logo
Is the universe really infinite? Astrophysicists explain.

Is the universe really infinite? Astrophysicists explain.

Yahoo22-04-2025
Everything on Earth, in our solar system, our galaxy, and beyond is contained within the universe. So how much does science tell us about the all-encompassing, four-dimensional cradle that holds all of space time? A lot.
Philosophers, mathematicians, and astronomers across cultures and centuries have long debated and theorized about the night sky. But in the early 1920's, building on the work of Henrietta Swan Leavitt and others, astronomer Edwin Hubble produced the first clear evidence that the swirling clusters visible through telescopes were actually distant galaxies, comparable to our own Milky Way. By capturing detailed, long-exposure images of space features like pulsing, Cepheid variable stars, Hubble confirmed the true nature of the Andromeda Nebula and others. These weren't just nearby gas clouds, but far away islands of worlds and stars.
In the century since, our ability to see clearer and farther out into space has dramatically improved. The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) is the most advanced ever launched, and it routinely provides remarkable imagery from across the universe. Using data from space telescopes and other instruments, astronomers, cosmologists, and astrophysicists are able to deduce and predict many things about the universe's shape, rate of change, and character. Here's what we know, and what we don't.
[ Related: The universe isn't just expanding—it may be spinning. ]
Let's get the disappointment out of the way early: 'There is physically, absolutely zero way that we will ever know,' how large the universe is, Sara Webb, an astrophysicist at Swinburne University of Technology in Australia, tells Popular Science.However, we do know that the universe is larger than 93 billion light-years across. This is the diameter of the sphere of the 'observable universe' that we find ourselves at the center of. Our ability to look out and measure the stars is limited by the age of the universe and the speed of light. The only light we can see is light that's been able to travel to us in the time since the big bang, which happened about 13.8 billion years ago. Therefore, light that's traveled 13.8 billion light-years is the oldest we can see.
However, the observable universe extends farther than 13.8 billion light-years in every direction because, for all the time space has existed, it's also been expanding. That expansion means that light from 13.8 billion years ago has actually traversed 46.5 billion light-years to reach our eyes and telescopes.
'It means, in theory, that space is actually expanding faster than the speed of light, when we add it all up– which really conceptually hurts your brain,' says Webb. 'The nothingness of space and time doesn't really abide by the laws for matter and physical things.'
And though we don't have firm evidence of the universe's total size, Webb thinks it's quite possibly infinite. 'There's no reason that it should be bounded. There's no reason why there should be an edge here or there,' she says.
The existence of edges remains a question mark, but astrophysicists generally agree on the universe's shape: it's flat, though perhaps not in the way you'd imagine. Flat doesn't mean our universe is two-dimensional (space-time exists in 4D, after all). However, it does mean that traveling forward without changing direction in the universe will never get you back to where you started. Instead of a doughnut, a sphere, or a Pringle, the universe is most probably a four-dimensional sheet of paper, says Webb.
Using theories and measurements about light coming from distant stars, multiple astronomers in the early 1900's suggested that the universe was expanding. In 1924, Swedish astronomer Knut Lundmark,found the first observational evidence for universe expansion. Hubble's work confirmed these findings in 1929. These early observations relied on a phenomenon called red shift, which is the visual version of the doppler effect.Think about how sound waves from a passing ambulance siren change pitch with the vehicles' position and speed: sounding higher on approach and lower once the ambulance is speeding away. Similarly, our perception of light waves is also impacted by the lights' movement and velocity. A light moving towards you will appear more blue , and one moving away will appear redder as the peaks and troughs of the wave are compressed and stretched respectively.
Hubble and others noted that the galaxies they were discovering all appeared red from Earth, with more distant galaxies exhibiting the greatest red shift. This suggests that all galaxies are moving away from us. The more distant galaxies appear to be speeding off into space faster because there is more nothingness between us and them to expand.
In addition to red-shift observations, astronomers past and present also rely on 'standard candles' to assess the size and speed of the universe. Standard candles are nifty cosmological markers of known brightness that can be used to observe how light is traveling and changing through space and time, says Abigail Lee, an astronomer and PhD candidate at the University of Chicago. The first type of standard candles discovered were Hubble's Cepheid variables, pulsating stars that emit bright light in a regular, periodic pattern, which can be used to deduce their distance from Earth.
