A Medley of Potpourri

Friday, November 28, 2025

Cosmic microwave background

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The cosmic microwave background (CMB, CMBR), or relic radiation, is microwave radiation that fills all space in the observable universe. With a standard optical telescope, the background space between stars and galaxies is almost completely dark. However, a sufficiently sensitive radio telescope detects a faint background glow that is almost uniform and is not associated with any star, galaxy, or other object. This glow is strongest in the microwave region of the electromagnetic spectrum. Its energy density exceeds that of all the photons emitted by all the stars in the history of the universe. The accidental discovery of the CMB in 1964 by American radio astronomers Arno Allan Penzias and Robert Woodrow Wilson was the culmination of work initiated in the 1940s.

The CMB is landmark evidence of the Big Bang theory for the origin of the universe. In the Big Bang cosmological models, during the earliest periods, the universe was filled with an opaque fog of dense, hot plasma of sub-atomic particles. As the universe expanded, this plasma cooled to the point where protons and electrons combined to form neutral atoms of mostly hydrogen. Unlike the plasma, these atoms could not scatter thermal radiation by Thomson scattering, and so the universe became transparent. Known as the recombination epoch, this decoupling event released photons to travel freely through space. However, the photons have grown less energetic due to the cosmological redshift associated with the expansion of the universe. The surface of last scattering refers to a shell at the right distance in space so photons are now received that were originally emitted at the time of decoupling.

The CMB is very smooth and uniform, but maps by sensitive detectors detect small but important temperature variations. Ground and space-based experiments such as COBE, WMAP and Planck have been used to measure these temperature inhomogeneities. The anisotropy structure is influenced by various interactions of matter and photons up to the point of decoupling, which results in a characteristic pattern of tiny ripples that varies with angular scale. The distribution of the anisotropy across the sky has frequency components that can be represented by a power spectrum displaying a sequence of peaks and valleys. The peak values of this spectrum hold important information about the physical properties of the early universe: the first peak determines the overall curvature of the universe, while the second and third peak detail the density of normal matter and so-called dark matter, respectively. Extracting fine details from the CMB data can be challenging, since the emission has undergone modification by foreground features such as galaxy clusters.

Features

Graph of cosmic microwave background spectrum around its peak in the microwave frequency range, as measured by the FIRAS instrument on the COBE. While vastly exaggerated "error bars" were included here to show the measured data points, the true error bars are too small to be seen even in an enlarged image, and it is impossible to distinguish the observed data from the blackbody spectrum for 2.725 K.

The cosmic microwave background radiation is an emission of uniform black body thermal energy coming from all directions. Intensity of the CMB is expressed in kelvin (K), the SI unit of temperature. The CMB has a thermal black body spectrum at a temperature of 2.72548±0.00057 K. Variations in intensity are expressed as variations in temperature. The blackbody temperature uniquely characterizes the intensity of the radiation at all wavelengths; a measured brightness temperature at any wavelength can be converted to a blackbody temperature.

The radiation is remarkably uniform across the sky, very unlike the almost point-like structure of stars or clumps of stars in galaxies. The radiation is isotropic to roughly one part in 25,000: the root mean square variations are just over 100 μK, after subtracting a dipole anisotropy from the Doppler shift of the background radiation. The latter is caused by the peculiar velocity of the Sun relative to the comoving cosmic rest frame as it moves at 369.82 ± 0.11 km/s towards the constellation Crater near its boundary with the constellation Leo. The CMB dipole and aberration at higher multipoles have been measured, consistent with galactic motion. Despite the very small degree of anisotropy in the CMB, many aspects can be measured with high precision and such measurements are critical for cosmological theories.

In addition to temperature anisotropy, the CMB should have an angular variation in polarization. The polarisation at each direction in the sky has an orientation described in terms of E-mode and B-mode polarization. The E-mode signal is a factor of 10 less strong than the temperature anisotropy; it supplements the temperature data as they are correlated. The B-mode signal is even weaker but may contain additional cosmological data.

The anisotropy is related to physical origin of the polarisation. Excitation of an electron by linear polarised light generates polarized light at 90 degrees to the incident direction. If the incoming radiation is isotropic, different incoming directions create polarizations that cancel out. If the incoming radiation has quadrupole anisotropy, residual polarization will be seen.

Other than the temperature and polarization anisotropy, the CMB frequency spectrum is expected to feature tiny departures from the black-body law known as spectral distortions. These are also at the focus of an active research effort with the hope of a first measurement within the forthcoming decades, as they contain a wealth of information about the primordial universe and the formation of structures at late time.

The CMB contains the vast majority of photons in the universe by a factor of 400 to 1; the number density of photons in the CMB is one billion times (10⁹) the number density of matter in the universe. The present-day energy density of CMB photons greatly exceeds that of the photons emitted by all the stars over the history of the universe. Without the expansion of the universe to cause the cooling of the CMB, the night sky would shine as brightly as the Sun. The energy density of the CMB is 0.260 eV/cm³ (4.17×10⁻¹⁴ J/m³), about 411 photons/cm³.

History

Early speculations

In 1931, Georges Lemaître speculated that remnants of the early universe may be observable as radiation, but his candidate was cosmic rays. Richard C. Tolman showed in 1934 that expansion of the universe would cool blackbody radiation while maintaining a thermal spectrum. The cosmic microwave background was first predicted in 1948 by Ralph Alpher and Robert Herman, in a correction they prepared for a paper by Alpher's PhD advisor George Gamow. Alpher and Herman were able to estimate the temperature of the cosmic microwave background to be 5 K.

Discovery

The first published recognition of the CMB radiation as a detectable phenomenon appeared in a brief paper by Soviet astrophysicists A. G. Doroshkevich and Igor Novikov, in the spring of 1964. In 1964, David Todd Wilkinson and Peter Roll, Robert H. Dicke's colleagues at Princeton University, began constructing a Dicke radiometer to measure the cosmic microwave background. In 1964, Arno Penzias and Robert Woodrow Wilson at the Crawford Hill location of Bell Telephone Laboratories in nearby Holmdel Township, New Jersey had built a Dicke radiometer that they intended to use for radio astronomy and satellite communication experiments. The antenna was constructed in 1959 to support Project Echo—the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's passive communications satellites, which used large Earth orbiting aluminized plastic balloons as reflectors to bounce radio signals from one point on the Earth to another. On 20 May 1964 they made their first measurement clearly showing the presence of the microwave background, with their instrument having an excess 4.2K antenna temperature which they could not account for. After receiving a telephone call from Crawford Hill, Dicke said "Boys, we've been scooped." A meeting between the Princeton and Crawford Hill groups determined that the antenna temperature was indeed due to the microwave background. Penzias and Wilson received the 1978 Nobel Prize in Physics for their discovery.

Cosmic origin

The interpretation of the cosmic microwave background was a controversial issue in the late 1960s. Alternative explanations included energy from within the Solar System, from galaxies, from intergalactic plasma and from multiple extragalactic radio sources. Two requirements would show that the microwave radiation was truly "cosmic". First, the intensity vs frequency or spectrum needed to be shown to match a thermal or blackbody source. This was accomplished by 1968 in a series of measurements of the radiation temperature at higher and lower wavelengths. Second, the radiation needed be shown to be isotropic, the same from all directions. This was also accomplished by 1970, demonstrating that this radiation was truly cosmic in origin.

Progress on theory

In the 1970s numerous studies showed that tiny deviations from isotropy in the CMB could result from events in the early universe. Harrison, Peebles and Yu, and Zel'dovich realized that the early universe would require quantum inhomogeneities that would result in temperature anisotropy at the level of 10⁻⁴ or 10⁻⁵. Rashid Sunyaev, using the alternative name relic radiation, calculated the observable imprint that these inhomogeneities would have on the cosmic microwave background.

COBE

After a lull in the 1970s caused in part by the many experimental difficulties in measuring CMB at high precision,increasingly stringent limits on the anisotropy of the cosmic microwave background were set by ground-based experiments during the 1980s. RELIKT-1, a Soviet cosmic microwave background anisotropy experiment on board the Prognoz 9 satellite (launched 1 July 1983), gave the first upper limits on the large-scale anisotropy.

The other key event in the 1980s was the proposal by Alan Guth for cosmic inflation. This theory of rapid spatial expansion gave an explanation for large-scale isotropy by allowing causal connection just before the epoch of last scattering. With this and similar theories, detailed prediction encouraged larger and more ambitious experiments.

