? Think of yourself on a highway and your speed is 55 mph. The car in the lane next to you is moving at 60 mph. That car will pass you at a rate of 5 mph, as their velocity is that much faster than your velocity. Now, let’s ramp up the speed of your car to 186,277 miles per second. This is exactly five miles per second slower than the speed of light. Remember, light is just a form of electromagnetic radiation. Imagine a beam of light traveling in the lane next to your car. At what rate of speed would it pass you? All your life’s experience would lead you to answer five miles per second. But that would be the incorrect answer! The light beam would pass you at a rate of 186,282 miles per second as if you were standing still. This is true regardless of your velocity relative to the beam of light. The genius of Einstein was to realize that contrary to what we perceive, the speed of light is constant for all observers and time is variable as a function of your velocity. The Special Theory of Relativity leads to the following conclusions:

1. As an object (or person) approaches the speed of light, their clock slows down compared to a stationary observer. If you were to take a round-trip voyage 100 light years away and travel at 99.995 percent of the speed of light, you would only age two years but arrive back on Earth 200 years later. In popular entertainment, the original 1968 movie Planet of the Apes gives a reasonably accurate portrayal of this effect.

2. Mass of an object increases as it approaches the speed of light. In fact, the mass of an object approaches infinity as it approaches the speed of light. This is why the speed of light is the maximum speed obtainable in our universe. As its mass approaches infinity, the force required to accelerate it approaches infinity.

3. The length of an object appears to decrease to a stationary observer as it approaches the speed of light.

4. E = mc2. This is the equation that gives us the understanding of nuclear fusion that occurs in the Sun. As hydrogen fuses to form helium, the mass of the helium atoms is less than the mass of the original hydrogen atoms. The difference is converted to energy. The Sun converts 4.3 million tons of mass into energy each second. A fraction of which reaches the Earth providing the energy to sustain life.

General Theory of Relativity

After publishing his Special Theory of Relativity, Einstein spent the next ten years working out the General Theory of Relativity. It is general in that it applies to all reference frames, accelerating and non-accelerating. This theory was published in 1916 and provided a dramatically different way of looking at gravity. Unlike Newton, who postulated gravity was a force between two bodies, Einstein postulated that gravity represents a curvature in space-time itself. Lets look at an analogy. Think of a trampoline with nothing on it. This represents a universe with no mass in it. If you rolled a golf ball across it, the ball would move in a straight line. Now place a baseball (which could represent a planet) on the trampoline. The ball would depress the trampoline slightly. Now roll the golf ball again. As it approached the baseball, the depression in the trampoline would cause the golf ball to move in a curved motion. Now place a bowling ball (this could represent a star) on the trampoline. The depression becomes more pronounced and the path of the golf ball as it moves towards the bowling ball becomes more curved. In fact, if the golf ball got too close to the bowling ball, its path would curve into the bowling ball much like a meteor would fall to the Earth’s surface if captured by Earth’s gravity well.  The video below describes the difference between Newton & Einstein’s theories on gravity.

Experimental Proof

Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity predicted the advance of Mercury’s perihelion accurately. Remember, the predictions of relativity and Newton’s Laws diverge in two circumstances. When an object travels near the speed of light and when it is located near a large gravity well. Mercury is the closest planet to the Sun. This closeness is enough for predictions of its motion using the theory of relativity to vary slightly than Newton’s Laws. While this created a buzz in the physics community, relativity did not gain general acceptance until it passed an experimental test in 1919. Relativity predicts that light would be deflected by the Sun’s gravity.  A beam of light would follow the path of space-time. If space-time is curved, then the path of light is curved as well.  On May 29, 1919, British astronomer Arthur Eddington led an expedition to measure a star’s position near the Sun during a solar eclipse. Einstein’s theory predicted a deflection of 1.75 seconds of arc as opposed to Newton’s Law predicting the deflection at 0.875 seconds of arc. The measurements came in at 1.98 and 1.61 seconds of arc. These measurements are within the range of 30 seconds of arc error allowed for observational uncertainties and proved light was deflected by the Sun’s gravity well. Both the London Times and the New York Times reported the story and Einstein quickly became, by far, the most famous scientist of the era.

