There was a big press conference this morning about Dark Energy which I missed, unfortunately. I have been reading about what was said (this directly relates to my Day Job) but I don’t have time to write up something especially coherent at the moment. For now, go read the (rather high-level) post at Asymptotia and the easier-to-digest press release, and I’ll explain more later.
About Bad Astronomy
If you went to BadAstronomy.com and found yourself here, never fear: the BA Blog has moved to its new home at Discover Blogs. The original BA site (with the Moon Hoax debunking and all that) is still online, too.
Phil Plait, the creator of Bad Astronomy, is an astronomer, lecturer, and author. After ten years working on Hubble Space Telescope and six more working on astronomy education, he struck out on his own as a writer. He has written two books, dozens of magazine articles, and 12 bazillion blog articles. He is a skeptic, and fights misuses of science as well as praising the wonder of real science.
Contact me: The Bad Astronomer "at" gmail "dot" com
Bad Astronomy is a Wikio Top Blog! Clearly, Wikio has excellent taste. 
Bad Astronomy was chosen as one of Time.com's Best Blogs of 2009. Subscribe to BA using an RSS Feed
Death from the Skies!
Order a copy of Death from the Skies! from Amazon, Barnes and Noble, or Borders.
"If things worked the way I wanted them to, any reporter about to do another 'sensational' story on deadly meteors would consult this volume, and bang! common sense would find its way into the news. How strange would that world be?"
-- Adam Savage, Mythbusters"Reading this book is like getting punched in the face by Carl Sagan. Frightening, but oddly exhilarating."
-- Daniel H. Wilson, author of How to Survive a Robot UprisingSocial/Networking/Cool Stuff
DISCOVERmagazine.com: Latest Articles on Space- DISCOVER Blogs: The Loom
November 16th, 2006 at 2:45 pm
Hey Phil, I have a question. Do you think that dark energy was created right after (meaning a few million years) the Big Bang along with when atoms first started coming into existance or do you think it took a couple of billion years after BB.
P.S.
I was wondering it you ever come to Michigan. I live in the Detroit area and I would love to meet you sometime. You seem like a pretty cool guy. I’ve been reading this blog for over a year and a half now and I love it. I’ve learned alot about science from this site. Keep up the good work!
November 16th, 2006 at 2:46 pm
Hey Phil, I have a question. Do you think that dark energy was created right after the Big Bang meaning a few million years along with when atoms first started coming into existance or do you think it took a couple of billion years after BB.
I was wondering it you ever come to Michigan. I live in the Detroit area and I would love to meet you sometime. You seem like a pretty cool guy. I’ve been reading this blog for over a year and a half now and I love it. I’ve learned alot about science from this site. Keep up the good work!
November 16th, 2006 at 2:47 pm
Hey Phil, I have a question. Do you think that dark energy was created right after the Big Bang meaning a few million years along with when atoms first started coming into existance or do you think it took a couple of billion years after BB. I was wondering it you ever come to Michigan. I live in the Detroit area and I would love to meet you sometime. You seem like a pretty cool guy. I’ve been reading this blog for over a year and a half now and I love it. I’ve learned alot about science from this site. Keep up the good work!
November 16th, 2006 at 2:49 pm
Oops… I keep getting an error and thought it wasn’t going thru. Sorry about that. Ignore the last 2 posts or you can delete them if you want.
November 16th, 2006 at 3:02 pm
I read about this on NASA’s site.
A simple diagram gives a nice visual aid to the issue; it shows the universe itself as a spring, with dark energy as a group of ballons that gets larger as the universe expands.
For xav0971:
If you click the “Back” button, you might see your messege appear. If it doesn’t, click “Refresh”.
November 16th, 2006 at 3:03 pm
hmph, didn’t seem all that new… “supernova = we think there’s dark energy” if there was anything significantly groundbreaking in the summary it must have been over my head or i missed it.
November 16th, 2006 at 3:27 pm
From the big announcement: “Pinpointing supernovae in the faraway universe is similiar to watching fireflies in your back yard. All fireflies glow with about the same brightness. So, you can judge how the fireflies are distributed in your back yard by noting their comparative faintness or brightness, depending on their distance from you.”
Someone tell these boys that all fireflies do NOT glow with about the same brightness. This has relevance because both redshift and luminosity of supernovae are affected by change in c, making “dark energy” unnecessary.
November 16th, 2006 at 4:56 pm
Sean at Cosmic Variance has a very nice post about the nature and significance of the new findings.
November 16th, 2006 at 5:34 pm
At work we’re using IExplorer 6.9.2800
Gary 7
November 16th, 2006 at 5:35 pm
OK Still getting the regex string error.
Gary 7
November 16th, 2006 at 5:57 pm
Oops. When I put this quick entry up, I meant to link to the CV post, and not Asymptotia. Oh well.
November 16th, 2006 at 6:04 pm
Babe in th U.:
There is no indication that C varies, anywhere,,,anytime.
GAry 7
November 16th, 2006 at 10:24 pm
Somebody should tell BA of the errors we get when we post comments.
November 16th, 2006 at 10:25 pm
Somebody should tell BA of the errors we get when we post comments.
November 17th, 2006 at 2:02 am
404’s are coming up for me.
November 17th, 2006 at 7:31 am
I can’t help thinking that the evangelical fundamentalist anti-science brigade has failed to notice the ‘Dark Energy Theory.’
No doubt, when they do, they’ll be campaigning to ban it and to return to the regular Light Energy version. {g}
–
November 17th, 2006 at 7:34 am
Risking a repeat post:
I can’t help thinking that the evangelical fundamentalist anti-science brigade has failed to notice the ‘Dark Energy Theory.’
No doubt, when they do, they’ll be campaigning to ban it and to return to the regular Light Energy version. {g}
P.S. Maybe they have noticed, and have begun the campaign by sabotaging this reply system…?
–
November 17th, 2006 at 10:27 am
kingnor, if I follow correctly, they are comparing the appearance of these really really distant (and therefore old) supernova with ones that are a lot closer (and therefore not as old). Because the appearances are the same, they conclude the Dark Energy that they have to account for now must have been in place then as well. Ergo, “Evidence for Dark Energy in the Early Universe“.
November 17th, 2006 at 11:38 am
There is lots of evidence of c change, some of it gathered with Type Ia supernovae. It also explains CMB data, even the lack of low-l fluctuations.
November 18th, 2006 at 6:23 am
Hey Babe:
I’ve seen some of the type 1a data and there is nothing there that suggests varience in c. Show me the data you’re interpreting that way.
GAry 7