Astronomy and Cosmology

Picture of the moon taken my Peter Woolliams aided by Maxwell and Michael de Podesta

Picture of the moon taken by Peter Woolliams aided by Maxwell and Michael de Podesta

This evening I visited my friend and colleague Peter Woolliams and from his back garden in Teddington he helped my son Maxwell and myself acquire several images of the Moon which were ‘stacked’ and ‘stitched’ together to produce the above image. Wow! Please click the image for a larger version and just wonder at the detail visible. I never thought I would ever have even a partial authorship of such an image. We also took an image of Jupiter which I will post when I have processed it, and Peter guided us around some interesting objects in the night sky. For the first time in my life I saw a nebula (the Orion Nebula: see good image or something closer to what we saw) and tiny smudge of light that it was, I was fascinated.

This was not easy to do. It required a fair bit of equipment – around £1000 worth including all the computers and cameras – and after a couple of hours we were freezing cold. The images also took a good deal of processing to get them this clean. And it made me reflect on exactly how difficult it is to draw cosmological conclusions from astronomical data.

One of the most profound cosmological ‘conclusions currently being drawn from astronomical data is the proposal that a large fraction of the Universe is ‘missing’ – i.e. that there is ten times more ‘dark matter’ than there is conventional matter  made of protons, neutrons and electrons. I treat all cosmological claims with the same disdain as Lev Landau who said “Cosmology: Never in doubt: always wrong” but some claims seem to be more well-founded than others. The deduction of cosmic expansion seems pretty robust, but the implication of the existence of a new forms of matter from observations of galaxies seems to me to be rather less robust. And so I was happy to read in my Scientific American newsletter that people are  raising their sceptical voices about this issue. At the same time others are inevitably raising the possibility that Dark Matter consists of even more amazing particles.

Now I don’t know the answer to this question, and nor does anyone else on Earth. And gazing into space tonight this basic fact – that we just don’t know what is out there – seemed like a really solid fact to me. And a cold one at that.

3 Responses to “Astronomy and Cosmology”

  1. Peter Says:

    We’ll do better yet on the moon!

  2. Abbababe Says:

    It’s brilliant that we don’t know everything, makes us explore and investigate instead of taking things at face value.

    Most scientists believe measurements between what propels the universe to expand and what slams the breaks on to keep the present state just don’t add up. Hence dark matter/gravity – the brakes. Dark energy the propellant. As I understand the present thought.

    • protonsforbreakfast Says:

      There are a number of discrepancies, but it seems to me rather arrogant to assume that now – after just a few centuries of real progress – that we know enough to propose a new class of matter that constitutes 90% of everything with out any direct observational evidence.

      In the end its the tone of cosmological assertions which irks me. We really don’t know everything – but we should be really proud of having figured out >anything< about this very confusing Universe. But there is plenty of time left just give it a few centuries and I am sure lost more will make sense and the pools of ignorance into which we stare will seem even darker and more attractive than they do now.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: