Modern cosmology - the study of the universe as a whole - is
undergoing a scientific revolution. New ground- and space-based
telescopes can now observe every bright galaxy in the universe. We
can see back in time to the cosmic dark ages before galaxies formed
and read the history of the early universe in the ripples of heat
radiation still arriving from the Big Bang. We now know that
everything that we can see makes up only about half a percent of the
cosmic density, and that most of the universe is made of invisible
stuff called "dark matter" and "dark energy." The cold dark
matter (CDM) theory based on this
(CDM) appears to
be able to
account for many features of the observable universe, including the
heat radiation and the large scale distribution of galaxies, although
there are possible problems understanding some details of the
structure of galaxies. Modern cosmology is developing humanity's
first story of the origin and nature of the universe that might
actually be true - in the sense that it will still be true in a
thousand years. Although this talk is entitled "Precision
Cosmology," I think we should be even more impressed that modern
cosmology is true than that it is precise.
Building on the work of Copernicus, Brahe, Kepler, and Galileo, Newton established the basis of what we now call classical physics. Although there have been many scientific revolutions in physics since the Newtonian synthesis, none of them have overthrown Newtonian physics the way that the Copernican-Newtonian scientific revolution overthrew earlier Aristotelian and Ptolemaic ideas. Ptolemy was never afterward taught as science, only as history, but Newtonian physics will always be taught. The subsequent revolutions in physics - wave optics, field theory, thermodynamics, relativity, and quantum mechanics - encompassed Newtonian physics rather than overthrowing it [2].
Once a well-confirmed basis for further progress is established, such as that provided by Newtonian physics, a scientific field can expand its range of successful applicability without any further overthrowing revolutions, and in this sense it can be said to be progressive. I think it is likely that the modern revolution in cosmology has now established such a basis for progress. Even though there is so much that we still do not know - in particular, the nature of the dark matter and dark energy, and the origin of the initial conditions - what we do know is now so well confirmed by diverse data that it is likely to be true.
Ever since Einstein's general relativity provided the essential
language for cosmology, the field has progressed in the normal
scientific style, with predictions followed by confirmations.
Friedmann and Lemaitre predicted the expansion of the universe, which
was subsequently confirmed by Hubble in 1929. Gamow, Alpher, and
Hermann in 1948 predicted the existence of the cosmic background
radiation (CBR) which was found by Penzias and Wilson in 1965, with
its thermal spectrum confirmed by the FIRAS instrument on the COBE
satellite in 1989. The cold dark matter theory
[3]
predicted the
amplitude of the CBR fluctuations, which were discovered by the DMR
instrument on COBE in 1992 and found to have the predicted amplitude.
By early 1992, it was clear that the only viable simple versions of
CDM were CDM with
m
0.3 and
0.7, and Cold+Hot DM
(CHDM) with
m = 1 and
= 0.2 - 0.3. A few years
later CHDM and all other
m = 1
cosmologies were ruled out by the discovery of abundant
high redshift galaxies and by the discovery of strong evidence for
using
high-redshift supernovae in 1998. The combination of
CDM and cosmic inflation predicted the acoustic peak in the CBR
angular power spectrum, which was discovered by the BOOMERANG and
MAXIMA balloon experiments and the DASI instrument at the South Pole
in 2000-2002. Now WMAP has confirmed and extended the CBR
observations of ground- and balloon-based instruments, and both the
CBR angular power spectrum and the galaxy power spectrum look exactly
like the predictions of
CDM
[4].
Our modern cosmological synthesis is based on several assumptions of
simplicity, in particular the "cosmological principle" (we don't
live at a special place in the universe) and the assumption that the
same laws of physics that describe phenomena in our laboratories on
earth and nearby are valid at all times and places throughout the
universe. These assumptions are being checked against observations.
For example, comparison of the details of atomic spectra in the
laboratory and from galaxies at various redshifts suggested that there
might be variations in the fine structure constant
= e2
/ (
c) of
/
= - 0.574 ± 0.102
× 10-5
[5],
but the latest results from another group and telescope
do not see that effect, finding
/
= 0.06 ± 0.06
× 10-5
[6].
This seems to me good news, since such a
variation might be inconsistent with the entire framework of
relativistic quantum field theory
[7].
But of course it will be necessary to test this new result, and to
understand the origin of the earlier apparent variation in
.