Lee explains it with an illuminating analogy. Imagine a 40 watt incandescent lightbulb. All lightbulbs of shared wattage are the same intrinsic brightness. However, if you look at the lightbulb from 100 feet away, it will appear dimmer than it does at a distance of 10 feet. That relative dimness can be used to calculate how far away the bulb is. It's the same with Cepheids in space. Other standard candles used for the same purpose include certain types of supernovae (i.e. exploding stars), 'tip of the red-giant branch' stars, and carbon stars. 'We know that these stars have the exact same intrinsic luminosity, and so we can use that property to measure distance,' Lee tells Popular Science.
We can approximate the distance between Earth and other galaxies by looking for nebulae that contain these standard candles. In 2011, three scientists were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics for demonstrating that not only is the universe expanding, but dark energy is accelerating that expansion.
Dark energy is a mysterious and repulsive force pushing space matter and objects apart. The expansive forces of dark energy are generally thought to be uniform across the entire universe, pushing against all objects equally. However, expansion itself is not uniformly observable. Within our planet, solar system, and galaxy, the attractive force of gravity keeps things relatively bound and less subject to dark energy. And the expansion rate itself is not fast enough to be readily observed on the small-scale. To detect it, you have to observe very distant objects.
Based on his early observations, Hubble first proposed that the universe was expanding at a rate of about 500 kilometers per second per megaparsec (Mpc), where a megaparsec is equal to 3.26 million light-years. The speed of universe expansion came to be known as the Hubble Constant (H0), despite the fact that the titular astronomer's initial estimate turned out to be pretty far off.
We now have a clearer sense of the expansion rate. Scientists generally agree H0 is between 65-75 km/sec/Mpc. If that sounds complicated, it's because it is. The rate of universal expansion is dependent on both time and distance. It's larger across bigger areas of space and longer durations. And the question of the exact speed remains unresolved. Depending on who you ask and how one measures, calculations for the true H0 vary. Broadly, two different approaches to quantifying the H0 routinely yield different results. This discrepancy is known as the 'Hubble Tension'.
By one set of measurements, which rely on relatively close-by standard candle calculations, H0 is 73 +/- 1 kilometers per second per megaparsec. By a different type of analysis, which relies on measurements of cosmic background radiation, H0 is 67 +/- 1. 'Both measurements have such precise uncertainties that there's no room for error,' says Lee.For a time, astronomers thought that more accurate instruments might resolve the tension, bringing these measured values closer together, but that hasn't been the case. 'People are getting better technology, but this tension isn't really improving.' she adds. The most up-to-date calculations, based on JWST data, still haven't brought H0 estimates any closer together.
[ Related: The hunt for the first stars in the universe. ]
'Dark energy is in crisis at the moment, because nothing really agrees, even though all of the science that has been done is incredibly rigorous,' says Webb.
It's possible the discrepancy is still due to measurement errors. However, it's also possible that something larger is going on. Perhaps, Webb suggests, the dark energy forces thought to cause universal expansion aren't entirely uniform. Maybe we need a new theory of physics to unify these observations.Scientists are working on the problem from all sides, considering ways to improve measurements as well as formulating potential big-picture explanations. 'The complementary approaches are good,' says Lee. 'Maybe we can stop looking for errors if people find a physics theory that ties everything together, and maybe they can stop if we find a big measurement error,' she says.
Yet all of this research relies on continued funding and federal investment. The massive proposed cuts to NASA's budget would cancel several major missions, including the launch of the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope. This next space telescope was specifically built to probe the mysteries of dark energy and universe expansion. After years of development, it is nearly ready for launch–ahead of schedule and under budget. Now, there's a chance it will never reach space, leaving a black hole where new discoveries could have been illuminated.
This story is part of Popular Science's Ask Us Anything series, where we answer your most outlandish, mind-burning questions, from the ordinary to the off-the-wall. Have something you've always wanted to know? Ask us.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

