"Is There Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1500 Years?" (Weekend Feature)
Spectacular Globular Cluster Found Harboring a 13-Billion-Year-Old Planet (Weekend Feature)

Small Magellanic Cloud Reveals a Challenge to Big Bang Physics





Stars in the Milky Way have about four times less lithium on the surface than expected by Big Bang predictions. Some scientists suggest that stellar activity might destroy lithium, or the element might sink from the surface through lighter hydrogen, but the remarkably consistent ratio from star to star is a challenge to those explanations. Observations of gas in the Small Magellanic Cloud revealed the amount of lithium that predictions say would have been produced at the Big Bang, but leave no room for subsequent production of the element.

One explanation could be a novel kind of physics operating at the Big Bang that left less lithium than the Standard Model predicts. J. Christopher Howk, Nicolas Lehner and Grant Mathews of the Center for Astrophysics at the University of Notre Dame published a paper this week in the journal Nature titled "Observation of interstellar lithium in the low-metallicity Small Magellanic Cloud."

The astrophysicists have explored a discrepancy between the amount of lithium predicted by the standard models of elemental production during the Big Bang and the amount of lithium observed in the gas of the Small Magellanic Cloud, a galaxy near to our own.

"The paper involves measuring the amount of lithium in the interstellar gas of a nearby galaxy, but it may have implications for fundamental physics, in that it could imply the presence of dark matter particles in the early universe that decay or annihilate one another," Howk says. "This may be a probe of physics in the early universe that gives us a handle on new physics we don't have another way to get a handle on right now."

Using observations from European Southern Observatory's Very Large Telescope (VLT) in Chile, the team measured the amount of lithium in the interstellar gas of the Small Magellanic Cloud, which has far fewer star-produced heavy elements than the Milky Way.

In addition to the production of elements by fusion in the core of stars, scientists believe conditions immediately after the Big Bang led to the formation of some elements, including a small amount of lithium. The team will conduct three nights of observations on the VLT in November. They will look for the lithium isotope 7Li in the Large Magellanic Cloud and 6Li in both the Large Magellanic Cloud and the Small Magellanic Cloud. The standard model predicts that no 6Li was created at the Big Bang.

The Daily Galaxy via Nature



Quote: "The astrophysicists have explored a discrepancy between the amount of lithium predicted by the standard models of elemental production during the Big Bang and the amount of lithium observed in the gas of the Small Magellanic Cloud, a galaxy near to our own”.

AD: OK then the Big Bang and the Standard model both are wrong regarding the formation of elements, but what then? Maybe the formation has nothing to do with the age of a star? Maybe the star formation hypothesis itself is wrong?

- Since our solar is an integrated part of the galactic rotation its formation shall be connected to this formation and not to “a local cloud of dust and gas that suddenly collapsed and formed our sun and planets”.

The actual amount and composition of gas and dust in the molecular cloud that formed our galaxy – and therefore also our solar system – decided what kind of elements that could be formed in our galaxy and in our solar system, and it is very logical that stars in other galaxies have other compositions of gasses and particles.

- It is the standard formation model itself that is wrong, connecting age to the solar formation and assuming that gasses and particles are evenly spread all over in cosmos, which this article contradicts very clearly.

again the 14 billion years and the big-bang BS...is anybody here that believes we`re right in the middle of the sphere? you`re all living in a box with your mind. Let`s consider we are at half distance between middle Universe and the Universe border. We should see stars in one direction (border) at 7 billion LY, and in the other (through the center of the Universe) at 21 billion LY. Instead we see stars at 14 billion LY in all directions. Please get out of your mind box.

There could be higher concentrations of Lithium in other galaxies. This would balance out the big bang theory. Our universe is not homogenous.

From the time of the very auspicious inception of the civilization, mankind is continuing to find out the correct answer to the question about universe creation or creator. Aborigines have taking up the considerations of the causes by religious thoughts in different ways as consolations as there was no practical answer or solutions to the questions. Pensive it mentioned below the little serving as an example of my research results and see Interesting facts about the Universe, as I see its- New Discovery of the Universe. See at http://t.co/jVFHtSCr

Gaugain, your comment indicates that you don't actually understand the 'big-bang BS' you're upset about. There is no 'universe border' or 'universe middle.' The balloon analogy might help you out.

I've been thinking about the gaps as we observe the universe more and more accurately. Are we looking at from the wrong stand point? What if baryonic matter was condensate from a 9 or 11 dimension dark matter/energy universe? No big-bang just an ongoing condensation. if galaxies form through the eddies in this dark soup creating the environment for observable solar system genesis, and it could explain better the rotational velocities of the outer stars of the galaxy which should fly off.
Maybe we have to have a major rethink and consider that all we observe is the 3/4D (assuming time is a real dimension) skin of the universe. Through some hitherto unknown interactions in Dark matter/energy Baryo-genesis occurs. Perhaps it could explain phenomena such as zero-point energy and quantum fluctuations and annihilations that seem to pervade all around. If gravity is only emergent in our perceivable universe, its operation and interactions in 11D may be very different from what we observe here in 3/4D.
I started thinking about this from the LHC results some of the work on Dark Flow and multi-verse theory. I have no idea how the mathematics would work but considering we have a habbit of assuming we know everything right up until we find out we are wrong perhaps now is a good time to challenge the Big Bang sacred cow.

Wow, Shahidur! I tried, believe me I tried. But I haven't got a clue what you're going on about...

Above says the SMC has 'fewer heavy elements" which really means it is less dusty in comparison to the MW. Science has continually pointed to the GMC and the LMC as star factories. The obvious reason that it is a star factory is the fact that it has less dust. That would seem to be a conundrum wouldn't it?
How can a star factory have less by product of star making?

Many questions arise from this.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)