It’s Professor Dave, let’s check some evidence.
Way back at the beginning of this series,
we talked about how the universe was born
from a singularity 13.8 billion years ago,
which we call the Big Bang, and we went over
everything we know regarding this event, and
what must have happened since then to produce
the universe we see today.
We weren’t ready yet to talk about the overwhelming
evidence that supports this model, but after
having learned about galaxies and many other
things, now we are.
Let’s talk a little bit about the models
that were competing with the Big Bang around
the time that it was proposed, and all of
the separate threads of evidence that have
cropped up to firmly support our current conception
of the origin of the universe.
Let’s start with the first primitive demonstrations
of a universe with a finite age.
This began with something called Olber’s paradox.
This is named after a German astronomer, who
in 1823, wondered how the night sky could
be dark if the universe is infinite.
He reasoned that if the universe were infinite
in both space and time, full of stars in all
directions forever, and with no beginning
in time, then every line of sight that is
possible should eventually arrive at a star.
If every line of sight were to reach a star,
then the whole sky should be as bright as
a star, and the night sky should be as light
as daytime.
Olbers himself concluded that since the night
sky is dark, perhaps space is not completely
transparent.
But other thinkers that followed, most notably
the poet Edgar Allen Poe, interpreted the
paradox as evidence that the universe must
be finite.
They hypothesized that not every line of sight
ends at a star, because there are not infinite
stars, or infinite space to contain them.
Of course, this isn’t the most rigorously
scientific argument of all time, as there
are variables it doesn’t take into account,
but it did set the stage for more substantial
evidence for a finite universe in the following
century.
In the beginning of the 20th century, modern
cosmology began, thanks to Einstein’s general
relativity as a consistent mathematical description
of the universe.
At this time, the notion of an infinite universe
was still quite prevalent, with such prominent
supporters as even Einstein himself.
He made the assumption, on next to no evidence,
that the universe as a whole was quite smooth,
with all of its galaxies distributed more
or less evenly.
This simplified universe was referred to as
homogeneous, or roughly the same everywhere,
and isotropic, or appearing the same in every direction.
These two assumptions together form the Cosmological
Principle.
But his own general theory of relativity required
that spacetime be dynamic and changing, and
therefore either expanding or contracting.
At the time, astronomers reported that stars
were neither approaching nor receding from
our solar system, and Einstein was so convinced
that the universe should be static, that he
introduced a modification that would reconcile
this static universe with general relativity.
This was called the cosmological constant,
which bestowed space itself with the ability
to expand or contract in such a way that precisely
cancels out the expansion or contraction of
the universe, allowing for the static universe
he envisioned.
Just a decade later, Hubble published the
results that were used to demonstrate that
the universe is indeed expanding, with redshift
values arising as the result of the stretching
of spacetime, and Einstein called his cosmological
constant the biggest mistake of his career,
although current studies show it may not have
been totally off the mark, for other reasons
we will get to later.
Once it was accepted that the universe is
expanding, the Big Bang model was proposed,
but it had a competitor in the Steady State
model.
This proposed that the universe was expanding,
but has the same properties at all times.
In order for this to be true, the model postulated
something called a C-field, which continuously
creates new matter as the universe expands,
so as to maintain the same overall density
for the universe.
This seems absurd now, but at the time, it
was more popular than the Big Bang model,
which postulated that the properties of the
universe change dramatically over time, beginning
from an extremely hot and infinitely dense point.
So what was the evidence that cropped up to
result in the discarding of steady state in
favor of the big bang?
This began in the 1960s, with Arno Penzias
and Robert Wilson.
They were using a microwave antenna to study
the emission produced by earth’s atmosphere,
looking for sources of interference that would
cause problems for satellite communication
systems.
To their surprise, they found a uniform background
of noise in every single direction, no matter
where they pointed it.
After trying everything they could think of,
including removing pigeons from the apparatus,
this signal just would not go away.
Completely by accident, they had discovered
a smoking gun, the leftover heat from an event
just after the big bang itself, which we call
the cosmic microwave background radiation.
This radiation, an emission of blackbody thermal
energy, has a temperature of around 2.7 Kelvin,
just barely above absolute zero.
