
 |
| (Click image for larger version) |
| Image courtesy of Adam Riess |
I was leading the calibration
and analysis
of data gathered by the High-z Supernova Search Team,
one of two teams of scientists—the other was the
Supernova Cosmology Project—trying to determine the fate
of our universe: Will it expand forever, or will it halt and contract,
resulting in the Big Crunch?
To find the answer, we had to determine the mass of
the universe. It can be calculated by measuring how
much the expansion of the universe is slowing.
First, we had to find cosmic candles—distant objects of
known brightness—and use them as yardsticks. On this page,
I checked the reliability of the supernovae, or exploding stars,
that we had collected to serve as our candles. I found that
the results they yielded for the present expansion rate of the
universe (known as the Hubble constant) did not appear
to be affected by the age or dustiness of their host galaxies.
Next, I used the data to calculate ΩM, the relative mass
of the universe.
It was significantly negative!
The result, if correct, meant that the assumption of my
analysis was wrong. The expansion of the universe
was not slowing. It was speeding up! How could that be?
I spent the next few days checking my calculation.
I found one could explain the acceleration by introducing
a vacuum energy, also called the cosmological constant,
that pushes the universe apart. In March 1998, we submitted
these results, which were published in September 1998.
Today, we know that 74 percent of the universe consists
of this dark energy. Understanding its nature remains
one of the most pressing tasks for physicists and astronomers
alike.
Adam Riess, Johns Hopkins University
Click here to download the pdf version of this article.
Click here for the “Logbook” archive.
Send a letter to the editor
Share this page with others! Submit to:
|
|
|
|
|