https://phys.org/news/2023-12-giant-void-puzzle-universe-expansion.html Phys.org Topics * Week's top * Latest news * Unread news * Subscribe [ ] Science X Account [ ] [ ] [*] Remember me Sign In Click here to sign in with or Forget Password? Not a member? Sign up Learn more * Nanotechnology * Physics * Earth * Astronomy & Space * Chemistry * Biology * Other Sciences * Medical Xpress Medicine * Tech Xplore Technology [INS::INS] * * share this! * 133 * Twit * Share * Email 1. Home 2. Astronomy & Space 3. Astronomy * * * --------------------------------------------------------------------- December 1, 2023 Editors' notes This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies. Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility: fact-checked trusted source written by researcher(s) proofread Do we live in a giant void? That could solve the puzzle of the universe's expansion, research suggests by Indranil Banik, The Conversation Do we live in a giant void? It could solve the puzzle of the universe's expansion Credit: Pablo Carlos Budassi/wikipedia, CC BY-SA One of the biggest mysteries in cosmology is the rate at which the universe is expanding. This can be predicted using the standard model of cosmology, also known as Lambda-cold dark matter (LCDM). This model is based on detailed observations of the light left over from the Big Bang--the so-called cosmic microwave background (CMB). The universe's expansion makes galaxies move away from each other. The further away they are from us, the more quickly they move. The relationship between a galaxy's speed and distance is governed by Hubble's constant, which is about 43 miles (70 km) per second per megaparsec (a unit of length in astronomy). This means that a galaxy gains about 50,000 miles per hour for every million light years it is away from us. But unfortunately for the standard model, this value has recently been disputed, leading to what scientists call the Hubble tension. When we measure the expansion rate using nearby galaxies and supernovas (exploding stars), it is 10% larger than when we predict it based on the CMB. In our new paper published in the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, we present one possible explanation: that we live in a giant void in space (an area with below average density). We show that this could inflate local measurements through outflows of matter from the void. Outflows would arise when denser regions surrounding a void pull it apart--they'd exert a bigger gravitational pull than the lower density matter inside the void. In this scenario, we would need to be near the center of a void about a billion light years in radius and with density about 20% below the average for the universe as a whole--so not completely empty. Such a large and deep void is unexpected in the standard model--and therefore controversial. The CMB gives a snapshot of structure in the infant universe, suggesting that matter today should be rather uniformly spread out. However, directly counting the number of galaxies in different regions does indeed suggest we are in a local void. Tweaking the laws of gravity We wanted to test this idea further by matching many different cosmological observations by assuming that we live in a large void that grew from a small density fluctuation at early times. To do this, our model didn't incorporate LCDM but an alternative theory called Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND). MOND was originally proposed to explain anomalies in the rotation speeds of galaxies, which is what led to the suggestion of an invisible substance called "dark matter." MOND instead suggests that the anomalies can be explained by Newton's law of gravity breaking down when the gravitational pull is very weak--as is the case in the outer regions of galaxies. The overall cosmic expansion history in MOND would be similar to the standard model, but structure (such as galaxy clusters) would grow faster in MOND. Our model captures what the local universe might look like in a MOND universe. And we found it would allow local measurements of the expansion rate today to fluctuate depending on our location. Recent galaxy observations have allowed a crucial new test of our model based on the velocity it predicts at different locations. This can be done by measuring something called the bulk flow, which is the average velocity of matter in a given sphere, dense or not. This varies with the radius of the sphere, with recent observations showing it continues out to a billion light years. Interestingly, the bulk flow of galaxies on this scale has quadruple the speed expected in the standard model. It also seems to increase with the size of the region considered--opposite to what the standard model predicts. The likelihood of this being consistent with the standard model is below one in a million. Do we live in a giant void? It could solve the puzzle of the universe's expansion CMB temperature fluctuations (color differences). Credit: NASA This prompted us to see what our study predicted for the bulk flow. We found it yields a quite good match to the observations. That requires that we are fairly close to the void center, and the void being most empty at its center. [INS::INS] Case closed? Our results come at a time when popular solutions to the Hubble tension are in trouble. Some believe we just need more precise measurements. Others think it can be solved by assuming the high expansion rate we measure locally is actually the correct one. But that requires a slight tweak to the expansion history in the early universe so the CMB still looks right. Unfortunately, an influential review highlights seven problems with this approach. If the universe expanded 10% faster over the vast majority of cosmic history, it would also be about 10% younger--contradicting the ages of the oldest stars. The existence of a deep and extended local void in the galaxy number counts and the fast observed bulk flows strongly suggest that structure grows faster than expected in LCDM on scales of tens to hundreds of millions of light years. Interestingly, we know that the massive galaxy cluster El Gordo formed too early in cosmic history and has too high a mass and collision speed to be compatible with the standard model. This is yet more evidence that structure forms too slowly in this model. Since gravity is the dominant force on such large scales, we most likely need to extend Einstein's theory of gravity, general relativity--but only on scales larger than a million light years. However, we have no good way to measure how gravity behaves