The Role of Images in Astronomical Discovery

Home > Other > The Role of Images in Astronomical Discovery > Page 27
The Role of Images in Astronomical Discovery Page 27

by Rene Roy


  which consists of the ordinary matter that makes up the stars and planets

  and us.

  Steven Weinberg 2

  As I have shown previously, the probability of the overlapping of images

  of nebulae is considerable. The gravitational fields of a number of “fore-

  ground” nebulae may therefore be expected to deflect the light coming to

  us from certain background nebulae.

  Fritz Zwicky 3

  How Can We Image the Invisible?

  Horace Welcome Babcock (1912–2003) was an American astrophysicist who spent the

  greater part of his career at the Mount Wilson Observatory (Fig. 8.1). He was the son

  of astronomer Harold Delos Babcock (1882–1965), a spectroscopist and solar physicist,

  who joined George Hale at the new Mount Wilson Observatory in 1909, and was the first

  to measure the magnetic field of the Sun. Horace was fascinated by instrument building

  and invented several new techniques for astronomical observing. In 1953, he pioneered

  adaptive optics, a technology now used in almost all large ground-based telescopes, which

  corrects atmospheric turbulence and provides images with close to diffraction-limit angu-

  lar resolution.4 Babcock also led and carried out the construction of a large observatory

  at Las Campanas, Chile, to survey the southern-hemisphere sky and to record images of

  1 S. L. Jaki, The Milky Way, An Elusive Road for Science, New York: Science History Publications, 1972, p. 291.

  2 S. Weinberg, Physics: What We Do and Don’t Know, The New York Review of Books, 2013, Vol. LX, No. 17, p. 86.

  3 F. Zwicky, On the Masses of Nebulae and of Clusters of Nebulae, The Astrophysical Journal, Chicago, 1937, Vol. 86, pp. 237–238.

  4 H. Babcock, The possibility of compensating astronomical seeing, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 1953, Vol. 65, pp. 229–236.

  173

  14:05:47, subject to the Cambridge Core

  .010

  174

  Part II – Images as Galaxy Discovery Engines

  Fig. 8.1 Robert Leighton (left) and Horace W. Babcock (right), two of the most creative scientists of

  the twentieth century. Credit: Courtesy of the Archives, California Institute of Technology.

  galaxies of unprecedented quality. The Chilean site hosts several large optical telescopes,

  including the 2.5-m Irénée du Pont telescope, the source of thousands of images of galax-

  ies, many used in the splendid atlases of galaxies that are presented in Chapter 10. Allan

  Sandage called Babcock the quiet American. “Horace Babcock’s reluctance to advance his

  own agenda kept him from achieving the renown he deserves as one of the great minds of

  his generation. On the other hand, his inability to indulge in self-aggrandizement made him

  an extremely effective director of the joint Mount Wilson and Palomar Observatories.”5

  Babcock provided one of the earliest pieces of evidence for the presence of a large amount

  of dark matter in spiral galaxies.

  Invisible Mass

  Astronomers had to swallow an uncomfortable surprise around the middle of the twentieth

  century. They found that most matter in the universe might be of a kind that neither absorbs

  nor emits radiation. They called the stuff “dark matter,” but it would be more appropriate,

  as suggested by the American physicist Steve Weinberg, to describe it as transparent matter

  or invisible mass. Despite their extraordinary number and variety of shapes, and the amount

  of matter they contain, galaxies constitute only the tip of the iceberg of cosmic mass; they

  are islets in a sea of invisible matter. The invisibility is not because the material is very dark

  5 A. R. Sandage, Centennial History of the Carnegie Institution of Washington, Volume 1: The Mount Wilson Observatory, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004, p. 420.

  14:05:47, subject to the Cambridge Core

  .010

  8. Imaging the Invisible

  175

  or extremely cold; it is due to its unusual – and yet unknown – nature. Despite multiple

  efforts, we have not yet succeeded in breaking the Gordian knot of what dark matter really

  is. Antimatter is not dark matter: it is like ordinary matter; it emits and absorbs light. We

  can see and are able to create antimatter in the laboratory.