James Webb Space Telescope revisits a classic Hubble image of over 2,500 galaxies
James Webb Space Telescope revisits a classic Hubble image of over 2,500 galaxies

Yahoo

time14 hours ago

  • Yahoo

James Webb Space Telescope revisits a classic Hubble image of over 2,500 galaxies

When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. The James Webb Space Telescope has returned to the scene of one of the Hubble Space Telescope's most iconic images, the Ultra Deep Field, to capture galaxies throughout cosmic history. This new image was taken as part of the JWST Advanced Deep Extragalactic Survey (JADES), which is intent on further probing in infrared light two patches of sky that were originally imaged by Hubble: the Hubble Deep Field (1995) and the Hubble Ultra Deep Field (2004). The deep fields were Hubble's most intense stares into the universe, revealing the faintest galaxies at the highest redshifts that Hubble could see, galaxies that existed over 13 billion years ago and whose light has been traveling for all that time. The Hubble Ultra Deep Field, in particular, was revisited several times by Hubble, in 2009, 2012 and 2014, using the near-infrared channels on the space telescope's Wide Field Camera 3. It shows some 10,000 galaxies detectable in an area of sky just 2.4 arcminutes square, which is less than a tenth of the diameter of the Full Moon in the night sky. However, Hubble can only see so far. At the greatest redshifts, corresponding to galaxies that we see as they existed within a few hundred million years of the Big Bang, visible light is stretched into infrared wavelengths beyond Hubble's capacity to see. So, to beat this limitation, the JWST has stepped up. The giant 6.5-meter space telescope got its first good look at the Hubble Ultra Deep Field in October 2022 with its Near-Infrared Camera. It has revisited the Ultra Deep Field several times, as part of the JADES project, and this latest image was captured by the JWST's Mid-Infrared Instrument (MIRI) Deep Imaging Survey (MIDIS for short). Indeed, the instrument's shortest-wavelength filter (F560W, which detects infrared light from 4.9 to 6.4 microns, centered on 5.6 microns) took the longest exposure of any single filter as part of this image, totaling 41 hours. The image doesn't show the entirety of the Ultra Deep Field, only a section of it containing about 2,500 visible galaxies, four-fifths of them being truly distant, high redshift galaxies. None are record-breakers — the maximum redshifts visible are about 12, equating to 380 million years after the Big Bang, or 13.4 billion years ago. Just to compare, the current highest redshift galaxy, MoM-z14 (which is not part of the Ultra Deep Field), has a redshift of 14.4 and we see it as it existed about 280 million years after the Big Bang. When coupled with data from JWST's Near-Infrared Camera (NIRCam) that operates at shorter wavelengths (1.9 to 4.8 microns), the observations reveal a great deal about the many galaxies in the image, most of which are visible as small dots of light. The image is presented in false color, since infrared light has no visible colors since it is beyond what the human eye can see. Hundreds of red galaxies in the image are either star-forming galaxies that are shrouded by interstellar dust that absorbs the starlight and re-radiates it in infrared, or are highly evolved galaxies with lots of older, redder stars that formed near the beginning of the universe. Meanwhile, the small greenish-white galaxies are those that are at very high redshift, meaning we see them as they exist mostly during the first billion years of cosmic history. On the other hand, the larger blue and cyan galaxies are closer with low-redshifts and so appear brighter to NIRCam than to MIRI. RELATED STORIES — James Webb Space Telescope eyes Hubble Ultra Deep Field in stunning detail (photo) — JWST peers through a cosmic lens in 'deepest gaze' to date | Space photo of the day for May 27, 2025 — Hubble and James Webb Space Telescopes show 2 sides of star cluster duo | Space photo of the day for July 10, 2025 Astronomers work to push ever deeper with the JWST, adding observation on top of observations to chart the development of galaxies from close to the dawn of the universe to the present day. Among the data could be answers to many of cosmology's greatest secrets, such as how supermassive black holes formed, how galaxies formed, and when the majority of stars in the universe came into being. This is all still a work in progress, so stay tuned! A study of the JWST Ultra Deep Field observations as published in the journal Astronomy & Astrophysics. Solve the daily Crossword