The NASA Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE) satellite orbited Earth in 1989–1996 detected and quantified the large-scale anisotropies at the limit of its detection capabilities. The NASA COBE mission clearly confirmed the primary anisotropy with the Differential Microwave Radiometer instrument, publishing their findings in 1992. The team received the Nobel Prize in physics for 2006 for this discovery.

Precision cosmology

Inspired by the COBE results, a series of ground and balloon-based experiments measured cosmic microwave background anisotropies on smaller angular scales over the two decades. The sensitivity of the new experiments improved dramatically, with a reduction in internal noise by three orders of magnitude. The primary goal of these experiments was to measure the scale of the first acoustic peak, which COBE did not have sufficient resolution to resolve. This peak corresponds to large scale density variations in the early universe that are created by gravitational instabilities, resulting in acoustical oscillations in the plasma. The first peak in the anisotropy was tentatively detected by the MAT/TOCO experiment and the result was confirmed by the BOOMERanG and MAXIMA experiments. These measurements demonstrated that the geometry of the universe is approximately flat, rather than curved. They ruled out cosmic strings as a major component of cosmic structure formation and suggested cosmic inflation was the right theory of structure formation.

Observations after COBE

Comparison of CMB results from COBE, WMAP and Planck
(March 21, 2013)

Inspired by the initial COBE results of an extremely isotropic and homogeneous background, a series of ground- and balloon-based experiments quantified CMB anisotropies on smaller angular scales over the next decade. The primary goal of these experiments was to measure the angular scale of the first acoustic peak, for which COBE did not have sufficient resolution. These measurements were able to rule out cosmic strings as the leading theory of cosmic structure formation, and suggested cosmic inflation was the right theory.

During the 1990s, the first peak was measured with increasing sensitivity and by 2000 the BOOMERanG experiment reported that the highest power fluctuations occur at scales of approximately one angular degree. Together with other cosmological data, these results implied that the geometry of the universe is flat. A number of ground-based interferometers provided measurements of the fluctuations with higher accuracy over the next three years, including the Very Small Array, Degree Angular Scale Interferometer (DASI), and the Cosmic Background Imager (CBI). DASI made the first detection of the polarization of the CMB and the CBI provided the first E-mode polarization spectrum with compelling evidence that it is out of phase with the T-mode spectrum.

Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe

In June 2001, NASA launched a second CMB space mission, WMAP, to make much more precise measurements of the large-scale anisotropies over the full sky. WMAP used symmetric, rapid-multi-modulated scanning, rapid switching radiometers at five frequencies to minimize non-sky signal noise. The data from the mission was released in five installments, the last being the nine-year summary. The results are broadly consistent Lambda CDM models based on 6 free parameters and fitting in to Big Bang cosmology with cosmic inflation.

Degree Angular Scale Interferometer

The Degree Angular Scale Interferometer (DASI) was a telescope installed at the U.S. National Science Foundation's Amundsen–Scott South Pole Station in Antarctica. It was a 13-element interferometer operating between 26 and 36 GHz (Ka band) in ten bands. The instrument is similar in design to the Cosmic Background Imager (CBI) and the Very Small Array (VSA).

In 2001 The DASI team announced the most detailed measurements of the temperature, or power spectrum of the cosmic microwave background (CMB). These results contained the first detection of the 2nd and 3rd acoustic peaks in the CMB, which were important evidence for inflation theory. This announcement was done in conjunction with the BOOMERanG and MAXIMA experiment. In 2002 the team reported the first detection of polarization anisotropies in the CMB.

Atacama Cosmology Telescope

The Atacama Cosmology Telescope (ACT) was a cosmological millimeter-wave telescope located on Cerro Toco in the Atacama Desert in the north of Chile. ACT made high-sensitivity, arcminute resolution, microwave-wavelength surveys of the sky in order to study the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB), the relic radiation left by the Big Bang process. Located 40 km from San Pedro de Atacama, at an altitude of 5,190 metres (17,030 ft), it was one of the highest ground-based telescopes in the world.

Planck Surveyor

A third space mission, the ESA (European Space Agency) Planck Surveyor, was launched in May 2009 and performed an even more detailed investigation until it was shut down in October 2013. Planck employed both HEMT radiometers and bolometer technology and measured the CMB at a smaller scale than WMAP. Its detectors were trialled in the Antarctic Viper telescope as ACBAR (Arcminute Cosmology Bolometer Array Receiver) experiment—which has produced the most precise measurements at small angular scales to date—and in the Archeops balloon telescope.

On 21 March 2013, the European-led research team behind the Planck cosmology probe released the mission's all-sky map (565x318 jpeg, 3600x1800 jpeg) of the cosmic microwave background.The map suggests the universe is slightly older than researchers expected. According to the map, subtle fluctuations in temperature were imprinted on the deep sky when the cosmos was about 370000 years old. The imprint reflects ripples that arose as early, in the existence of the universe, as the first nonillionth (10⁻³⁰) of a second. Apparently, these ripples gave rise to the present vast cosmic web of galaxy clusters and dark matter. Based on the 2013 data, the universe contains 4.9% ordinary matter, 26.8% dark matter and 68.3% dark energy. On 5 February 2015, new data was released by the Planck mission, according to which the age of the universe is 13.799±0.021 billion years old and the Hubble constant was measured to be 67.74±0.46 (km/s)/Mpc.

South Pole Telescope

The South Pole Telescope (SPT) is a 10-metre (390 in) diameter telescope located at the Amundsen–Scott South Pole Station, Antarctica. The telescope is designed for observations in the microwave, millimeter-wave, and submillimeter-wave regions of the electromagnetic spectrum, with the particular design goal of measuring the faint, diffuse emission from the cosmic microwave background (CMB). Key results include a wide and deep survey of discovering hundreds of clusters of galaxies using the Sunyaev–Zel'dovich effect, a sensitive 5 arcminute CMB power spectrum survey, and the first detection of B-mode polarized CMB.

Theoretical models

The cosmic microwave background radiation and the cosmological redshift-distance relation are together regarded as the best available evidence for the Big Bang event. Measurements of the CMB have made the inflationary Big Bang model the Standard Cosmological Model. The discovery of the CMB in the mid-1960s curtailed interest in alternatives such as the steady state theory.

In the Big Bang model for the formation of the universe, inflationary cosmology predicts that after about 10⁻³⁷ seconds the nascent universe underwent exponential growth that smoothed out nearly all irregularities. The remaining irregularities were caused by quantum fluctuations in the inflaton field that caused the inflation event. Long before the formation of stars and planets, the early universe was more compact, much hotter and, starting 10⁻⁶ seconds after the Big Bang, filled with a uniform glow from its white-hot fog of interacting plasma of photons, electrons, and baryons.

As the universe expanded, adiabatic cooling caused the energy density of the plasma to decrease until it became favorable for electrons to combine with protons, forming hydrogen atoms. This recombination event happened when the temperature was around 3000 K or when the universe was approximately 379,000 years old. As photons did not interact with these electrically neutral atoms, the former began to travel freely through space, resulting in the decoupling of matter and radiation.

The color temperature of the ensemble of decoupled photons has continued to diminish ever since; now down to 2.7260±0.0013 K, it will continue to drop as the universe expands. The intensity of the radiation corresponds to black-body radiation at 2.726 K because red-shifted black-body radiation is just like black-body radiation at a lower temperature. According to the Big Bang model, the radiation from the sky we measure today comes from a spherical surface called the surface of last scattering. This represents the set of locations in space at which the decoupling event is estimated to have occurred and at a point in time such that the photons from that distance have just reached observers. Most of the radiation energy in the universe is in the cosmic microwave background, making up a fraction of roughly 6×10⁻⁵ of the total density of the universe.

Two of the greatest successes of the Big Bang theory are its prediction of the almost perfect black body spectrum and its detailed prediction of the anisotropies in the cosmic microwave background. The CMB spectrum has become the most precisely measured black body spectrum in nature.

Predictions based on the Big Bang model

In the late 1940s Alpher and Herman reasoned that if there was a Big Bang, the expansion of the universe would have stretched the high-energy radiation of the very early universe into the microwave region of the electromagnetic spectrum, and down to a temperature of about 5 K. They were slightly off with their estimate, but they had the right idea. They predicted the CMB. It took another 15 years for Penzias and Wilson to discover that the microwave background was actually there.