  Nevertheless, we do know a few things about dark matter. First, it exercises a gravi-

  tational pull, just like ordinary matter; it creates gravitational potentials giving weight to

  objects and accelerating masses that fall into them. We know also that this invisible mass is,

  on average, about six times more abundant than ordinary matter, i.e. baryonic matter. The

  latter is made of electrons, protons, neutrons and of other exotic well-known species of par-

  ticles such as neutrinos, mesons or bosons. Dark matter is none of this stuff. In this chapter,

  I will show how observations and images of ordinary matter have revealed the existence of

  this perplexing and ubiquitous component of our universe.

  A Brief History of Dark Matter

  Early in the twentieth century, astronomers used the absolute luminosity of stars and stellar

  systems, or the amount of light they emit, to derive the amount of matter contained in

  them. They devised clever ways to translate the amount of light coming from stars into the

  mass responsible for its emission. They also established how this ratio of “mass to light”

  varied for different types of stars. For example, low-mass stars produce relatively little

  light compared to massive stars, which emit copious amounts of light. British astrophysicist

  Arthur Stanley Eddington (1882–1944) found a simple relation between luminosity and

  mass: the luminosity of a star is proportional to approximately the power 3.5 of its mass,

  i.e. L M 3.5.6 A star five times as massive as the Sun is 280 times more luminous than

  our luminary. The Eddington relation applies to stars on the main sequence, those in the

  stable hydrogen-burning phase. To get the overall mass of a galaxy, one also had to estimate

  independently the mass of matter that emits very little light: very cool stars, dwarf stars,

  black holes, small solid bodies and cold interstellar gases. Applying Newtonian mechanics,

  the global kinematics of bodies in a galaxy provided an independent clue about its total

  mass and spatial distribution. Most puzzling, the results from the two methods disagreed

  very significantly. Something was unbridled.

  Evidence for some dark matter was first inferred in the early 1930s. It came first from the

  measurements of velocities of nearby stars and gas clouds in our neighborhood of the Milky

  Way. The Dutch astronomer Jan Oort (1900–92) had been analyzing the stellar kinematics

  in the solar neighborhood to derive a mean cosmic mass density. In 1932, he found that this

  density was twice that deduced from the stars and the gas.7 Compared with the results of

  the mass-to-light ratio analysis just discussed, the kinematics led to significantly more mass

  than was implied by the stellar light striking our telescopes. The velocities of the stars in

  6 A. S. Eddington, On the Relation between the Masses and Luminosities of the Stars, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 1924, Vol. 84, pp. 308–332.

  7 J. H. Oort, The Force Exerted by the Stellar System in the Direction Perpendicular to the Galactic Plane and Some Related Problems, Bulletin of the Astronomical Institute of the Netherlands, 1932, Vol. VI, No. 238, p. 249–287

&n
bsp; 14:05:47, subject to the Cambridge Core

  .010

  176

  Part II – Images as Galaxy Discovery Engines

  our neighborhood of the Milky Way were much higher than could be accounted for solely

  from the masses of visible stars, gas and dust clouds, even when all these masses were care-

  fully summed up. To explain the discrepancy, Oort suggested the existence of an important

  component of invisible mass, or “missing mass.” Studying the edge-on galaxy NGC 3115

  in 1940, he also found that “the distribution of mass in this system appears to bear almost

  no relation to that of light.”8 Oort’s interpretation of these data was highly debatable.