Because of the extreme isotropy of this radiation,
detectable in every direction and not associated
with any particular source, its origin must
have been from a time of thermal equilibrium,
when the entire universe was one opaque ball
of plasma.
It was the era of recombination that we discussed
in our overview of cosmology that produced
this radiation, just 300 thousand years after
the big bang.
When electrons combined with nuclei for the
first time, they immediately relaxed to lower-energy
states, and in doing so, they emitted electromagnetic
radiation.
The radiation was then stretched out as the
universe expanded over billions of years,
leaving it in the microwave portion of the
spectrum today.
Proponents of the big bang model had predicted
this cosmic microwave background prior to
this discovery, and had estimated its temperature
at around five kelvin.
The confirmation of this phenomenon was the
first huge victory for the big bang model,
as the steady state model could not account
for such a blackbody spectrum.
But it wasn’t the only stunning piece of
evidence that would be compiled.
We can use the cosmic microwave background,
and the recession velocities of the universe,
and turn back the clock, so to speak.
We just use math to play the movie backwards
until we get to the beginning.
The math, in any of these cases, agrees with
a figure of about 13.8 billion years for the
age of the universe, and that’s the essence
of the big bang model, which goes on to make
a tremendous amount of predictions.
For one thing, the model predicts that given
the expected rate of cooling, there must have
been a period where the universe was just
cool enough for subatomic particles to exist
and just hot enough for them to fuse.
This was the period of nucleosynthesis we
described when we first examined cosmology.
This period should have been long enough such
that about one fourth of the primordial hydrogen
fused to become helium, and when we look around,
we do indeed see a universe that is about
3 to 1 hydrogen to helium.
A similar prediction can be made for the baryon
to photon ratio in the universe, and this
also matches up with observation.
The model also predicts when galaxies ought
to form, about a half a billion years into
the lifetime of the universe, and when we
look as far out into the universe as we can,
we can see these early galaxies forming 13.4
billion light years away, their light only
now reaching our eyes, just as the model predicts.
The calculations associated with these kinds
of predictions are too complicated to be shown
here, but if you go on to study astrophysics
and cosmology, they will be examined in detail.
For the extremely early epochs, the ones where
symmetry breaking occurred to separate some
unified force into the four we know today,
we have particle accelerators to test predictions.
We’ve described the electroweak epoch, where
the electromagnetic force and weak nuclear
force were combined as one, and particle physicists
can make predictions about what kinds of particles
should exist at such high temperatures to
mediate this force.
We can predict their mass, charge, and other
parameters.
Then, when we do experiments by smashing particles
together at nearly the speed of light, the
collision converts these particles to pure
energy, by Einstein’s E = mc^2.
For the tiny region encapsulated by this collision,
temperatures and energies resembling the very
early universe are achieved, and the particles
that existed in those early times have a brief
chance to exist again.
We use bubble chambers to measure their properties,
and when they precisely match predictions,
that is a huge victory for the standard model
of particle physics, which is intimately intertwined
with early-universe cosmology.
As we build more and more powerful particle
accelerators, we can generate collisions that
yield more and more energy, thus probing earlier
and earlier towards the initial singularity.
This will help us produce theories that describe
the unification of the electroweak force with
the strong nuclear force, and maybe one day,
all four forces, as they were in the very
first epoch of the universe.
And there you have the evidence for the big
bang model.
The power of the model lies in its predictions,
which although quite disparate, have been
largely confirmed by observation.
The temperature of the cosmic microwave background.
The distribution of hydrogen and helium in
the universe.
The results of experiments in particle accelerators.
We make quantitative predictions, make some
observations, and see that we were correct.
This makes the big bang so much more than
some creation myth, because the model fits
the data.
All the data, of every kind.
That’s empiricism at its finest, and it’s
the best that science can hope to do.
For this reason, cosmologists are about as
sure that the big bang happened as they are
that the earth goes around the sun.
But of course, there is still more to learn.
Not just about the first few instants after
the big bang, but other aspects of the universe.
Let’s move forward now and take a look at
the frontier of astronomy.