Negative photo of 1919 eclipse, Credit: Royal Society of London/Dyson, Eddington, Davidson
The Sun’s gravity well deflects starlight. Credit: ESA

The Cosmological Constant

The General Theory of Relativity yields a field equation which takes the following form: (Ruv)-1/2 (guv) R = (8)(π)Tuv – Λ(guv)

The subscripts in the equation are indications of what are called stress tensors. This enables mathematicians to express a complex set of equations in a compact form. You can think of this as a mathematical version of a zip file. This equation explains how matter and energy ( Tuv) curves space-time [(Ruv)-1/2 (guv)]. Now, I won’t go into the gory details of this equation. In fact, Einstein himself needed help with the complexities of the mathematics when he derived it. What is important about this equation is it predicts the universe must be either contracting or expanding as matter will deform space-time.

Einstein was not satisfied with this result. At the time, the universe was considered to be a permanent unchanging entity. What Einstein did to correct this was to add the constant Λ in the right side of the equation. This constant changes the equation providing a stable universe offsetting the effects of gravity on space-time. During the 1920’s, Georges Lemaitre argued the cosmological constant was not required and the universe could expand after originating from a primeval atom. Lemaitre used relativity to formulate what would later be called the Big Bang theory.  Edwin Hubble (whom the Hubble Space Telescope was named after) discovered that all the galaxies in the universe were receding from each other. The universe was expanding! Relativity, in its original form, had predicted this result. Einstein would later admit his addition of the cosmological constant was an error.

New knowledge contradictory to our preconceived ideas can form a disequilibrium in our minds that can take time to sort out . Even Albert Einstein, who did as much as anybody to revolutionize physics, suffered once from an inability to overcome a preconceived idea. In this case, he believed the universe was static. It is something we all must guard against. In science, we must let the evidence point us to a conclusion and not allow a preconceived conclusion allow us to define the evidence. It should be noted that once the evidence of the Big Bang arrived, Einstein came around as a supporter of the theory rather than sticking with an outdated idea of the universe. As I speak of preconceived ideas, most would assume when Einstein was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1921, it would have been for relativity. However, he won the Nobel Prize for his explanation of the photoelectric effect.

If you want to read more about Einstein and Relativity

The following sources I highly recommend for anybody who desires a greater understanding of the theory of relativity.

Issacson, W., (2007) Einstein. New York, Simon and Schuster.

A very readable biography of Einstein includes non-mathematical overviews of Einstein’s work.  I found this book very enlightening describing the educational and life experiences that enabled Einstein to make breakthroughs where others failed.

Guttfreund, H. & Renn, J., (2015).  The Road to Relativity.  Princeton, Princeton University Press.

This book contains Einstein’s original manuscript for the theory of general relativity with a page by page interpretation for the public.  It also has an excellent historical background on how Einstein developed the theory.

Einstein, A., Relativity:  The General and Special Theory.

Want to learn about relativity directly from the source?  This is Albert Einstein’s attempt to describe the theory to the public.  The book can be purchased in the usual online outlets but is also in the public domain and can be read online for free, for example, here.

Lambourne, R., (2010). Relativity, Gravitation, and Cosmology. Cambridge University Press.

If you are seeking a textbook to get started on relativity, this is the best treatment I have seen. It will walk you through the algebra of special relativity to the tensors of general relativity. The text has many problems to work through to obtain a solid understanding of the subject. Lambourne has in the past taught a short course in relativity at Oxford’s Department for Continuing Education open to the public. Sounds like a good way to spend a week in the summer.

*Image atop post is the gravitational lensing of a galaxy by another galaxy in front. Typically, such lensing can result in two or more images of an object but if the alignment is just right, it will form a ring structure. Gravitational lensing was predicted by Einstein in 1915. Credit: ESA/NASA/Hubble

Evidence for the Big Bang

The evolution of the world can be compared to a display of fireworks that has just ended, some few red wisps, ashes, and smoke. Standing on a cooled cinder, we see the slow fading of the suns, and we try to recall the vanished brilliance of the origin of the worlds.” – Fr. Georges Lemaitre

Since the ancient astronomers, humans have wondered about the origins of the universe.  For most of history, mythology filled the void in our knowledge.  Then with Issac Newton, scientists began to assume the universe was infinite in both time and space.  The concept of a universe that had a discrete origin was considered religious and not scientific.  During the 20th century, dramatic advancements in both theory and observation provided a definitive explanation how the universe originated and evolved.  Most people I talk to, especially in America, are under the impression the Big Bang is just a theory without any evidence.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  In fact, every time you drink a glass of water, you are drinking the remnants of the Big Bang.

In 1916, Einstein published his general theory of relativity.  Rather than viewing gravity as an attractive force between bodies of mass, relativity describes gravity as mass bending the fabric of space-time.  Think of a flat trampoline with nothing on it.  If you roll a marble across the trampoline, it moves in a straight path.  Now put a bowling ball on the trampoline, the marble’s path is deflected by the bend in the trampoline.  This is analogous to the Sun bending space-time deflecting the paths of planets.  Once Einstein finished up on relativity, he endeavored to build models of the universe with his new theory.  These models produced one puzzling feature.

The equations describing the universe with relativity produced the term dr/dt.  The radius of the universe could expand or contract as time progresses.  If you introduced matter into the model, gravity would cause space-time and the universe itself to contract.  That didn’t seem to reflect reality, and Einstein was still operating with the Newtonian notion of an infinite, unchanging universe.  To check the contraction of the universe, Einstein included a cosmological constant to relativity to offset the force of gravity precisely.  By doing this, Einstein missed out on one of the great predictions made by his theory.

Balancing forces are not unheard of in nature.  In a star like the Sun, the inward force of gravity is offset by the outward force of gas as it moves from high pressure in the core to lower pressure regions towards the surface.  This is referred to as hydrostatic equilibrium and prevents the Sun from collapsing upon itself via gravity to form a black hole.  Einstein’s cosmological constant served the same purpose by preventing the universe as a whole from collapsing into a black hole via gravity.  However, during the 1920’s, a Catholic priest who was also a mathematician and astrophysicist, would provide a radical new model to approach this problem.

Georges Lemaitre had a knack for being where the action was.  As a Belgian artillery officer, Lemaitre witnessed the first German gas attack at Ypres in 1916.  Lemaitre was spared as the wind swept the gas towards the French sector.  After the war, Lemaitre would both enter the priesthood and receive PhD’s in mathematics and astronomy.  The math background provided Lemaitre with the ability to study and work on relativity theory.  The astronomy background put Lemaitre in contact with Arthur Eddington and Harlow Shapley, two of the most prominent astronomers of the time.  This would give Lemaitre a key edge in understanding both current theory and observational evidence.

It’s hard to imagine, but less than 100 years ago it was thought the Milky Way was the whole of the universe.  A new telescope, the 100-inch at Mt. Wilson, would provide the resolution power required to discern stars in other galaxies previously thought to be spiral clouds within the Milky Way.  One type of star, Cepheid variables, whose period of brightness correlates with its luminosity, provided a standard candle to measure galactic distances.  It was Edwin Hubble at Mt. Wilson who made this discovery.  Besides greatly expanding the size of the known universe, Hubble’s work unveiled another key aspect of space.

Edwin Hubble, Albert Einstein, & Fr. Georges Lemaitre. Credit: American Institute of Physics.

When stars and galaxies recede from Earth, their wavelengths of light are stretched out and move towards the red end of the spectrum.  This is akin to the sound of a car moving away from you.  Sound waves are stretched longer resulting in a lower pitch.  What Hubble’s work revealed was galaxies were moving away from each other.  Hubble was cautious in providing a rational for this.  However, Fr. Lemaitre had the answer.  It wasn’t so much galaxies were moving away as space was expanding between the galaxies as allowed by relativity theory.  Lemaitre also analyzed Hubble’s data to determine that the more distant a galaxy was, the greater its velocity moving away from us.  Lemaitre published this result in an obscure Belgian journal.  Hubble would independently publish the same result a few years later and received credit for what is now known as Hubble’s law.  This law equates recessional velocity to a constant (also named after Hubble) times distance.

