Sometimes it’s not that hard to predict the future — everyone paying attention (including me) knew that one of the most Nobel-worthy discoveries out there was the 1998 announcement that our universe is accelerating. Now the achievement has been officially honored, with this year’s Physics Prize going to Saul Perlmutter, Adam Riess, and Brian Schmidt. (Great quotes and coverage at the Guardian.) Congrats to three extremely deserving scientists!
Like regular people with major historical events, most physicists can remember where they were when they first heard that the universe is accelerating. That’s how big this discovery was. It was just the right combination of “startling” — very few people really thought the universe was accelerating, and if they did they certainly weren’t proclaiming that belief very loudly — and “believable” — we all knew it was possible, and as soon as the data came in people realized that it solved a bunch of problems at once. There was a healthy amount of skepticism, but in a very short period of time it became difficult to get a Ph.D. as a cosmologist without working on this problem in one way or another — either verifying the result observationally, or trying to come up with a theoretical explanation.
The leading explanation by far, of course, is the existence of a smooth and persistent source of energy known as dark energy, of which Einstein’s cosmological constant is the simplest and most compelling example. If that’s the right answer, we’re talking about 73% or so of the universe. Something to tell your grandkids that you helped discover, eh? A small sampling of what this discovery has wrought, just taken from this here blog:
- Songs
- Frantic attempts to wriggle out
- Amazing cosmological measurements
- More frantic attempts
- Complaints about fundamentalism
- A much better idea what will happen to the universe in the future
- Plant nutrient formulae
- Conferences
- Task forces
- Plans for future satellites
- Prizes galore
- New theories of gravity
- New scenarios for the origin of the universe
- Better theoretical understanding
- Better observational strategies
- Confused vocabulary
- Confused cosmologists
- Multiple confirmations
Not a bad result, I would say.
You don’t think I’m going to leave this without mentioning that Brian Schmidt was my office mate in grad school, do you? Taught the young man all he knows (about inflation and field theory). Adam Riess was a fellow classmate of ours, both of them studying under Bob Kirshner. I even got to collaborate on a follow-up paper with these upstanding gentlemen. Saul Perlmutter was already at Lawrence Berkeley Labs thinking about supernovae and the expansion of the universe, so I can’t claim to have influenced him, but we did chat on the phone several times about what different observational outcomes would imply for theory. This is the first Nobel Prize where I was friends with all the winners before they won.
In this day and age, of course, much good science is done by teams, not by individuals. This is certainly an example; Brian has already said that he’ll be bringing his team to Stockholm. Congratulations again to everyone involved in this discovery, truly one of the historic events in science.
October 4th, 2011 at 9:03 am
Wait, you were at Harvard during that time rooming with Brian? I was working with Kirshner on a related project, and visited twice. Weird; we must’ve met then at some point. Did you go to the Friday wine tasting I attended? Hmmmm.
October 4th, 2011 at 9:09 am
There were a lot of Friday wine tastings, I went to some of them. We were at least in the same building!
October 4th, 2011 at 9:17 am
It is great to see that the physics Nobel prize is recognizing the contribution of astronomers. It has always struck me as odd that to date, only observations of the microwave sky “counted” as physics, especially considering the missed opportunity to honor Hubble himself. Everyone agrees that the detection of dark matter particles – should that ever occur – would warrant a Nobel prize. So why not a Nobel prize for Vera Rubin and Albert Bosma, whose observations did so much to motivate the current search for dark matter?
October 4th, 2011 at 9:30 am
A very deserved prize! Congratulations to the three of them
But I do agree with Stacy, I think Vera would be a very worthy winner, and I’m surprised she hasn’t already been awarded the prize. She is a bit of a hero of mine though, so I’m biased.
October 4th, 2011 at 9:33 am
I’m already on the Nobel Prize for Vera Rubin bandwagon.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2006/05/24/future-cosmology-nobels/
October 4th, 2011 at 9:44 am
This is the first Nobel prize for work done in optical astronomy. Both teams used NOAO telescopes to find the SN and obtain their light curves. It’s wonderful that you can find something novel about the Universe just by going out and taking a look. Of course, it’s a little harder than that, and both teams worked like crazy. A great day!
October 4th, 2011 at 10:32 am
“On any clear night, the chances are that your roof will be struck by evidence falling from the sky which, if you only knew what to look for and how, would win you the Nobel prize.” — David Deutsch — The Beginning of Infinity.
Well, this just proves it. Congratulations to Perlmutter, Riess and Schmidt!
October 4th, 2011 at 1:15 pm
Riess gave a talk at Goddard a year or so ago, and I made a point in attending, thinking, “I’ll catch him before he’s won his Nobel Prize.”
October 4th, 2011 at 1:33 pm
Congratulations to all the new winners. I was at the AAS meeting where the two teams gave invited talks about their findings, with Perlmutter giving one and Bob Kirshner the other. I thought at the time that talking in “competition” with Kirshner was a thankless task.
Now, if there was a solution to the Nobel three-body problem, optical astronomy might win another Nobel.
October 4th, 2011 at 2:54 pm
Congrats to them, it is truly well deserved!
October 4th, 2011 at 3:03 pm
[...] once again, and for a little more info, don’t hesitate to read Sean’s, Steinn’s or Peter’s interesting takes, also, on the 2011 Nobel Prize in Physics! Read [...]
October 4th, 2011 at 3:20 pm
[...] RSS « Nobel Prize for the Accelerating Universe [...]
October 4th, 2011 at 4:35 pm
Innocent question: How come Alan Guth hasn’t won a Nobel prize? Did he hurt somebody’s feelings?