According to standard cosmology, the CMB gives a snapshot of the hot early universe at the point in time when the temperature dropped enough to allow electrons and protons to form hydrogen atoms. This event made the universe nearly transparent to radiation because light was no longer being scattered off free electrons. When this occurred some 380,000 years after the Big Bang, the temperature of the universe was about 3,000 K. This corresponds to an ambient energy of about 0.26 eV, which is much less than the 13.6 eV ionization energy of hydrogen. This epoch is generally known as the "time of last scattering" or the period of recombination or decoupling.

Since decoupling, the color temperature of the background radiation has dropped by an average factor of 1,089 due to the expansion of the universe. As the universe expands, the CMB photons are redshifted, causing them to decrease in energy. The color temperature of this radiation stays inversely proportional to a parameter that describes the relative expansion of the universe over time, known as the scale length. The color temperature T_r of the CMB as a function of redshift, z, can be shown to be proportional to the color temperature of the CMB as observed in the present day (2.725 K or 0.2348 meV):

T_r = 2.725 K × (1 + z)

The high degree of uniformity throughout the observable universe and its faint but measured anisotropy lend strong support for the Big Bang model in general and the ΛCDM ("Lambda Cold Dark Matter") model in particular. Moreover, the fluctuations are coherent on angular scales that are larger than the apparent cosmological horizon at recombination. Either such coherence is acausally fine-tuned, or cosmic inflation occurred.

Primary anisotropy

The power spectrum of the cosmic microwave background radiation temperature anisotropy in terms of the angular scale (or multipole moment). The data shown comes from the WMAP (2006), Acbar (2004) Boomerang (2005), CBI (2004), and VSA (2004) instruments. Also shown is a theoretical model (solid line).

The anisotropy, or directional dependency, of the cosmic microwave background is divided into two types: primary anisotropy, due to effects that occur at the surface of last scattering and before; and secondary anisotropy, due to effects such as interactions of the background radiation with intervening hot gas or gravitational potentials, which occur between the last scattering surface and the observer.

The structure of the cosmic microwave background anisotropies is principally determined by two effects: acoustic oscillations and diffusion damping (also called collisionless damping or Silk damping). The acoustic oscillations arise because of a conflict in the photon–baryon plasma in the early universe. The pressure of the photons tends to erase anisotropies, whereas the gravitational attraction of the baryons, moving at speeds much slower than light, makes them tend to collapse to form overdensities. These two effects compete to create acoustic oscillations, which give the microwave background its characteristic peak structure. The peaks correspond, roughly, to resonances in which the photons decouple when a particular mode is at its peak amplitude.

The peaks contain interesting physical signatures. The angular scale of the first peak determines the curvature of the universe (but not the topology of the universe). The next peak—ratio of the odd peaks to the even peaks—determines the reduced baryon density. The third peak can be used to get information about the dark-matter density.

The locations of the peaks give important information about the nature of the primordial density perturbations. There are two fundamental types of density perturbations called adiabatic and isocurvature. A general density perturbation is a mixture of both, and different theories that purport to explain the primordial density perturbation spectrum predict different mixtures.

Adiabatic density perturbations: In an adiabatic density perturbation, the fractional additional number density of each type of particle (baryons, photons, etc.) is the same. That is, if at one place there is a 1% higher number density of baryons than average, then at that place there is a 1% higher number density of photons (and a 1% higher number density in neutrinos) than average. Cosmic inflation predicts that the primordial perturbations are adiabatic.
Isocurvature density perturbations: In an isocurvature density perturbation, the sum (over different types of particle) of the fractional additional densities is zero. That is, a perturbation where at some spot there is 1% more energy in baryons than average, 1% more energy in photons than average, and 2% less energy in neutrinos than average, would be a pure isocurvature perturbation. Hypothetical cosmic strings would produce mostly isocurvature primordial perturbations.

The CMB spectrum can distinguish between these two because these two types of perturbations produce different peak locations. Isocurvature density perturbations produce a series of peaks whose angular scales (ℓ values of the peaks) are roughly in the ratio 1 : 3 : 5 : ..., while adiabatic density perturbations produce peaks whose locations are in the ratio 1 : 2 : 3 : ... Observations are consistent with the primordial density perturbations being entirely adiabatic, providing key support for inflation, and ruling out many models of structure formation involving, for example, cosmic strings.

Collisionless damping is caused by two effects, when the treatment of the primordial plasma as fluid begins to break down:

the increasing mean free path of the photons as the primordial plasma becomes increasingly rarefied in an expanding universe,
the finite depth of the last scattering surface (LSS), which causes the mean free path to increase rapidly during decoupling, even while some Compton scattering is still occurring.

These effects contribute about equally to the suppression of anisotropies at small scales and give rise to the characteristic exponential damping tail seen in the very small angular scale anisotropies.

The depth of the LSS refers to the fact that the decoupling of the photons and baryons does not happen instantaneously, but instead requires an appreciable fraction of the age of the universe up to that era. One method of quantifying how long this process took uses the photon visibility function (PVF). This function is defined so that, denoting the PVF by P(t), the probability that a CMB photon last scattered between time t and t + dt is given by P(t) dt.

The maximum of the PVF (the time when it is most likely that a given CMB photon last scattered) is known quite precisely. The first-year WMAP results put the time at which P(t) has a maximum as 372,000 years. This is often taken as the "time" at which the CMB formed. However, to figure out how long it took the photons and baryons to decouple, we need a measure of the width of the PVF. The WMAP team finds that the PVF is greater than half of its maximal value (the "full width at half maximum", or FWHM) over an interval of 115,000 years. By this measure, decoupling took place over roughly 115,000 years, and thus when it was complete, the universe was roughly 487,000 years old.

Late time anisotropy

Since the CMB came into existence, it has apparently been modified by several subsequent physical processes, which are collectively referred to as late-time anisotropy, or secondary anisotropy. When the CMB photons became free to travel unimpeded, ordinary matter in the universe was mostly in the form of neutral hydrogen and helium atoms. However, observations of galaxies today seem to indicate that most of the volume of the intergalactic medium (IGM) consists of ionized material (since there are few absorption lines due to hydrogen atoms). This implies a period of reionization during which some of the material of the universe was broken into hydrogen ions.

The CMB photons are scattered by free charges such as electrons that are not bound in atoms. In an ionized universe, such charged particles have been liberated from neutral atoms by ionizing (ultraviolet) radiation. Today these free charges are at sufficiently low density in most of the volume of the universe that they do not measurably affect the CMB. However, if the IGM was ionized at very early times when the universe was still denser, then there are two main effects on the CMB:

Small scale anisotropies are erased. (Just as when looking at an object through fog, details of the object appear fuzzy.)
The physics of how photons are scattered by free electrons (Thomson scattering) induces polarization anisotropies on large angular scales. This broad angle polarization is correlated with the broad angle temperature perturbation.

Both of these effects have been observed by the WMAP spacecraft, providing evidence that the universe was ionized at very early times, at a redshift around 10. The detailed provenance of this early ionizing radiation is still a matter of scientific debate. It may have included starlight from the very first population of stars (population III stars), supernovae when these first stars reached the end of their lives, or the ionizing radiation produced by the accretion disks of massive black holes.

The time following the emission of the cosmic microwave background—and before the observation of the first stars—is semi-humorously referred to by cosmologists as the Dark Age, and is a period which is under intense study by astronomers (see 21 centimeter radiation).

Two other effects which occurred between reionization and our observations of the cosmic microwave background, and which appear to cause anisotropies, are the Sunyaev–Zel'dovich effect, where a cloud of high-energy electrons scatters the radiation, transferring some of its energy to the CMB photons, and the Sachs–Wolfe effect, which causes photons from the Cosmic Microwave Background to be gravitationally redshifted or blueshifted due to changing gravitational fields.

Alternative theories

The standard cosmology that includes the Big Bang "enjoys considerable popularity among the practicing cosmologists" However, there are challenges to the standard big bang framework for explaining CMB data. In particular standard cosmology requires fine-tuning of some free parameters, with different values supported by different experimental data. As an example of the fine-tuning issue, standard cosmology cannot predict the present temperature of the relic radiation, $T_{0}$ . This value of $T_{0}$ is one of the best results of experimental cosmology and the steady state model can predict it. However, alternative models have their own set of problems and they have only made post-facto explanations of existing observations. Nevertheless, these alternatives have played an important historic role in providing ideas for and challenges to the standard explanation.

Polarization

The cosmic microwave background is polarized at the level of a few microkelvin. There are two types of polarization, called E-mode (or gradient-mode) and B-mode (or curl mode). This is in analogy to electrostatics, in which the electric field (E-field) has a vanishing curl and the magnetic field (B-field) has a vanishing divergence.