  The puzzle grew when the curious kinematical behavior was found on a much larger

  scale, that of clusters of galaxies. Our old friend Fritz Zwicky (1898–1974) of Chapter 3

  was an early and astute observer of the extragalactic world (Fig. 3.11). He had taken a

  keen interest in the regions of space where galaxies appear to congregate in volumes of

  only a few million light-years in diameter. As we have seen, William Herschel and the

  Birr Castle observers had noticed such groupings of galaxies in the nineteenth century but

  never speculated on the nature of these assemblies of “nebulae” except in describing them

  as a “stratum.” We know today that they are galaxy clusters; galaxies group together as

  hundreds, sometimes thousands of members, to make up the so-called “rich” clusters. The

  American astronomers Harlow Shapley and Adelaide Ames were the first to come up with

  the concept of clusters of galaxies, calling them “nebular clouds.”9

  By 1933, Zwicky had prefigured the presence of an excess of mass in many clusters.10

  Using the newly installed wide-field 18-inch Schmidt telescope of Mount Palomar Obser-

  vatory, Zwicky surveyed and catalogued thousands of clusters of galaxies. Employing the

  larger Mount Wilson 100-inch telescope for follow-up observations, he obtained the spec-

  tra of several of the individual galaxies of clusters, deriving their velocities with respect to

  the center of the cluster. Applying Newton’s law of gravitation, Zwicky derived the masses

  of the entire cluster by measuring the velocities of the individual member galaxies, just as

  we can calculate the mass of the Sun by measuring the orbital speed of the planets and

  their distance to the Sun. As Jan Oort had found on a smaller astronomical scale, Zwicky

  discovered that the mass from the luminous material of the cluster was clearly insufficient

  to account for the high velocities he measured for the galaxies; these should have flown

  away. Surmising that they were being held together, he claimed that there was an important

  amount of “missing mass.”

  Zwicky had also patiently measured the rotational curves of a few clusters of galaxies

  to infer their individual mass from Newtonian mechanics. He summed together all their

  masses. The “missing mass” did not go away; the masses of the constituent galaxies did

  not add up at all to the total mass. The prescient Zwicky wrote, “if this is confirmed, we

  would arrive at the astonishing conclusion that dark matter is present with a much greater

  density than luminous matter.”11 Soon after, in 1936, the American astronomer and inventor

  8 J. H. Oort, Some Problems Concerning the Structure and Dynamics of the Galactic System and the Elliptical Nebulae NGC

  3113 and 4494, The Astrophysical Journal, 1940, Vol. 91, pp. 273–306.

  9 H. Shapley and A. Ames, A Study of a Cluster of Bright Spiral Nebulae, Harvard College Observatory Circular, 1926, Vol. 294, pp. 1–8.

  10 F. Zwicky, Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln, Helvetica Physica Acta, 1933, Vol. 6, pp. 110–127.

  11 Translated from F. Zwicky and cited by S. van den Bergh, The Early History of Dark Matter, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 1999, Vol. 111, p. 657.

  14:05:47, subject to the Cambridge Core

  .010

  8. Imaging the Invisible

  177

  Fig. 8.2 Transformational Image: Zwicky’s Map of the Distribution of Galaxies in the Coma

  Cluster of Galaxies. From Zwicky (1937), The Astrophysical Journal. C

  AAS. Reproduced with

  permission.

  Sinclair Smith (1899–1938) also found the presence of large amounts of invisible mass in

  another nearby large galaxy cluster, the Virgo cluster of galaxies at about 54 million light-

  years.

  In a fascinating paper in 1937, Zwicky summarized the extensive set of observations he

  had conducted of the Coma cluster of galaxies hosting hundreds of galaxies and located at

  about 333 million light-years (Fig. 1.4). While mapping the distribution of galaxies in the

  cluster, Zwicky had been struck by its apparent spherical symmetry (Fig. 8.2). He demon-

  strated that the galaxies in the Coma cluster were evenly distributed and that individual

  galaxies had much higher velocities than expected, based solely on the gravitational mass

  inferred from the stellar light of the galaxies.12 Repeating Oort’s remark about the solar

  12 F. Zwicky, On the Masses of Nebulae and of Clusters of Nebulae, The Astrophysical Journal, Chicago, 1937, Vol. 86, pp. 217–246.