October 4th, 2011 at 6:05 pm
As we celebrate expansions, accelerations and Nobel Prizes, let’s not forget Henrietta Swan Leavitt who started it all. Her studies on the brightness of Cepheid variable stars revolutionized astronomy and directly led to the discovery of the expanding universe and all that followed. Partly because she was a woman she received almost no recognition for this during her lifetime. Leavitt needs to supplant the tired old caricature of Marie Curie as a new role model for women in science.
October 4th, 2011 at 6:32 pm
Alan Guth has no Nobel because it’s not really clear that inflation has been “discovered” yet. The Nobel committee seems to really prefer giving prizes for concrete discoveries; note that they’re particular that this year’s is for “acceleration”, and NOT for “dark energy”.
October 4th, 2011 at 7:30 pm
Vera Rubin shafted again?
October 4th, 2011 at 7:46 pm
Good call by Sean “master of the universe” Carroll five years ago:
October 4th, 2011 at 8:19 pm
It’s not every day you *don’t* win the Nobel Prize.
No, that’s not right. It *is* every day.
But you know what I mean.
October 4th, 2011 at 8:39 pm
[...] trip to Stockholm”. It appears that his name actually was drawn this year. Sean Carroll says “I knew him when”, and then discusses the science at length. Many congratulations to Brian, who remains a profoundly [...]
October 4th, 2011 at 11:50 pm
[...] Energy FAQ | Cosmic Variance In honor of the Nobel Prize, here are some questions that are frequently asked about dark energy, or should [...]
October 5th, 2011 at 12:29 am
Sean—don’t go over to the Dark Side! If I had won the prize, my first words into the international microphones would have been “Let’s all stop using the airhead term “dark energy”.”
As you yourself have pointed out, essentially everything has energy and lots of things are dark. “Dark energy” is just a stupid “marketing” term which is all style and no substance, all presentation and no content, something from a spin doctor or an add agency. Scientists should promote understanding the universe, not trying to sound cool.
As to whether we need a deeper understanding of “what” the cosmological constant “is”: do we need a deeper understanding of what gravitation “is”, i.e. “why” it exists, or is it enough that GR describes it well?
Nobel originally specified “invention or discovery”, so there is no problem that all the details are not understood. In fact, discoveries which are difficult to understand are more interesting.
Note also that Hubble came to believe that the expansion of the universe was not real, though of course he discovered the relation between apparent magnitude and redshift.
October 5th, 2011 at 12:53 am
[...] honor of the Nobel Prize, here are some questions that are frequently asked about dark energy, or should [...]
October 5th, 2011 at 5:57 am
[...] google_ad_slot = "4185208288"; google_ad_width = 468; google_ad_height = 60; In honor of the Nobel Prize, here are some questions that are frequently asked about darkenergy, or should be.What is dark [...]
October 5th, 2011 at 9:23 am
[...] be discussing in a post at Cosmic Log. It’s possible the Nobel Prize will be mentioned. (The physics one. Don’t expect any insight from me on quasicrystals, except that they’re [...]
October 6th, 2011 at 2:41 am
Congratulations to the nobel laureates.
Also I would nominate Irwin Shapiro for Shapiro delay. Nowadays
everyone takes “Shapiro delay” for granted, but it took 50 years after einstein’s discovery of GR for
this to be proposed. Also now it has not only become a powerful test to discriminate against alternate gravity theories, but it is also routinely used as an astrophysical tool to measure masses of neutron
stars, including the nobel-prize winning Hulse-Taylor binary pulsar , where Shapiro delay was one of the observables used which helped over-determine the system
October 6th, 2011 at 8:02 am
[...] honor of the Nobel Prize, here are some questions that are frequently asked about dark energy, or should [...]
October 6th, 2011 at 1:39 pm
Calm down guys! There is no such thing as a Nobel Prize well deserved unless you assume Nobel means the best, which has never been the case. The only thing can be said about Nobel Prize is that those results are important and can last longer than a decade without been proven wrong. In most cases one just need to be lucky to discover things that are interesting enough to alert the Nobel committee. Most of the Nobel Prize winners are neither any smarter nor harder working than their peers (I happened to think Bob Kirshner is in a much better scientist than the three winners, but that does not matter to Nobel committee). Nobel prize became famous because of great people such as Einstein, but Einstein did not get his fame because of the Nobel Prize he received for photoelectric effect. Many won Nobel because their research sort of “vindicates” GR, but Einstein never got a prize for GR. In short, Nobel prize is over valued, and serious scientists should ignore it.
October 7th, 2011 at 7:53 pm
[...] to Adam Riess, Saul Perlmutter, and Brian Schmidt for the discovery of the cosmic acceleration (see these two Cosmic Variance posts for more); second, awarding the Nobel Prize in Chemistry to Dan Shechtman [...]
October 8th, 2011 at 5:45 pm
We used to joke when I was a student at Caltech that it was very easy to know a nobel prize winner, but it was much more interesting to know somebody BEFORE they won it. Congrats to your friends.
October 15th, 2011 at 7:35 pm
SUPERLUMINELLE
– James Ph. Kotsybar
The Universe is expanding,
Faster than the limit of light,
Beyond common understanding.
Cosmology is demanding.
Its study is by no means slight.
The Universe is expanding.
Physics’ heroes, quite outstanding,
Have applied their full mental might
Beyond common understanding.
There’s no point in reprimanding,
As we gaze out into the night,
The Universe is expanding.
The truth of fact is commanding.
Whatever is has to be right,
Beyond common understanding.
Einstein’s physics notwithstanding,
Much quicker than what we call bright,
The Universe is expanding
Beyond common understanding.
October 19th, 2011 at 9:29 pm
[...] once again, and for a little more info, don’t hesitate to read Sean’s, Steinn’s or Peter’s interesting takes, also, on the 2011 Nobel Prize in [...]