One of 'easiest-to-observe nebulas' will be visible in August: Where, how to see it
One of 'easiest-to-observe nebulas' will be visible in August: Where, how to see it

USA Today

time18 hours ago

  • USA Today

One of 'easiest-to-observe nebulas' will be visible in August: Where, how to see it

The "dumbbell nebula" should be visible throughout August and beyond high in the sky anywhere in the United States. Stargazers have plenty of reasons to look up throughout August – a month marked by meteor showers, planetary conjunctions and even a visible nebula. Yes, a formation known as the "dumbbell nebula" – nicknamed because it looks like, well, a dumbbell – should be easy to spot throughout the month, NASA said in an August skywatching guide. But unlike other cosmic phenomena that will appear in August, the "dumbbell nebula" unfortunately won't be visible to the naked eye. The good news? You still don't need any especially advanced equipment to see it. Here's what to know about the "dumbbell nebula" and how to see it in the August skies. What is a nebula? A nebula, such as the two that the Vera C. Rubin Observatory analyzed earlier in 2025, is a luminescent giant cloud of dust and gas in space. A nebula could be the result of an explosion of a dying star such as a supernova, which throws out gas and dust, according to NASA. Other nebulae are regions where new stars are beginning to form, such as the Cat's Paw nebula that the James Webb Space Telescope recently studied in unprecedented detail. What is the 'dumbbell nebula?' The "dumbbell nebula," also known as Messier 27, is what astronomers refer to as a planetary nebula due to its round, planet-like appearance when viewed through a telescope, according to NASA. Spotted in 1764 by French astronomer Charles Messier, the "dumbbell nebula" is the first planetary nebula ever discovered. It's located 1,200 light-years away in the constellation Vulpecula. The result of an aging star that shed its outer layers to create a colorful glow, the "dumbbell nebula" is composed of knots of gas and dust – some of which resemble fingers pointing at the central star. The formation is also enormous. Some of the isolated clouds of gas and dust are 10.5 billion to 34.7 billion miles wide – larger than the distance from the sun to Pluto. Each cloud contains as much mass as three Earths, according to NASA. When, where will 'dumbbell nebula' be visible in August? The "dumbbell nebula" should be visible throughout August and beyond high in the sky anywhere in the United States. The "dumbbell nebula" appears within a pattern of stars known as the Summer Triangle, which is in prime position in August for observers in the Northern Hemisphere. Fortunately for stargazers, the formation is considered to be "one of the easiest-to-observe nebulas in the sky," Chelsea Gohd of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory said in a video with August skywatching tips. How to see 'dumbbell nebula' Stargazers will need binoculars or a small telescope to observe the "dumbbell nebula," which can be found high overhead in the first half of each night in the Summer Triangle. Observers will be able to spot it a third of the way between bright stars Altair and Deneb. The nebula will appear as a small, faint patch of light about a quarter of the width of a full moon.