As space is expanding between each object and in each direction, the recession velocity is greater the more distant an object is. Credit: OpenStax Astronomy/CC 4.0.

It would require more resolving power to determine the final value of the Hubble constant.  In fact, it took Hubble’s namesake, the Hubble Space Telescope to pin down the value which also provides the age of the universe.

Hubble’s original plot of recession velocity vs distance. The more distant a galaxy, the faster it is moving away from us. This is indicative of an expanding universe. Credit: doi: 10.1073/pnas.15.3.168 PNAS March 15, 1929 vol. 15 no. 3 168-173

In the meantime, the debate on the origin of the universe still needed to be settled.  Lemaitre favored a discrete beginning to the universe that evolved throughout its history.  Specifically, Lemaitre felt vacuum energy would cause the expansion of the universe to accelerate in time and thus, kept Einstein’s cosmological constant, albeit with a different value to speed up the expansion.  Einstein disagreed and thought the cosmological constant was no longer required.  By 1931, Einstein conceded the universe was expanding, but not accelerating as Lemaitre thought.  A decade later, the most serious challenge to the Big Bang theory emerged.

The label Big Bang was pinned on Lemaitre’s theory derisively by Fred Hoyle of Cambridge, who devised the Steady State theory.  This theory postulated an expanding universe, but the expansion was generated by the creation of new hydrogen.  Hoyle scored points with the discovery that stellar nucleosynthesis created the elements from carbon to iron via fusion processes.  Although Hoyle proved the Big Bang was not required to form these heavy elements, he still could not provide an answer to how hydrogen was created.  It would take some modifications to the Big Bang model to challenge Hoyle’s Steady State model.

Fred Hoyle and Fr. Georges Lemaitre. Credit: St. Edmond’s College/University of Cambridge.

During the 1940’s, George Gamow proposed a hot Big Bang as opposed to the cold Big Bang of Georges Lemaitre.  In Gamow’s model, the temperature of the universe reaches 1032 K during the first second of existence.  Gamow was utilizing advancements in quantum mechanics made after Lemaitre proposed his original Big Bang model.  Gamow’s model had the advantage over Hoyle’s Steady State model as it could explain the creation of hydrogen and most of the helium in the universe.  The hot Big Bang model had one additional advantage, it predicted the existence of a background microwave radiation emanating from all points in the sky and with a blackbody spectrum.

A blackbody is a theoretical construct.  It is an opaque object that absorbs all radiation (hence, it is black) and remits it as thermal radiation.  The key here is to emit blackbody radiation, an object has to be dense and hot.  A steady state universe would not emit blackbody radiation whereas a big bang universe would in its early stages.  During the first 380,000 years of its existence, a big bang universe would be a small, hot, and opaque.  By the time this radiation reached Earth some 13 billion years later, the expansion of the universe would stretch out these radiation wavelengths into the microwave range.  This stretching would correlate to a cooling of the blackbody radiation somewhere between 0 and 5 K or just 5 degrees above absolute zero.  Detection of this radiation, called the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) would resolve the Big Bang vs. Steady State debate.

In 1964, Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson were using the 20-foot horn antenna at Bell Labs to detect extra-galactic radio sources.  Regardless of where the antenna was pointed, they received noise correlating to a temperature of 2.7 K.  Cosmology was still a small, somewhat insular field separate from the rest of astronomy.  Penzias and Wilson did not know how to interpret this noise and made several attempts to rid themselves of it, including two weeks cleaning out pigeon droppings from the horn antenna.  Finally, they placed a call to Princeton University where they reached Robert Dicke, who had been building his own horn antenna to detect the CMB.  When the call ended, Dicke turned to his team and said:

“Boys, we’ve been scooped”