E-modes

The E-modes arise from Thomson scattering in a heterogeneous plasma. E-modes were first seen in 2002 by the Degree Angular Scale Interferometer (DASI).

B-modes

B-modes are expected to be an order of magnitude weaker than the E-modes. The former are not produced by standard scalar type perturbations, but are generated by gravitational waves during cosmic inflation shortly after the big bang. However, gravitational lensing of the stronger E-modes can also produce B-mode polarization. Detecting the original B-modes signal requires analysis of the contamination caused by lensing of the relatively strong E-mode signal.

Primordial gravitational waves

Models of "slow-roll" cosmic inflation in the early universe predicts primordial gravitational waves that would impact the polarisation of the cosmic microwave background, creating a specific pattern of B-mode polarization. Detection of this pattern would support the theory of inflation and their strength can confirm and exclude different models of inflation. While claims that this characteristic pattern of B-mode polarization had been measured by BICEP2 instrument were later attributed to cosmic dust due to new results of the Planck experiment, subsequent reanalysis with compensation for foreground dust show limits in agreement with results from Lambda-CDM models.

Gravitational lensing

The second type of B-modes was discovered in 2013 using the South Pole Telescope with help from the Herschel Space Observatory. In October 2014, a measurement of the B-mode polarization at 150 GHz was published by the POLARBEAR experiment. Compared to BICEP2, POLARBEAR focuses on a smaller patch of the sky and is less susceptible to dust effects. The team reported that POLARBEAR's measured B-mode polarization was of cosmological origin (and not just due to dust) at a 97.2% confidence level.

Multipole analysis

The CMB angular anisotropies are usually presented in terms of power per multipole. The map of temperature across the sky, $T (θ, φ),$ is written as coefficients of spherical harmonics, $T (θ, φ) = \sum_{ℓ m} a_{ℓ m} Y_{ℓ m} (θ, φ)$ where the $a_{ℓ m}$ term measures the strength of the angular oscillation in $Y_{ℓ m} (θ, φ)$ , and ℓ is the multipole number while m is the azimuthal number. The azimuthal variation is not significant and is removed by applying the angular correlation function, giving power spectrum term $C_{ℓ} \equiv ⟨ | a_{ℓ m} |^{2} ⟩ .$ Increasing values of ℓ correspond to higher multipole moments of CMB, meaning more rapid variation with angle.

CMBR monopole term (ℓ = 0)

The monopole term, ℓ = 0, is the constant isotropic mean temperature of the CMB, T_γ = 2.7255±0.0006 K with one standard deviation confidence. This term must be measured with absolute temperature devices, such as the FIRAS instrument on the COBE satellite.

CMBR dipole anisotropy (ℓ = 1)

CMB dipole represents the largest anisotropy, which is in the first spherical harmonic (ℓ = 1), a cosine function. The amplitude of CMB dipole is around 3.3621±0.0010 mK. The CMB dipole moment is interpreted as the peculiar motion of the Earth relative to the CMB. Its amplitude depends on the time due to the Earth's orbit about the barycenter of the solar system. This enables us to add a time-dependent term to the dipole expression. The modulation of this term is 1 year, which fits the observation done by COBE FIRAS. The dipole moment does not encode any primordial information.

From the CMB data, it is seen that the Sun appears to be moving at 369.82±0.11 km/s relative to the reference frame of the CMB (also called the CMB rest frame, or the frame of reference in which there is no motion through the CMB). The Local Group — the galaxy group that includes our own Milky Way galaxy — appears to be moving at 620±15 km/s in the direction of galactic longitude ℓ = 271.9°±2°, b = 30°±3°. The dipole is now used to calibrate mapping studies.

Multipole (ℓ ≥ 2)

The temperature variation in the CMB temperature maps at higher multipoles, or ℓ ≥ 2, is considered to be the result of perturbations of the density in the early Universe, before the recombination epoch at a redshift of around z ⋍ 1100. Before recombination, the Universe consisted of a hot, dense plasma of electrons and baryons. In such a hot dense environment, electrons and protons could not form any neutral atoms. The baryons in such early Universe remained highly ionized and so were tightly coupled with photons through the effect of Thompson scattering. These phenomena caused the pressure and gravitational effects to act against each other, and triggered fluctuations in the photon-baryon plasma. Quickly after the recombination epoch, the rapid expansion of the universe caused the plasma to cool down and these fluctuations are "frozen into" the CMB maps we observe today.

Anomalies

With the increasingly precise data provided by WMAP, there have been a number of claims that the CMB exhibits anomalies, such as very large scale anisotropies, anomalous alignments, and non-Gaussian distributions. The most longstanding of these is the low-ℓ multipole controversy. Even in the COBE map, it was observed that the quadrupole (ℓ = 2, spherical harmonic) has a low amplitude compared to the predictions of the Big Bang. In particular, the quadrupole and octupole (ℓ = 3) modes appear to have an unexplained alignment with each other and with both the ecliptic plane and equinoxes. A number of groups have suggested that this could be the signature of quantum corrections or new physics at the greatest observable scales; other groups suspect systematic errors in the data.

Ultimately, due to the foregrounds and the cosmic variance problem, the greatest modes will never be as well measured as the small angular scale modes. The analyses were performed on two maps that have had the foregrounds removed as far as possible: the "internal linear combination" map of the WMAP collaboration and a similar map prepared by Max Tegmark and others. Later analyses have pointed out that these are the modes most susceptible to foreground contamination from synchrotron, dust, and bremsstrahlung emission, and from experimental uncertainty in the monopole and dipole.

A full Bayesian analysis of the WMAP power spectrum demonstrates that the quadrupole prediction of Lambda-CDM cosmology is consistent with the data at the 10% level and that the observed octupole is not remarkable. Carefully accounting for the procedure used to remove the foregrounds from the full sky map further reduces the significance of the alignment by ~5%. Recent observations with the Planck telescope, which is very much more sensitive than WMAP and has a larger angular resolution, record the same anomaly, and so instrumental error (but not foreground contamination) appears to be ruled out. Coincidence is a possible explanation, chief scientist from WMAP, Charles L. Bennett suggested coincidence and human psychology were involved, "I do think there is a bit of a psychological effect; people want to find unusual things."

Measurements of the density of quasars based on Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer data finds a dipole significantly different from the one extracted from the CMB anisotropy. This difference is conflict with the cosmological principle.

Future evolution

Assuming the universe keeps expanding and it does not suffer a Big Crunch, a Big Rip, or another similar fate, the cosmic microwave background will continue redshifting until it will no longer be detectable, and will be superseded first by the one produced by starlight, and perhaps, later by the background radiation fields of processes that may take place in the far future of the universe such as proton decay, evaporation of black holes, and positronium decay.

Timeline of prediction, discovery and interpretation

Thermal (non-microwave background) temperature predictions

1896 – Charles Édouard Guillaume estimates the "radiation of the stars" to be 5–6 K.
1926 – Sir Arthur Eddington estimates the non-thermal radiation of starlight in the galaxy "... by the formula E = σT⁴ the effective temperature corresponding to this density is 3.18° absolute ... black body".
1930s – Cosmologist Erich Regener calculates that the non-thermal spectrum of cosmic rays in the galaxy has an effective temperature of 2.8 K.
1931 – Term microwave first used in print: "When trials with wavelengths as low as 18 cm. were made known, there was undisguised surprise+that the problem of the micro-wave had been solved so soon." Telegraph & Telephone Journal XVII. 179/1
1934 – Richard Tolman shows that black-body radiation in an expanding universe cools but remains thermal.
1946 – Robert Dicke predicts "... radiation from cosmic matter" at < 20 K, but did not refer to background radiation.
1946 – George Gamow calculates a temperature of 50 K (assuming a 3-billion year old universe), commenting it "... is in reasonable agreement with the actual temperature of interstellar space", but does not mention background radiation.
1953 – Erwin Finlay-Freundlich in support of his tired light theory, derives a blackbody temperature for intergalactic space of 2.3 K and in the following year values of 1.9K and 6.0K.

