It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


New data suggests the universe is clumpier than thought

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:52 AM
the old model

the new model

This new research upends that idea though, showing that there exists far more clumps of stuff such as stars and galaxies then there should be if everything has been moving, since the Big Bang, according to the laws of physics.

Thomas and his team made the find by analyzing data from the SDSK, creating a 3-D map in the process, of galaxies some 4 billion light years distant, then calculated the smoothness of what they saw and compared that to what models suggested they should find. To their surprise they discovered that instead of the normal 1% clumpiness that models suggest, they instead found differences as much as 2%, which is significant because it moves their findings out of the realm of simple calculation errors.


"IF" the universe is "clumper" than first thought, the numbers we are talking about are enough if proven to, require different theories of how this extra "clumpyness" can be accounted for.

dark energy

this has me thinking if all this clumpyness could be accounted for with gravity alone in the face of the "acceleration" we see in the universe?


edit on 18-6-2011 by XPLodER because: add pics

edit on 18-6-2011 by XPLodER because: fix pic

edit on 18-6-2011 by XPLodER because: corrections

posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 01:53 AM
reply to post by XPLodER

There is always going to be new data out dating the old data.

You know why?

Because its all bullsh. They don't know anything about the universe or how to calculate it.

posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 02:11 AM
reply to post by onequestion

maby i did a bad job of trying to get the message accross
the small percentages we are talking about here would be increase of mass in the universe by a large margin,
these recalculations would if shown correct affect how gravity interacts in the larger scale over a much larger time,
this is why they look back in time at stars in the distence to provide the measurements
its one of the only ways you can measure them because of there scale
so if proven gravity on the large scale would require corrections when compaired to the gravity we would expect here in our solar system


posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 02:19 AM
reply to post by onequestion

I sort of agree with this guy here, what stops them from making stuff up to recieve a big paycheck and fame.

Although they do research but most of it its just theories, or whatever fits the blanks if you know what i mean.

posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 02:32 AM
reply to post by HisMajesty

because there are huge numbers of people who are interested in the universe

and if there is more mass then we need to explain it to understand the universe
and out of understanding comes technology
one of the greatest questions of all time, how did we get here?

posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 02:40 AM
reply to post by XPLodER

Interesting though honestly I spent the first fifteen seconds chuckling about how odd it is to see the Universe described as being clumpy

Just goes to show that we only have a grasp of the basics when it comes to the cosmos, it's a start but there's a lot more mystery where that came from.

posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 02:57 AM
reply to post by Titen-Sxull

now that you mention it clumpy
why not more conjested?

top topics


log in