  14:05:47, subject to the Cambridge Core

  .010

  178

  Part II – Images as Galaxy Discovery Engines

  neighborhood in our Milky Way, Zwicky concluded that light was not a good tracer of

  mass. Highly intrigued, he explored alternative approaches to calculate the total mass of

  clusters of galaxies in order to put his unexpected finding on solid ground and to find pos-

  sible inconsistencies. In order to do this, Zwicky used an extraordinarily powerful tool, the

  virial theorem.

  The Virial Theorem

  The virial theorem is based on Newton’s gravitational theory, and is a simple mathematical

  relation between the mass of a system, its size and the velocities of its components. It can

  be employed to infer the mass of a system of particles in hydrostatic equilibrium. Zwicky

  made the assumption that galaxies of a large cluster were particles of such a system. Tak-

  ing the mean velocity of all the individual galaxies, σ , and the size of the cluster, R, the

  total mass, M, derived from the virial is written in its simple form as M

  5 Rσ 2/ G,

  v irial

  where G is the gravitational constant. The basic assumption is simple: the system, in this

  case the galaxy cluster, has had the time to settle dynamically. The members are neither in

  free fall, nor escaping from the gravitational potential of the cluster. The beautiful morpho-

  logical symmetry of the many galaxy clusters Zwicky had photographed indicated that the

  hydrostatic state assumption was reasonable, at least in the case of the Coma cluster.

  Applying the virial equation, Zwicky arrived again at an astounding value for the total

  mass of the cluster. Combining the results of his several approaches, Zwicky announced the

  presence of a “missing mass” that was 100 times greater than that of the luminous matter.

  Zwicky was adamant: a kind of matter other than the luminous one was necessary to keep

  the cluster gravitationally bound, and to explain the smooth distribution of galaxies around

  its center.

  Unsatisfied, Zwicky explored the possibility that clusters of galaxies were dynamically

  unstable or had not had time to settle. The galaxy ve
locities would then be unreliable tracers

  of the total mass and the virial theorem could not then be applied. He rejected this hypoth-

  esis, stating that clusters of galaxies would be so short-lived that there would be very few

  clusters in existence. This was not the case as clusters of galaxies peppered the deep sky.

  Zwicky was finding clusters all over, above and below the plane of the Milky Way, direc-

  tions where he could probe deep into the universe. Most galaxy clusters must have had the

  time to relax gravitationally, making the use of the virial theorem justifiable and its results

  reliable, he re-affirmed.

  Zwicky could not escape the stunning conclusion that clusters of galaxies were big pock-

  ets of dark matter, loci with huge concentrations of this matter that create deep depressions

  in the membrane of spacetime. Ordinary matter just falls and assembles into these deep

  “valleys.” We know today that dark matter stretches across space as large-scale cosmic

  filaments; the filaments form a web of structures that crisscross each other; clusters of galax-

  ies are found at the junctions of these large-scale filaments. The visible structures, i.e. the

  galaxies, groups of galaxies and clusters of galaxies, trace the dark matter as streetlights

  outline the patterns of our cities seen at night.

  14:05:47, subject to the Cambridge Core

  .010

  8. Imaging the Invisible

  179

  The Secret of Symmetry of Galaxy Clusters and X-Rays

  When later observed from space, the clusters of galaxies revealed another surprise: they

  contain colossal quantities of X-ray-emitting gas. X-ray-emitting plasma from the Coma

  cluster, so well studied by Zwicky, was discovered during a balloon flight in 1966; this

  finding of hot intracluster gas was one of the major breakthroughs of X-ray astronomy

  (Chapter 7). Because of their deep gravitational potential, clusters of galaxies are able to

  retain and heat their intracluster gas to very high temperatures (Plate 8.1). In Coma, X-rays

  indicated a binding mass of about 7 x 1014 solar masses, with its intracluster gas heated

  to 100 million kelvin.13 These high temperatures meant that the speeds of the ions were

  the same as those of the galaxies moving within the cluster’s gravitational potential. There-

 

‹ Prev