Microwave background radiation predictions and measurements

1941 – Andrew McKellar detected a "rotational" temperature of 2.3 K for the interstellar medium by comparing the population of CN doublet lines measured by W. S. Adams in a B star.
1948 – Ralph Alpher and Robert Herman estimate "the temperature in the universe" at 5 K. Although they do not specifically mention microwave background radiation, it may be inferred.
1953 – George Gamow estimates 7 K based on a model that does not rely on a free parameter
1955 – Émile Le Roux of the Nançay Radio Observatory, in a sky survey at λ = 33 cm, initially reported a near-isotropic background radiation of 3 kelvins, plus or minus 2; he did not recognize the cosmological significance and later revised the error bars to 20K.
1957 – Tigran Shmaonov reports that "the absolute effective temperature of the radioemission background ... is 4±3 K". with radiation intensity was independent of either time or direction of observation. Although Shamonov did not recognize it at the time, it is now clear that Shmaonov did observe the cosmic microwave background at a wavelength of 3.2 cm
1964 – A. G. Doroshkevich and Igor Dmitrievich Novikov publish a brief paper suggesting microwave searches for the black-body radiation predicted by Gamow, Alpher, and Herman, where they name the CMB radiation phenomenon as detectable.
1964–65 – Arno Penzias and Robert Woodrow Wilson measure the temperature to be approximately 3 K. Robert Dicke, James Peebles, P. G. Roll, and D. T. Wilkinson interpret this radiation as a signature of the Big Bang.
1966 – Rainer K. Sachs and Arthur M. Wolfe theoretically predict microwave background fluctuation amplitudes created by gravitational potential variations between observers and the last scattering surface (see Sachs–Wolfe effect).
1968 – Martin Rees and Dennis Sciama theoretically predict microwave background fluctuation amplitudes created by photons traversing time-dependent wells of potential.
1969 – R. A. Sunyaev and Yakov Zel'dovich study the inverse Compton scattering of microwave background photons by hot electrons (see Sunyaev–Zel'dovich effect).
1983 – Researchers from the Cambridge Radio Astronomy Group and the Owens Valley Radio Observatory first detect the Sunyaev–Zel'dovich effect from clusters of galaxies.
1983 – RELIKT-1 Soviet CMB anisotropy experiment was launched.
1990 – FIRAS on the Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE) satellite measures the black body form of the CMB spectrum with exquisite precision, and shows that the microwave background has a nearly perfect black-body spectrum with T = 2.73 K and thereby strongly constrains the density of the intergalactic medium.
January 1992 – Scientists that analysed data from the RELIKT-1 report the discovery of anisotropy in the cosmic microwave background at the Moscow astrophysical seminar.
1992 – Scientists that analysed data from COBE DMR report the discovery of anisotropy in the cosmic microwave background.
1995 – The Cosmic Anisotropy Telescope performs the first high resolution observations of the cosmic microwave background.
1999 – First measurements of acoustic oscillations in the CMB anisotropy angular power spectrum from the MAT/TOCO, BOOMERANG, and Maxima Experiments. The BOOMERanG experiment makes higher quality maps at intermediate resolution, and confirms that the universe is "flat".
2002 – Polarization discovered by DASI.
2003 – E-mode polarization spectrum obtained by the CBI. The CBI and the Very Small Array produces yet higher quality maps at high resolution (covering small areas of the sky).
2003 – The Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe spacecraft produces an even higher quality map at low and intermediate resolution of the whole sky (WMAP provides no high-resolution data, but improves on the intermediate resolution maps from BOOMERanG).
2004 – E-mode polarization spectrum obtained by the CBI.
2004 – The Arcminute Cosmology Bolometer Array Receiver produces a higher quality map of the high resolution structure not mapped by WMAP.
2005 – The Arcminute Microkelvin Imager and the Sunyaev–Zel'dovich Array begin the first surveys for very high redshift clusters of galaxies using the Sunyaev–Zel'dovich effect.
2005 – Ralph A. Alpher is awarded the National Medal of Science for his groundbreaking work in nucleosynthesis and prediction that the universe expansion leaves behind background radiation, thus providing a model for the Big Bang theory.
2006 – The long-awaited three-year WMAP results are released, confirming previous analysis, correcting several points, and including polarization data.
2006 – Two of COBE's principal investigators, George Smoot and John Mather, received the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2006 for their work on precision measurement of the CMBR.
2006–2011 – Improved measurements from WMAP, new supernova surveys ESSENCE and SNLS, and baryon acoustic oscillations from SDSS and WiggleZ, continue to be consistent with the standard Lambda-CDM model.
2010 – The first all-sky map from the Planck telescope is released.
2013 – An improved all-sky map from the Planck telescope is released, improving the measurements of WMAP and extending them to much smaller scales.
2014 – On March 17, 2014, astrophysicists of the BICEP2 collaboration announced the detection of inflationary gravitational waves in the B-mode power spectrum, which if confirmed, would provide clear experimental evidence for the theory of inflation.However, on 19 June 2014, lowered confidence in confirming the cosmic inflation findings was reported.
2015 – On January 30, 2015, the same team of astronomers from BICEP2 withdrew the claim made on the previous year. Based on the combined data of BICEP2 and Planck, the European Space Agency announced that the signal can be entirely attributed to dust in the Milky Way.
2018 – The final data and maps from the Planck telescope is released, with improved measurements of the polarization on large scales.
2019 – Planck telescope analyses of their final 2018 data continue to be released.

In popular culture

In the Stargate Universe TV series (2009–2011), an ancient spaceship, Destiny, was built to study patterns in the CMBR which is a sentient message left over from the beginning of time.

In Wheelers, a novel (2000) by Ian Stewart & Jack Cohen, CMBR is explained as the encrypted transmissions of an ancient civilization. This allows the Jovian "blimps" to have a society older than the currently-observed age of the universe.

In The Three-Body Problem, a 2008 novel by Liu Cixin, a probe from an alien civilization compromises instruments monitoring the CMBR in order to deceive a character into believing the civilization has the power to manipulate the CMBR itself.

The 2017 issue of the Swiss 20 francs bill lists several astronomical objects with their distances – the CMB is mentioned with 430 · 10¹⁵ light-seconds.

In the 2021 Marvel series WandaVision, a mysterious television broadcast is discovered within the Cosmic Microwave Background.

Last universal common ancestor

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The last universal common ancestor (LUCA) is the hypothesized common ancestral cell population from which all subsequent life forms descend, including Bacteria, Archaea, and Eukarya. The cell had a lipid bilayer; it possessed the genetic code and ribosomes which translated from DNA or RNA to proteins. Although the timing of the LUCA cannot be definitively constrained, most studies suggest that the LUCA existed by 3.5 billion years ago, and possibly as early as 4.3 billion years ago or earlier. The nature of this point or stage of divergence remains a topic of research.

All earlier forms of life preceding this divergence and all extant organisms are generally thought to share common ancestry. On the basis of a formal statistical test, this theory of a universal common ancestry (UCA) is supported in preference to competing multiple-ancestry hypotheses. The first universal common ancestor (FUCA) is a hypothetical non-cellular ancestor to LUCA and other now-extinct sister lineages.

Whether the genesis of viruses falls before or after the LUCA–as well as the diversity of extant viruses and their hosts–remains a subject of investigation.

While no fossil evidence of the LUCA exists, the detailed biochemical similarity of all current life (divided into the three domains) makes its existence widely accepted by biochemists. Its characteristics can be inferred from shared features of modern genomes. These genes describe a complex life form with many co-adapted features, including transcription and translation mechanisms to convert information from DNA to mRNA to proteins.

Historical background

A phylogenetic tree directly portrays the idea of evolution by descent from a single ancestor. An early tree of life was sketched by Jean-Baptiste Lamarck in his Philosophie zoologique in 1809. Charles Darwin more famously proposed the theory of universal common descent through an evolutionary process in his book On the Origin of Species in 1859: "Therefore I should infer from analogy that probably all the organic beings which have ever lived on this earth have descended from some one primordial form, into which life was first breathed." The last sentence of the book begins with a restatement of the hypothesis:

There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one ...

By 1871, in another letter to Hooker, Darwin speculated on the natural origin of life itself, writing that life might have begun in a "warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity, etc., present," an early expression of abiogenesis.

The term "last universal common ancestor" or "LUCA" was first used in the 1990s for such a primordial organism.

Inferring LUCA's features

Biochemical mechanisms

While the anatomy of the LUCA cannot be reconstructed with certainty, its biochemical mechanisms can be deduced and described in some detail, based on properties shared by currently living organisms as well as genetic analysis.

The LUCA certainly had genes and a genetic code. Its genetic material was most likely DNA, so that it lived after the RNA world. The DNA was kept double-stranded by an enzyme, DNA polymerase, which recognises the structure and directionality of DNA. The integrity of the DNA was maintained by a group of repair enzymes including DNA topoisomerase. If the genetic code was based on dual-stranded DNA, it was expressed by copying the information to single-stranded RNA. The RNA was produced by a DNA-dependent RNA polymerase using nucleotides similar to those of DNA. It had multiple DNA-binding proteins, such as histone-fold proteins. The genetic code was expressed into proteins. These were assembled from 20 free amino acids by translation of a messenger RNA via a mechanism of ribosomes, transfer RNAs, and a group of related proteins.

