"Are dark matter and dark energy related?" is a common question I get. Here's the deal: the *only* way dark matter and dark energy are related is that they both have "dark" in their names, which is a placeholder for things we can't see and don't understand.
Dark matter is stuff, that, like regular matter, is most likely made of subatomic particles, but ones that have yet to be discovered. There's about 5 times more dark matter than there is regular matter in the Universe, making it the most dominant form of matter.
Dark matter provided the seeds for galaxies to form in the early Universe, and now holds galaxies and galaxy groups and clusters together, preventing them from flying apart. You may find an analogy I made for dark matter useful:
In the analogy you'll find that dark matter only interacts with gravity, to our knowledge; it may also experience interactions with "dark" forces we don't understand yet. But its lack of interaction with light/normal matter is what has made it elude detection for many years.
While dark matter is the most dominant form of *matter* in the Universe, dark energy is the most dominant component of the Universe. Of the Universe's contents, 70% is dark energy, 25% is dark matter, and a tiny 5% is regular matter, the stuff that we're made of and understand.
Dark energy is stuff that causes the expansion of the Universe to accelerate, stretching it apart faster and faster as time progresses! The reason this is true is also the reason dark energy is one of the strangest things in the Universe.
As the Universe expands, matter and radiation dilutes, ie their density decreases since their amounts are the same, but the volume/space they're in increases due to expansion. Radiation dilutes faster than matter bc it also redshifts w/ expansion, causing it to lose more energy.
While matter and radiation dilute with the expansion of the Universe, dark energy does not. In other words, the density of dark energy remains *constant* as the Universe expands!! It is the same today as it was in the early Universe, and will be the same when the Universe dies.
So in the early Universe, the density of matter, and radiation, were larger than dark energy. At that time, the Universe grew slowly, and the gravitational pull of matter wads stronger than the "stretch" of dark energy. But nevertheless, the Universe grew. And dark energy waited.
As the Universe expanded, matter and radiation became less important as their densities decreased, with radiation becoming unimportant first bc of its extra energy loss to redshift. In fact it has diluted so much today that its energy contribution to the Universe is negligible.
So we're left with matter and dark energy. Eventually their densities became equal because the density of matter was diluting, while dark energy remained *constant*. Today we are just past that point, so there's not enough matter to combat the expansion due to dark energy.
So you see, eventually dark energy won over matter. Earlier matter (and therefore gravity) was able to prevent the expansion of the Universe from accelerating bc it had higher density than dark energy did. Not anymore, which is why the expansion is accelerating.
You can see that in this figure below. Earlier in the Universe's history, matter actually caused the expansion to decelerate. Then the curve turns upward, because it can no longer fight dark energy.
Source of the figure: sci.esa.int/euclid/46673-e…
In the very distance future, matter will not matter any longer, and all that will matter is dark energy because everything else will be so diluted that you could call the Universe one that's nothing but flat and only containing dark energy. We call this a de Sitter Universe.
Basically dark energy is the beast that did nothing but wait until it became more important than the other stuff in the Universe, and now it's winning and causing the expansion of the Universe to accelerate.
And that concludes today's episode of cosmology with the Astropartigirl. Happy Tuesday!
I should add that a constant density for dark energy best fits current models, but dark energy *might* be even weirder: it might *increase* with time! If that's true then the future is bleak, as everything, even atoms, will be torn to shreds in the end. This is a big rip.
But if it *is* constant, then instead, the Universe will probably die in a heat death, where there's no more energy to create things, and entropy stops. Then everything just freezes, and blinks out of existence by freezing to death. Maybe protons decay, but that's about it.
I don't know if I'd rather be around for the heat death or the big rip, but I think I'd prefer to just not be around for either. Luckily, most likely nobody will. 🙂
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
We've detected a Gravitational Wave Background (GWB). Gravitational waves are formed from some of the most energetic processes in the Universe, like black hole mergers, or inflation! So, what does the GWB mean?
A GWB is predicted from supermassive black hole binary (SMBHB) mergers in the early universe. But you could also get it from early universe phenomena, like inflation and cosmic strings. The GWB from SMBHBs would be from mergers in the first few billion years of the Universe. 2/n
This is what is the most likely source of the ones detected by @NANOGrav and co. But I'm going to talk about the other possibilities, like other sources of GWB or ones that could be in addition to SMBHB signals. The possibilities I'll discuss lead to new physics. 3/n
OMG: you're looking at asteroid belts around the star Fomalhaut, images by JWST. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME AN ASTEROID BELT HAS BEEN SEEN IN ANOTHER STAR SYSTEM. And it has THREE!! The gaps probably come from moons we don't see, kinda like how moonlets make gaps in Saturn's rings.
And of course I meant unseen PLANETS here. Comparing to Saturn's rings had me stuck in moon mode, but this is a huge scale so these gaps are made by planets!
Here's an example of a gap in Saturn's rings created by a moonlet named Daphnis. I processed this image myself using Cassini images + Photoshop (I used to do this often). An old blog post of mine on this (plus more if you are so inclined to look): astropartigirl.com/2017/05/27/sat…
The Universe is BIG. HUGE. But we don't actually know HOW huge--it may even be infinite. But because the expansion of the Universe is Accelerating, some parts of the Universe are so far away that light can never reach us. THERE ARE PARTS OF THE UNIVERSE THAT WE CAN NEVER OBSERVE!
No matter how good our technology gets, we'll never be able to build a telescope that can resolve anything beyond what we call the "observable Universe" because light from objects beyond this point will not have had enough time to reach us. They're forever beyond our reach!
Different parts of the Universe have different particle horizons. So the only way we could see beyond our observable Universe is if we could travel to distant parts faster than light propagates, and the most plausible (and my favorite) way to do this is wormholes.
Since I'm losing followers for caring how my name is spelt, here's why it matters:
I'm an astrophysics PhD candidate, ie expert. @jubileemedia elicited my expertise. I gave them an entire day. I was not paid, or adequately fed. I DESERVE MY EXPERTISE TO BE ATTRIBUTED TO MY NAME.
My name is "Sophia", not "Sofia". Or "Soph", or "Sophie", or any other variation. SOPHIA. If you forget, you'll find my name in my email, signature, even my social media bios! There's no excuse to take my expertise for free, not feed me a proper lunch, and then misspell my name.
Needless to say, there is no world in which I'll do something like this without getting paid again. EVER.
Update: I emailed my point of contact at @jubileemedia asking to have my name fixed. It might seem small, but I gave half a day of my life for this episode, one I could've spent on my PhD work. The least I deserve is being respectfully addressed with my name correctly spelled.
And finally, I won't complain if any of you are keen on asking Jubilee to make the name update! It's disheartening to find a video you anticipated, only for them to show it to you AFTER posting and still didn't care to write your info down correctly.
Ever wonder how many photons have been emitted over the Universe's history? Probably not, BUT YOU DO NOW: the total # of photons ever emitted is 10⁸⁹, ie,
100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. 🤯
By the way, they're dominated by photons from the Cosmic Microwave Background. All photons from other processes make up such a tiny amount compared to this! Here's how you can figure it out: there are ~410 photons/cm³, and the Universe is ~46 billion light years in radius. 🙂
Ooooo this set some people on 🔥 lol! Happy Saturday!