Actually, the first time the CMB was detected was in 1941 by Andrew McKeller but the theory to explain what caused it was not in place and the finding went forgotten.  Penzias and Wilson published their discovery simultaneously with Robert Dicke providing the theory explaining this was proof that the young universe was in a hot, dense, state after its origin.  Georges Lemaitre was told of the confirmation of the Big Bang a week before he passed away.  Penzias and Wilson were awarded the Nobel in 1978.  Back at Cambridge, Fred Hoyle refused to concede the Steady State theory was falsified until his death in 2001.  Some believe this refusal, among other things, cost Hoyle the Nobel in 1983 when it was awarded for the discovery of nucleosynthesis.  Hoyle was passed in favor of his junior investigator, Willy Fowler.

It would take 25 more years before another mystery of the CMB was solved.  The noise received by Penzias and Wilson was uniform in all directions.  For the stars and galaxies to form, some regions of the CMB had to be cooler than others.  This was not a failure on Penzias and Wilson’s part, but better equipment with higher resolution capabilities were required to detect the minute temperature differences.  In 1989, the COBE probe, headed by George Smoot, set out to map these differences in the CMB.  The mission produced the image below.  The blue regions are 0.00003 K cooler than the red regions, just cold enough for the first stars and galaxies to form.  This map is a representation of the universe when it was 380,000 years old.

The oval represents a 3-D spherical map of the universe projected into 2-D by cutting from one pole to the other. Credit: NASA

Could we peer even farther into the universe’s past?  Unfortunately, no.  The universe did not become transparent until it was 380,000 years old, when it cooled down sufficiently for light photons to pass unabated without colliding into densely packed particles.  It’s similar to seeing the surface of a cloud and not beyond.

The first nine minutes of the COBE probe produced a spectrum of the CMB.  The data was plotted against the predicted results of a blackbody spectrum.  The results are below:

Credit: Mather et al. Astrophys. J. Lett. , 354:L37ÐL40, May 1990

The data points are a perfect match for the prediction.  In fact, the CMB represents the most perfect blackbody spectrum observed.  The universe was in a hot, dense state after its creation.

The late 1990’s would add another twist to the expansion of the universe.  Two teams, one based in Berkeley and the other at Harvard, set out to measure the rate of expansion throughout the history of the universe.  It was expected that over time, the inward pull of gravity would slow the rate of expansion.  And this is what relativity would predict once the cosmological constant was pulled out, or technically speaking, equal to zero.  The two teams set about their task by measuring Type Ia supernovae.

Like Cepheid variables, Type Ia supernovae are standard candles.  They result when a white dwarf siphons off enough mass from a neighboring star to reach the size of 1.4 Suns.  Once this happens, a supernova occurs and as these transpire at the same mass point, their luminosity can be used to calibrate distance and in turn, the history of the universe.  A galaxy 1 billion light years away takes 1 billion years for its light to reach Earth.  A galaxy 8 billion light years away takes 8 billion years for its light to reach Earth.  Peering farther into the universe allows us to peer farther back in time as well.

What the two teams found sent shock waves throughout the world of astronomy.

The first 10 billion years of universe went as expected, gravity slowed the expansion.  After that, the expansion accelerated.  The unknown force pushing out the universe was dubbed dark energy.  This puts the cosmological constant back into play.  The key difference instead of operating from an incorrect assumption of a static universe, data can be used to find a correct value that would model an increasingly expanding universe.  Georges Lemaitre’s intuition on the cosmological constant had been correct.  While the exact nature of dark energy needs to be worked out, it does appear to be a property of space itself.  That is, the larger the universe is, the more dark energy exists to push it out at a faster rate.

Besides detecting the CMB, cosmologists spent the better part of the last century calculating the Hubble constant.  The value of this constant determines the rate of expansion and provides us with the age of the universe.  The original value derived by Hubble in the 1920’s gave an age for the universe that was younger than the age of the Earth.  Obviously, this did not make sense and was one reason scientists were slow to accept the Big Bang theory.  However, it was clear the universe was expanding and what was needed was better technology affording more precise observations.  By the time I was an undergrad in the 1980’s, the age of the universe was estimated between 10-20 billion years.