on much larger scales--there are no gravitationally bound objects that huge. We can assume General Relativity remains valid and compare with observations, but it is precisely this approach that leads to the very severe tensions currently faced by our best model of cosmology. Einstein is thought to have said that we cannot solve problems with the same thinking that led to the problems in the first place. Even if the required changes are not drastic, we could well be witnessing the first reliable evidence for more than a century that we need to change our theory of gravity. More information: Sergij Mazurenko et al, A simultaneous solution to the Hubble tension and observed bulk flow within 250 h-1 Mpc, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (2023). DOI: 10.1093/mnras/ stad3357 Provided by The Conversation This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.The Conversation Citation: Do we live in a giant void? That could solve the puzzle of the universe's expansion, research suggests (2023, December 1) retrieved 1 December 2023 from https://phys.org/news/ 2023-12-giant-void-puzzle-universe-expansion.html This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Explore further The universe is expanding faster than theory predicts--physicists are trying to explain the mismatch --------------------------------------------------------------------- 133 shares * Facebook * Twitter * Email Feedback to editors * Featured * Last Comments * Popular Two methods for demonstrating how photolyase isolates use light to repair damaged DNA 9 hours ago 0 An anomalous relativistic emission arising from the intense interaction of lasers with plasma mirrors 11 hours ago 0 Study identifies the 'fingerprints' of energy models exploring emission mitigation scenarios Nov 30, 2023 0 Astronomers inspect supernova remnants with MeerKAT Nov 30, 2023 0 A theoretical approach to ferroelectricity in hafnia-related materials Nov 30, 2023 0 --------------------------------------------------------------------- [gif] Ghostlike dusty galaxy reappears in James Webb Space Telescope image 2 hours ago [gif] Scientists navigate uncharted waters in fish immunology research 4 hours ago [gif] Study illuminates formation of US east coast during break up of supercontinent Pangea 5 hours ago [gif] New understanding of 'oobleck-like' fluids contributes to smart material design 5 hours ago [gif] When physics meets biology: Prion protein orchestrates liquid-liquid phase separation with copper 6 hours ago [gif] Researcher develops a chatbot with an expertise in nanomaterials 7 hours ago [gif] Citizen scientists help discover new mantis species 7 hours ago [gif] Climate change to drive surge in insects that attack almonds, peaches, walnuts: Study 8 hours ago [gif] Uncovering the genetic history of British otters 9 hours ago [gif] Two methods for demonstrating how photolyase isolates use light to repair damaged DNA 9 hours ago --------------------------------------------------------------------- Relevant PhysicsForums posts Solar Activity and Space Weather Update thread Nov 30, 2023 The James Webb Space Telescope Nov 29, 2023 Why is NASA claiming 10-100x better BW performance from optical-based comm (DSOC)? Nov 28, 2023 Amaterasu and GRB221009A Nov 26, 2023 Is the Universe older than we think? Nov 25, 2023 What does the output of a radio telescope look like? Nov 25, 2023 More from Astronomy and Astrophysics --------------------------------------------------------------------- [INS::INS] * Related Stories [gif] The universe is expanding faster than theory predicts--physicists are trying to explain the mismatch Nov 15, 2023 [gif] The universe caught suppressing cosmic structure growth Sep 11, 2023 [gif] New measurements of galaxy rotation lean toward modified gravity as an explanation for dark matter Dec 30, 2022 [gif] Plot thickens in the hunt for a ninth planet Oct 5, 2023 [gif] Dark matter: Our review suggests it's time to ditch it in favor of a new theory of gravity Jul 8, 2022 [gif] Astronomers map vast void in our cosmic neighborhood Jul 22, 2019 * Recommended for you [gif] Ghostlike dusty galaxy reappears in James Webb Space Telescope image 2 hours ago [gif] One of the largest magnetic storms in history quantified: Aurorae from the tropics to the polar regions 23 hours ago [gif] Astronomers spot giant stream of stars between galaxies Nov 30, 2023 [gif] Astronomers inspect supernova remnants with MeerKAT Nov 30, 2023 [gif] New theory explains how magnetic switchbacks form in the solar wind Nov 30, 2023 [gif] Chandra catches spider pulsars destroying nearby stars Nov 30, 2023 Load comments (5) Let us know if there is a problem with our content Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form. For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines). Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request [-- please select one -- ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] Your message to the editors [ ] Your email (only if you want to be contacted back) [ ] Send Feedback Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors. Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages. E-mail the story Do we live in a giant void? That could solve the puzzle of the universe's expansion, research suggests Your friend's email [ ] Your email [ ] [ ] I would like to subscribe to Science X Newsletter. Learn more Your name [ ] Note Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys.org in any form. [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] Your message [ ] Send Newsletter sign up Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties. [ ] Subscribe More information Privacy policy Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account. Remove ads Maybe later Medical Xpress Medical Xpress Medical research advances and health news Tech Xplore Tech Xplore The latest engineering, electronics and technology advances Science X Science X The most comprehensive sci-tech news coverage on the web Newsletters [ ] Subscribe Science X Daily and the Weekly Email Newsletter are free features that allow you to receive your favorite sci-tech news updates in your email inbox Follow us * * * * * Top * Home * Search * Mobile version * Help * FAQ * About * Contact * Science X Account * Premium Account * Archive * News wire * Android app * iOS app * RSS feeds * Push notification (c) Phys.org 2003 - 2023 powered by Science X Network Privacy policy Terms of use E-mail newsletter [ ] Subscribe Follow us * * * * It appears that you are currently using Ad Blocking software. What are the consequences? x Quantcast