Although LUCA was likely not capable of sexual interaction, gene functions were present that promoted the transfer of DNA between individuals of the population to facilitate genetic recombination. Homologous gene products that promote genetic recombination are present in bacteria, archaea and eukaryota, such as the RecA protein in bacteria, the RadA protein in archaea, and the Rad51 and Dmc1 proteins in eukaryota.

The functionality of LUCA as well as evidence for the early evolution of membrane-dependent biological systems together suggest that LUCA had cellularity and cell membranes. As for the cell's structure, it contained a water-based cytoplasm effectively enclosed by a lipid bilayer membrane; it was capable of reproducing by cell division. It tended to exclude sodium and concentrate potassium by means of specific ion transporters (or ion pumps). The cell multiplied by duplicating all its contents followed by cellular division. The cell used chemiosmosis to produce energy. It also reduced CO₂ and oxidized H₂ (methanogenesis or acetogenesis) via acetyl-thioesters.

By phylogenetic bracketing, analysis of the presumed LUCA's offspring groups, LUCA appears to have been a small, single-celled organism. It likely had a ring-shaped coil of DNA floating freely within the cell. Morphologically, it would likely not have stood out within a mixed population of small modern-day bacteria. The originator of the three-domain system, Carl Woese, stated that in its genetic machinery, the LUCA would have been a "simpler, more rudimentary entity than the individual ancestors that spawned the three [domains] (and their descendants)".

Because both bacteria and archaea have differences in the structure of phospholipids and cell wall, ion pumping, most proteins involved in DNA replication, and glycolysis, it is inferred that LUCA had a permeable membrane without an ion pump. The emergence of Na⁺/H⁺ antiporters likely led to the evolution of impermeable membranes present in eukaryotes, archaea, and bacteria. It is stated that "The late and independent evolution of glycolysis but not gluconeogenesis is entirely consistent with LUCA being powered by natural proton gradients across leaky membranes. Several discordant traits are likely to be linked to the late evolution of cell membranes, notably the cell wall, whose synthesis depends on the membrane and DNA replication". Although LUCA likely had DNA, it is unknown if it could replicate DNA and is suggested that it "might just have been a chemically stable repository for RNA-based replication". It is likely that the permeable membrane of LUCA was composed of archaeal lipids (isoprenoids) and bacterial lipids (fatty acids). Isoprenoids would have enhanced stabilization of LUCA's membrane in the surrounding extreme habitat. Nick Lane and coauthors state that "The advantages and disadvantages of incorporating isoprenoids into cell membranes in different microenvironments may have driven membrane divergence, with the later biosynthesis of phospholipids giving rise to the unique G1P and G3P headgroups of archaea and bacteria respectively. If so, the properties conferred by membrane isoprenoids place the lipid divide as early as the origin of life".

A 2024 study suggests that LUCA's genome was similar in size to that of modern prokaryotes, coding for some 2,600 proteins; that it respired anaerobically, and was an acetogen; and that it had an early CAS-based anti-viral immune system.

An anaerobic thermophile

A direct way to infer LUCA's genome would be to find genes common to all surviving descendants, but little can be learnt by this approach, as there are only about 30 such genes. They are mostly for ribosome proteins, proving that LUCA had the genetic code. Many other LUCA genes have been lost in later lineages over 4 billion years of evolution.

Three ways to infer genes present in LUCA: universal presence, presence in both the Bacterial and Archaean domains, and presence in two phyla in both domains. The first yields as stated only about 30 genes; the second, some 11,000 with lateral gene transfer (LGT) very likely; the third, 355 genes probably in LUCA, since they were found in at least two phyla in both domains, making LGT an unlikely explanation.

An alternative to the search for "universal" traits is to use genome analysis to identify phylogenetically ancient genes. This gives a picture of a LUCA that could live in a geochemically harsh environment and is like modern prokaryotes. Analysis of biochemical pathways implies the same sort of chemistry as does phylogenetic analysis.

In 2016, Madeline C. Weiss and colleagues genetically analyzed 6.1 million protein-coding genes and 286,514 protein clusters from sequenced prokaryotic genomes representing many phylogenetic trees, and identified 355 protein clusters that were probably common to the LUCA. The results of their analysis are highly specific, though debated. They depict LUCA as "anaerobic, CO₂-fixing, H₂-dependent with a Wood–Ljungdahl pathway (the reductive acetyl-coenzyme A pathway), N₂-fixing and thermophilic. LUCA's biochemistry was replete with FeS clusters and radical reaction mechanisms." The cofactors also reveal "dependence upon transition metals, flavins, S-adenosyl methionine, coenzyme A, ferredoxin, molybdopterin, corrins and selenium. Its genetic code required nucleoside modifications and S-adenosylmethionine-dependent methylations." They show that methanogens and clostridia were basal, near the root of the phylogenetic tree, in the 355 protein lineages examined, and that the LUCA may therefore have inhabited an anaerobic hydrothermal vent setting in a geochemically active environment rich in H₂, CO₂, and iron, where ocean water interacted with hot magma beneath the ocean floor. It is even inferred that LUCA also grew from H₂ and CO₂ via the reverse incomplete Krebs cycle. Other metabolic pathways inferred in LUCA are the pentose phosphate pathway, glycolysis, and gluconeogenesis. Even if phylogenetic evidence may point to a hydrothermal vent environment for a thermophilic LUCA, this does not constitute evidence that the origin of life took place at a hydrothermal vent since mass extinctions may have removed previously existing branches of life.

Weiss and colleagues write that "Experiments ... demonstrate that ... acetyl-CoA pathway [chemicals used in anaerobic respiration] formate, methanol, acetyl moieties, and even pyruvate arise spontaneously ... from CO₂, native metals, and water", a combination present in hydrothermal vents.

An experiment shows that Zn²⁺, Cr³⁺, and Fe can promote 6 of the 11 reactions of an ancient anabolic pathway called the reverse Krebs cycle in acidic conditions which implies that LUCA might have inhabited either hydrothermal vents or acidic metal-rich hydrothermal fields.

Undersampled protein families

Some other researchers have challenged Weiss et al.'s 2016 conclusions. Sarah Berkemer and Shawn McGlynn argue that Weiss et al. undersampled the families of proteins, so that the phylogenetic trees were not complete and failed to describe the evolution of proteins correctly. There are two risks in attempting to attribute LUCA's environment from near-universal gene distribution (as in Weiss et al. 2016). On the one hand, it risks misattributing convergence or horizontal gene transfer events to vertical descent; on the other hand, it risks misattributing potential LUCA gene families as horizontal gene transfer events. A phylogenomic and geochemical analysis of a set of proteins that probably traced to the LUCA show that it had K⁺-dependent GTPases and the ionic composition and concentration of its intracellular fluid was seemingly high K⁺/Na⁺ ratio, NH⁺
₄, Fe²⁺, CO²⁺, Ni²⁺, Mg²⁺, Mn²⁺, Zn²⁺, pyrophosphate, and PO³⁻
₄ which would imply a terrestrial hot spring habitat. It possibly had a phosphate-based metabolism. Further, these proteins were unrelated to autotrophy (the ability of an organism to create its own organic matter), suggesting that the LUCA had a Heterotrophic lifestyle (consuming organic matter) and that its growth was dependent on organic matter produced by the physical environment.

The presence of the energy-handling enzymes CODH/acetyl-coenzyme A synthase in LUCA could be compatible not only with being an autotroph but also with life as a mixotroph or heterotroph. Weiss et al. in 2018 replied that no enzyme defines a trophic lifestyle, and that heterotrophs evolved from autotrophs.

A 2024 study directly estimated the order in which amino acids were added into the genetic code from early protein domain sequences. A total of 969 protein domains were classified as present in LUCA, including 101 domain sequences that dated back to the even-older pre-LUCA communities. 88% of the protein domains annotated as LUCA or pre-LUCA were confirmed by Moody et al. 2024, by being associated with proteins that are more than 50% likely to be present in LUCA. It found that amino acids that bind metals, and those that contain sulphur, came early in the genetic code. The study suggests that sulphur metabolism and catalysis involving metals were important elements of life at the time of LUCA.

