My research area is computational astrophysics. This means I use computers to analyze astronomical data or model astrophysical systems. Most of my work is done through an application known as Mathematica, which is a powerful computational program. Like any application, Mathematica has advantages and disadvantages, but it has one property that is absolutely essential: it is Turing complete.
Have You Heard the One About…
This week I’ve gotten a number of questions about various proposed models in astrophysics, such as the one about how anti-gravity could explain dark matter and dark energy. Or the one where dark matter is a result of quantum interference on a cosmic scale. Or the one where the cosmic microwave background is actually due to thermal turbulence rather than the big bang. There are lots of ideas that show up in the literature and in the press, so how do you judge the quality of a particular idea?
Papers Please
The BICEP2 paper has officially been accepted in Physical Review Letters. Having survived peer review, does that mean we can now declare that inflation has now been officially observed? Not necessarily.
Impossible Dream
Imagine working on a project to mine asteroids, or mapping a billon stars in our galaxy, or using the next generation of space telescopes to study the atmospheres of possibly habitable exoplanets. Imagine going to the Moon, or even Mars. Those are dreams you can make real.
The Universe In Your Hands
Have you ever thought about where your hands came from? Naturally, you got your hands from your parents. They gave you the DNA which determined the size and shape of your hands. All the muscles, bones and tendons in your hands were honed by natural selection to the form you have today. Your DNA traces its lineage through the entire history of life on earth from its early beginnings more than 3.5 billion years ago to the present day. It is a profound concept when you think about it, but that is just part of the story.
Point/Counterpoint
Back in March, a project known as BICEP2 held a press conference where they announced the discovery of inflation in the early universe. This created quite a stir in the press. When the announcement was made, the results had just been made public, and their paper had not been peer reviewed. As everyone started analyzing the work, what initially looked like a pretty strong result started to look less strong. Then there started to be murmurings that perhaps the announcement had been premature.
Evidence That Demands a Verdict
There’s a popular picture that traverses the net now and then that states 97% of climate scientists believe that anthropogenic global warming is true. More specifically, that of peer reviewed climate research papers, of the ones that made a statement on the cause of global warming, 97% agreed that humanity was the cause. You can imagine the lively discussions it induced.
Of Cabbages and Kings
When talking about scientific ideas, you often hear terms such as theories, hypotheses, facts, laws, models, etc. Some of these terms are used in everyday speech, but with meanings other than their scientific ones. Someone might say they have a theory, when they really mean they have an idea. People talk about scientific laws as if they are facts, or use the phrase “just a theory” to distinguish it from some idealized truth. Even scientists will sometimes interchange terms like theory and law. We know what we mean, but we aren’t always precise with our usage. So what do these terms mean in a scientific sense?
Black Swan
Only about half of Americans are confident in the validity of the big bang. That’s a rather surprising number given that the big bang is not only well supported by the evidence, it is now a foundational concept in modern astronomy. There are, of course, several reasons for this lack of acceptance, but one I hear often in interactions with the public is the claim that the big bang (and astrophysics or cosmology in general) is not scientific because it is not falsifiable. After all, there is only one universe, and you can’t run that experiment again.