Contributor: The true cost of abandoning science
Contributor: The true cost of abandoning science

Yahoo

time19 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Contributor: The true cost of abandoning science

Any trip to the dark night skies of our Southern California deserts reveals a vista full of wonder and mystery — riddles that astrophysicists like myself spend our days unraveling. I am fortunate to study how the first galaxies formed and evolved over the vast span of 13 billion years into the beautiful structures that fill those skies. NASA's crown jewel, the James Webb Space Telescope, has delivered measurements of early galaxies so puzzling that, more than three years after its launch, we are still struggling to understand them. My work on ancient galaxies may seem to have no relevance to the enormous challenges that confront our nation every day. But if we look back over the last 80 years, ever since World War II turned America into the epicenter of global science, curiosity-driven investigation — in astronomy, quantum materials, evolutionary biology and more — has been a pillar of American progress. But science in America is now under dire threat. President Trump's administration is laying waste to both national laboratories and federal support for academic science. Scientific staff is being sharply reduced from the National Park Service to the National Science Foundation and everywhere in between. Looking at the president's science funding proposals across many agencies, the 2026 fiscal year budget calls for a 34% cut to basic research. The plan slashes NASA's budget to the lowest amount since human space flight began more than 60 years ago, canceling or defunding dozens and dozens of NASA missions. Already, the NSF has halved support for the most promising American graduate students. Read more: Contributor: Those cuts to 'overhead' costs in research? They do real damage Scientists are speaking up against this destruction, of course. There are strong practical reasons to back science: It is a powerful engine for economic growth, and it is essential for understanding and mitigating the dangers of the natural world — whether they be the Los Angeles wildfires (which my family fled in January) or the tragic floods in Texas last month. As important as these pragmatic arguments are, their focus on quantifiable, short-term benefits undervalues the true worth of the scientific enterprise. Occasionally, curiosity-driven inquiry — basic science — rapidly enables new technology, but more often its first impact is the wonder we experience at novel measurements, whether contemplating ripples in space-time generated by colliding black holes, underwater ecosystems that draw energy from geothermal vents rather than the sun, or the relic microwave radiation of the Big Bang. The practical impacts that follow are unpredictable; if the goal is to explore the unknown, then the benefits are also unknown. (Let us not forget that even Columbus was sorely mistaken about what his journey would uncover!) Only through hard work to understand and unpack new discoveries do their full benefits become clear, and that can take decades, as with how Einstein's theory of relativity (published from 1905 to 1915) eventually enabled GPS technology. Read more: Contributor: Ending LGBTQ+ health research will leave science in the dark Government support is essential in this process. Although Hollywood often portrays scientific discovery as the work of lone geniuses, far more often it is an incremental process, inching ahead through insights from disparate research groups leveraging cutting-edge infrastructure (such as Arctic research facilities and orbiting telescopes), which can only be built through the focused resources of government investment. Every American taxpayer has helped enable innumerable scientific advancements because they are largely due to our nation's investments in the public goods of people and facilities. Of course, these advances have cost money, and we must always ask how best to balance the long-term benefits of science against our country's other urgent needs. (The enormously popular James Webb Space Telescope, for example, was massively over budget, which led to budget-estimation reforms at NASA.) In 2024, the total science budget, outside of medical research (and its obvious practical benefits), was about $28 billion. This is a large number, but it is still just over one-half of 1% of all spending outside of Social Security and Medicare: For every $1,000 in spending, about $6 — one tall Starbucks Caffè Mocha or Big Mac in California — supports fundamental scientific inquiry. Read more: Trump freezes $300 million in UCLA science and medical research funding, citing antisemitism Yet the current administration has chosen to hack away at budgets rather than do the hard work of self-examination and improvement. American science, and especially the emerging generation of young scientists, will not survive these cuts. If implemented, the administration's framework will choke off new technologies before they are only half an idea, leave fundamental questions about the universe unanswered and chase a generation of scientists to other countries. By any measure, American science is the envy of the world, and we now face a choice: to remain at the vanguard of scientific inquiry through sound investment, or to cede our leadership and watch others answer the big questions that have confounded humanity for millennia — and reap the rewards and prestige. Only one of those options will make the future America great. Steven R. Furlanetto is a professor of physics and astronomy at UCLA. If it's in the news right now, the L.A. Times' Opinion section covers it. Sign up for our weekly opinion newsletter. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times. Solve the daily Crossword

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store