Possibly a mesophile

Several lines of evidence suggest that LUCA was non-thermophilic. The content of G + C nucleotide pairs (compared to the occurrence of A + T pairs) can indicate an organism's thermal optimum as they are more thermally stable due to an additional hydrogen bond. As a result, they occur more frequently in the rRNA of thermophiles; however, this is not seen in LUCA's reconstructed rRNA.

The identification of thermophilic genes in the LUCA has been challenged, as they may instead represent genes that evolved later in archaea or bacteria, then migrated between these via horizontal gene transfer, as in Woese's 1998 hypothesis. For instance, the thermophile-specific topoisomerase, reverse gyrase, was initially attributed to LUCA before an exhaustive phylogenetic study revealed a more recent origin of this enzyme followed by extensive horizontal gene transfer. LUCA could have been a mesophile that fixed CO₂ and relied on H₂, and lived close to hydrothermal vents.

Further evidence that LUCA was mesophilic comes from the amino acid composition of its proteins. The abundance of I, V, Y, W, R, E, and L amino acids (denoted IVYWREL) in an organism's proteins is correlated with its optimal growth temperature. According to phylogenetic analysis, the IVYWREL content of LUCA's proteins suggests its ideal temperature was below 50°C.

Evidence that bacteria and archaea both independently underwent phases of increased and subsequently decreased thermo-tolerance suggests a dramatic post-LUCA climate shift that affected both populations, and would explain the seeming genetic pervasiveness of thermo-tolerant genetics.

Age

Studies from 2000 to 2018 have suggested an increasingly ancient time for the LUCA. In 2000, estimates of the LUCA's age ranged from 3.8 to 3.5 bya (billion years ago) in the Paleoarchean, a few hundred million years before the earliest fossil evidence of life, for which candidates range in age from 4.28 to 3.48 bya. This placed the origin of the first forms of life shortly after the Late Heavy Bombardment which was thought to have repeatedly sterilized Earth's surface. However, a 2018 study by Holly Betts and colleagues applied a molecular clock model to the genomic and fossil record (102 species, 29 common protein-coding genes, mostly ribosomal), concluding that LUCA preceded the Late Heavy Bombardment (making the LUCA over 3.9 bya). A 2022 study suggested an age of around 4.2–3.6 bya for the LUCA. A 2024 study suggested that the LUCA lived around 4.2 bya (with a confidence interval of 4.33–4.09 bya).

Root of the tree of life

In 1990, a novel concept of the tree of life was presented, dividing the living world into three stems, classified as the domains Bacteria, Archaea, Eukarya. It is the first tree founded exclusively on molecular phylogenetics, and which includes the evolution of microorganisms. It has been called a "universal phylogenetic tree in rooted form". This tree and its rooting became the subject of debate.

In the meantime, numerous modifications of this tree, mainly concerning the role and importance of horizontal gene transfer for its rooting and early ramifications have been suggested (e.g.). Since heredity occurs both vertically and horizontally, the tree of life may have been more weblike or netlike in its early phase and more treelike when it grew three-stemmed. Presumably horizontal gene transfer has decreased with growing cell stability.

A modified version of the tree, based on several molecular studies, has its root between a monophyletic domain Bacteria and a clade formed by Archaea and Eukaryota. A small minority of studies place the root in the domain bacteria, in the phylum Bacillota, or state that the phylum Chloroflexota (formerly Chloroflexi) is basal to a clade with Archaea and Eukaryotes and the rest of bacteria (as proposed by Thomas Cavalier-Smith). Metagenomic analyses recover a two-domain system with the domains Archaea and Bacteria; in this view of the tree of life, Eukaryotes are derived from Archaea.With the later gene pool of LUCA's descendants, sharing a common framework of the AT/GC rule and the standard twenty amino acids, horizontal gene transfer would have become feasible and could have been common.

The nature of LUCA remains disputed. In 1994, on the basis of primordial metabolism (as discussed by Wächtershäuser), Otto Kandler proposed a successive divergence of the three domains of life from a multiphenotypical population of pre-cells, reached by gradual evolutionary improvements (cellularization). The phenotypically diverse pre-cells of this population were metabolising, self-reproducing entities exhibiting frequent mutual exchange of genetic information. Thus, in this scenario there was no "first cell". It may explain the unity and, at the same time, the partition into three lines (the three domains) of life. Kandler's pre-cell theory is supported by Wächtershäuser. In 1998, Carl Woese, based on the RNA world concept, proposed that no individual organism could be considered a LUCA, and that the genetic heritage of all modern organisms derived through horizontal gene transfer among an ancient community of organisms. Other authors concur that there was a "complex collective genome" at the time of the LUCA, and that horizontal gene transfer was important in the evolution of later groups; Nicolas Glansdorff states that LUCA "was in a metabolically and morphologically heterogeneous community, constantly shuffling around genetic material" and "remained an evolutionary entity, though loosely defined and constantly changing, as long as this promiscuity lasted."

The theory of a universal common ancestry of life is widely accepted. In 2010, based on "the vast array of molecular sequences now available from all domains of life," D. L. Theobald published a "formal test" of universal common ancestry (UCA). This deals with the common descent of all extant terrestrial organisms, each being a genealogical descendant of a single species from the distant past. His formal test favoured the existence of a universal common ancestry over a wide class of alternative hypotheses that included horizontal gene transfer. Basic biochemical principles imply that all organisms do have a common ancestry.

A proposed non-cellular ancestor to LUCA is the First universal common ancestor (FUCA).FUCA would therefore be the ancestor to every modern cell as well as to ancient, now-extinct cellular lineages not descending from LUCA. FUCA is assumed to have had descendants other than LUCA, none of which have modern descendants. Some genes of these ancient now-extinct cell lineages are thought to have been horizontally transferred into the genome of early descendants of LUCA.

LUCA and viruses

The origin of viruses remains disputed. Since viruses need host cells for their replication, it is likely that they emerged after the formation of cells. Viruses may even have multiple origins and different types of viruses may have evolved independently over the history of life. There are different hypotheses for the origins of viruses, for instance an early viral origin from the RNA world or a later viral origin from selfish DNA.

Based on how viruses are currently distributed across the bacteria and archaea, the LUCA is suspected of having been prey to multiple viruses, ancestral to those that now have those two domains as their hosts. Furthermore, extensive virus evolution seems to have preceded the LUCA, since the jelly-roll structure of capsid proteins is shared by RNA and DNA viruses across all three domains of life.LUCA's viruses were probably mainly dsDNA viruses in the groups called Duplodnaviria and Varidnaviria. Two other single-stranded DNA virus groups within the Monodnaviria, the Microviridae and the Tubulavirales, likely infected the last bacterial common ancestor. The last archaeal common ancestor was probably host to spindle-shaped viruses. All of these could well have affected the LUCA, in which case each must since have been lost in the host domain where it is no longer extant. By contrast, RNA viruses do not appear to have been important parasites of LUCA, even though straightforward thinking might have envisaged viruses as beginning with RNA viruses directly derived from an RNA world. Instead, by the time the LUCA lived, RNA viruses had probably already been out-competed by DNA viruses.

LUCA might have been the ancestor to some viruses, as it might have had at least two descendants: LUCELLA, the Last Universal Cellular Ancestor, the ancestor to all cells, and the archaic virocell ancestor, the ancestor to large-to-medium-sized DNA viruses. Viruses might have evolved before LUCA but after the first universal common ancestor (FUCA), according to the reduction hypothesis, where giant viruses evolved from primordial cells that became parasitic.

Criticism of science

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_science

Personification of "Science" in front of the Boston Public Library

Criticism of science addresses problems within science in order to improve science as a whole and its role in society. Criticisms come from philosophy, from social movements like feminism, and from within science itself.

The emerging field of metascience seeks to increase the quality of and efficiency of scientific research by improving the scientific process.

Philosophical critiques

Philosopher of science Paul Feyerabend advanced the idea of epistemological anarchism, which holds that there are no useful and exception-free methodological rules governing the progress of science or the growth of knowledge, and that the idea that science can or should operate according to universal and fixed rules is unrealistic, pernicious and detrimental to science itself. Feyerabend advocates a democratic society where science is treated as equal to other ideologies or social institutions such as religion, and education, or magic and mythology, and considers the dominance of science in society authoritarian and unjustified. He also contended (along with Imre Lakatos) that the demarcation problem of distinguishing science from pseudoscience on objective grounds is not possible and thus fatal to the notion of science running according to fixed, universal rules.