When the Hubble Space Telescope was launched in 1990, a set of key projects were earmarked for priority during the early years of the mission.  Appropriately enough, pinning down the Hubble constant was one of these projects.  With its high resolution able to measure the red shift of distant quasars and Cepheid variables, the Hubble was able to pin down the age of the universe at 13.7 billion years.  This result has been confirmed by the subsequent WMAP and Planck missions.

The story of the Big Bang is not complete.  There is the lithium problem. The Big Bang model predicts three times the amount of lithium as is observed in the universe.  And there is inflation.  In the first moments of the universe’s existence, the universe was small enough for quantum fluctuations to expand it greatly.  Multiple models exist explaining how this inflation occurred and this needs to be resolved.  This would determine how the universe is observed to be flat rather than curved and why one side of the universe is the same temperature as the other when they are too far apart to have been in contact.  An exponential expansion of the universe during its first moments of existence would solve that.

NASA’s WMAP mission measured the average angular distance between CMB fluctuations. One degree is flat, 0.5 degrees open, 1.5 degrees closed. The measurement came in flat at 1 degree consistent with inflation theory. Credit: NASA/WMAP

Then there is the theory of everything.  In his 1966 PhD thesis, Stephen Hawking demonstrated that if you reverse time in the Big Bang model, akin to running a movie projector in reverse, the universe is reduced to a singularity at the beginning.  A singularity has a radius of zero, an infinite gravity well and infinite density.  Once the universe has a radius less than 1.6 x 1035 meter, a quantum theory of gravity is required to describe the universe at this state as relativity does not work on this scale.

When discussing these problems with Big Bang skeptics, the tendency is to reply with a gotcha moment.  However, this is just scientists being honest about their models.  And if you think you have an alternative to the Big Bang, you’ll need to explain the CMB blackbody spectrum, which can only be produced by a universe in a hot dense state.  And you’ll need to explain the observed expansion of the universe.  It’s not enough to point out the issues with a model, you’ll need to replicate what it gets right.  While there are some kinks to work out, the Big Bang appears to be here to stay.

You don’t need access to an observatory or a NASA mission to experience the remnants of the Big Bang.  Every glass of water you drink includes hydrogen created during the Big Bang.  And if you tune your television to an empty channel, part of the static you see is noise from the CMB.  The Big Bang theory and the observational evidence that backs it up is one of the landmark scientific achievements of the 20th century, and should be acknowledged as such.

*Image atop post is a timeline of the evolution of the universe.  Credit:  NASA/WMAP Science Team.

Science’s First Rough Draft

It has often been said that newspapers are “history’s first rough draft.”  The same is true of science.  One could argue that journals fill the role, but historically, the vast majority of the public reads of scientific discoveries and/or events in the newspaper.  It is quite interesting to see how these events were interpreted at the time without the benefit of hindsight.  The New York Times online archive dates back to the paper’s origins in the 1850’s and represent a rich source of historical material that can be used in the class or for personal research.  Here are some historical articles pertaining to astronomy and physics.

Auroral Phenomena – September 5, 1851.  This article describes the aftermath of the Carrington Event, the most powerful magnetic storm in recorded history.  The aurora was seen across America and telegraph operators could still send messages even after disconnecting the batteries.  Below, NASA presents a computer model of the 1859 magnetic storm.

Glowing After – Sunset SkiesDecember 1, 1883.  Three months after the Krakatoa eruption, the skies around the world appeared deep red after sunset as a result of aerosols ejected into the atmosphere.  The cause of these sunsets were not known at the time – the article never refers to the Krakatoa eruption.

A Comet Visible by DaylightSeptember 20, 1882.  The Great Comet of 1882, considered the brightest comet of the past 1,000 years, is visible during the day.  The image atop this post is this comet.  In 2015, the Rosetta mission became the first to attempt a landing on a comet.

The Roentgen DiscoveryFebruary 7, 1896.  The discovery of x-rays and possible applications in the medical field.  A century later, astronomers would use the orbiting Chandra X-Ray Observatory to discover the universe to be a violent place.

Wireless Signals Across the OceanDecember 15, 1901Guglielmo Marconi receives radio signals in Newfoundland from London to open the era of mass communication.  Decades later, astronomers use radio telescopes to discover pulsars and peer into the center of the galaxy.

The Greatest Telescope in the WorldJanuary 27, 1907.  Plans to build a 100-inch telescope on the summit of Mt. Wilson in California.  Opened in 1917, this telescope is where Edwin Hubble discovered the universe was expanding.

Mt. Wilson 100-inch telescope. Credit: Gregory Pijanowski
Mt. Wilson 100-inch telescope. Credit: Gregory Pijanowski

Comet Gazers See Flashes –  May 19, 1910.  Report on Earth passing through tail of Halley’s Comet.  The comet tail was 100 degrees long and 10 degrees wide in the sky.  Whatever was seen that night, comet tails are much too tenuous to cause flashes in the atmosphere.

Lights All Askew in the Heavens – November 10, 1919.  Eddington Expedition proves Einstein’s General Relativity theory correct by measuring the bending of starlight during a total solar eclipse.  Relativity has passed every test since, including the recent observation of gravity waves.

Ninth Planet Discovered on Edge of Solar System – March 14, 1930.  Pluto is discovered.  Since reclassified as a dwarf planet, the New Horizons mission gave us the first close up images of Pluto in 2015.

Nebula Velocities Support EinsteinJune 12, 1931.  Edwin Hubble discovers the expansion of the universe as predicted by Einstein’s relativity theory.  Actually, Einstein was originally skeptical the universe could expand.  It was Fr. Georges Lemaitre, Catholic priest and physicist, who proposed what was later called the Big Bang theory.  The word nebula in the title refers to what we now call galaxies.

Lemaitre Follows Two Paths to TruthFebruary 19, 1933Fr. Georges Lemaitre does not find a conflict between science and religion.  Einstein and Lemaitre, “Have a profound respect and admiration for each other”.  Article quotes Einstein as stating, “This is the most beautiful and satisfactory explanation of creation to which I have ever listened” regarding Lemaitre’s Big Bang theory.

Fr. Georges Lemaitre (center) and Albert Einstein, January 10, 1933. To the left is Robert Millikan who was the first to measure the charge of an electron. Credit: California Institute of Technology.

Bohr and Einstein at OddsJuly 28, 1935.  The conflict between relativity and quantum mechanics.  The quest to unify the theory of relativity, which governs large objects, and quantum mechanics, which explains physics on an atomic scale, continues to this day.

Science and the BombAugust 7, 1945.  One day after Hiroshima, nuclear fission as a weapon and the implications for humanity are explained.

Palomar Observers Dazzled in First Use of 200-inch LensJune 5, 1948.  Delayed by World War II for five years, Mt. Palomar Observatory finally opens for business.

Palomar
Mt. Palomar 200-inch telescope. Largest in the world from 1948-97. Credit: Gregory Pijanowski

Radio Telescope to Expose SpaceJune 19, 1959.  Navy to build largest radio telescope in West Virginia.  The current radio observatory in Green Bank, WV is surrounded by a 13,000 square mile (slightly larger than the state of Maryland) radio quiet zone, meaning no cell phones, radio, or microwave ovens.

New Clues to the Size of the UniverseMarch 26, 1963.  The brightest objects in the universe, dubbed quasars, are discovered.  Located over 10 billion light years away, these objects are so bright some astronomers thought they must reside within the Milky Way.  However, further research would prove quasars to be the most distant objects observed by humans.

Signals Imply a Big Bang UniverseMay 21, 1965.  The discovery of the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB) proves the universe was born in a hot, dense state aka the Big Bang.  The CMB was most recently mapped by the ESA Planck mission.  The map shows the state of the universe when it was 380,000 years old.

*Image on top of post is the Great Comet of 1882 from the Cape of Good Hope.  Credit:  David Gill.