Feyerabend also criticized science for not having evidence for its own philosophical precepts. Particularly the notion of Uniformity of Law and the Uniformity of Process across time and space, or Uniformitarianism in short, as noted by Stephen Jay Gould. "We have to realize that a unified theory of the physical world simply does not exist" says Feyerabend, "We have theories that work in restricted regions, we have purely formal attempts to condense them into a single formula, we have lots of unfounded claims (such as the claim that all of chemistry can be reduced to physics), phenomena that do not fit into the accepted framework are suppressed; in physics, which many scientists regard as the one really basic science, we have now at least three different points of view...without a promise of conceptual (and not only formal) unification". In other words, science is begging the question when it presupposes that there is a universal truth with no proof thereof.

Historian Jacques Barzun termed science "a faith as fanatical as any in history" and warned against the use of scientific thought to suppress considerations of meaning as integral to human existence.

Sociologist Stanley Aronowitz scrutinized science for operating with the presumption that the only acceptable criticisms of science are those conducted within the methodological framework that science has set up for itself. That science insists that only those who have been inducted into its community, through means of training and credentials, are qualified to make these criticisms. Aronowitz also alleged that while scientists consider it absurd that Fundamentalist Christianity uses biblical references to bolster their claim that the Bible is true, scientists pull the same tactic by using the tools of science to settle disputes concerning its own validity.

New-age writer Alan Watts criticized science for operating under a materialist model of the world that he posited is simply a modified version of the Abrahamic worldview, that "the universe is constructed and maintained by a Lawmaker" (commonly identified as God or the Logos). Watts asserts that during the rise of secularism through the 18th to 20th century when scientific philosophers got rid of the notion of a lawmaker they kept the notion of law, and that the idea that the world is a material machine run by law is a presumption just as unscientific as religious doctrines that affirm it is a material machine made and run by a lawmaker.

Epistemology

David Parkin compared the epistemological stance of science to that of divination. He suggested that, to the degree that divination is an epistemologically specific means of gaining insight into a given question, science itself can be considered a form of divination that is framed from a Western view of the nature (and thus possible applications) of knowledge.

Author and Episkopos of Discordianism Robert Anton Wilson stresses that the instruments used in scientific investigation produce meaningful answers relevant only to the instrument, and that there is no objective vantage point from which science could verify its findings since all findings are relative to begin with.

Ethics

Several academics have offered critiques concerning ethics in science. In Science and Ethics, for example, the professor of philosophy Bernard Rollin examines the relevance of ethics to science, and argues in favor of making education in ethics part and parcel of scientific training.

Social science scholars, like social anthropologist Tim Ingold, and scholars from philosophy and the humanities, like critical theorist Adorno, have criticized modern science for subservience to economic and technological interests. A related criticism is the debate on positivism. While before the 19th century science was perceived to be in opposition to religion, in contemporary society science is often defined as the antithesis of the humanities and the arts.

Many thinkers, such as Carolyn Merchant, Theodor Adorno and E. F. Schumacher considered that the 17th century Scientific Revolution shifted science from a focus on understanding nature, or wisdom, to a focus on manipulating nature, i.e. power, and that science's emphasis on manipulating nature leads it inevitably to manipulate people, as well. Science's focus on quantitative measures has led to critiques that it is unable to recognize important qualitative aspects of the world.

Critiques from within science

Metascience is the use of scientific methodology to study science itself, with the goal of increasing the quality of research while reducing waste. Meta-research has identified methodological weaknesses in many areas of science. Critics argue that reforms are needed to address these weaknesses.

Reproducibility

The social sciences, such as social psychology, have long suffered from the problem of their studies being largely not reproducible. Now, medicine has come under similar pressures. In a phenomenon known as the replication crisis, journals are less likely to publish straight replication studies so it may be difficult to disprove results. Another result of publication bias is the Proteus phenomenon: early attempts to replicate results tend to contradict them. However, there are claims that this bias may be beneficial, allowing accurate meta-analysis with fewer publications.

Cognitive biases

Critics argue that the biggest bias within science is motivated reasoning, whereby scientists are more likely to accept evidence that supports their hypothesis and more likely to scrutinize findings that do not. Scientists do not practice pure induction but instead often come into science with preconceived ideas and often will, unconsciously or consciously, interpret observations to support their own hypotheses through confirmation bias. For example, scientists may re-run trials when they do not support a hypothesis but use results from the first trial when they do support their hypothesis. It is often argued that while each individual has cognitive biases, these biases are corrected for when scientific evidence converges. However, systematic issues in the publication system of academic journals can often compound these biases. Issues like publication bias, where studies with non-significant results are less likely to be published, and selective outcome reporting bias, where only the significant outcomes out of a variety of outcomes are likely to be published, are common within academic literature. These biases have widespread implications, such as the distortion of meta-analyses where only studies that include positive results are likely to be included. Statistical outcomes can be manipulated as well, for example large numbers of participants can be used and trials overpowered so that small difference cause significant effects or inclusion criteria can be changed to include those are most likely to respond to a treatment. Whether produced on purpose or not, all of these issues need to be taken into consideration within scientific research, and peer-reviewed published evidence should not be assumed to be outside of the realm of bias and error; some critics are now claiming that many results in scientific journals are false or exaggerated.

Science has been criticized for being too conformist, and for becoming on average less disruptive.

Feminist critiques

Feminist scholars and women scientists such as Emily Martin, Evelyn Fox Keller, Ruth Hubbard, Londa Schiebinger and Bonnie Spanier have critiqued science because they believe it presents itself as objective and neutral while ignoring its inherent gender bias. They assert that gender bias exists in the language and practice of science, as well as in the expected appearance and social acceptance of who can be scientists within society.

Sandra Harding says that the "moral and political insights of the women's movement have inspired social scientists and biologists to raise critical questions about the ways traditional researchers have explained gender, sex, and relations within and between the social and natural worlds." Anne Fausto-Sterling is a prominent example of this kind of feminist work within biological science. Some feminists, such as Ruth Hubbard and Evelyn Fox Keller, criticize traditional scientific discourse as being historically biased towards a male perspective. A part of the feminist research agenda is the examination of the ways in which power inequities are created and/or reinforced in scientific and academic institutions.

Other feminist scholars, such as Ann Hibner Koblitz, Lenore Blum, Mary Gray, Mary Beth Ruskai, and Pnina Abir-Am and Dorinda Outram, have criticized some gender and science theories for ignoring the diverse nature of scientific research and the tremendous variation in women's experiences in different cultures and historical periods. For example, the first generation of women to receive advanced university degrees in Europe were almost entirely in the natural sciences and medicine—in part because those fields at the time were much more welcoming of women than were the humanities. Koblitz and others who are interested in increasing the number of women in science have expressed concern that some of the statements by feminist critics of science could undermine those efforts, notably the following assertion by Keller:

Just as surely as inauthenticity is the cost a woman suffers by joining men in misogynist jokes, so it is, equally, the cost suffered by a woman who identifies with an image of the scientist modeled on the patriarchal husband. Only if she undergoes a radical disidentification from self can she share masculine pleasure in mastering a nature cast in the image of woman as passive, inert, and blind.

Language in science

Emily Martin examines the metaphors used in science to support her claim that science reinforces socially constructed ideas about gender rather than objective views of nature. In her study about the fertilization process, Martin describes several cases when gender-biased perception skewed the descriptions of biological processes during fertilization and even possibly hampered the research. She asserts that classic metaphors of the strong dominant sperm racing to an idle egg are products of gendered stereotyping rather than a faithful portrayal of human fertilization. The notion that women are passive and men are active are socially constructed attributes of gender which, according to Martin, scientists have projected onto the events of fertilization and so obscuring the fact that eggs do play an active role. For example, she wrote that "even after having revealed...the egg to be a chemically active sperm catcher, even after discussing the egg's role in tethering the sperm, the research team continued for another three years to describe the sperm's role as actively penetrating the egg." Scott Gilbert, a developmental biologist at Swarthmore College supports her position: "if you don't have an interpretation of fertilization that allows you to look at the egg as active, you won't look for the molecules that can prove it. You simply won't find activities that you don't visualize."

Media and politics

The mass media face a number of pressures that can prevent them from accurately depicting competing scientific claims in terms of their credibility within the scientific community as a whole. Determining how much weight to give different sides in a scientific debate requires considerable expertise regarding the matter. Few journalists have real scientific knowledge, and even beat reporters who know a great deal about certain scientific issues may know little about other ones they are suddenly asked to cover.

Many issues damage the relationship of science to the media and the use of science and scientific arguments by politicians. As a very broad generalisation, many politicians seek certainties and facts whilst scientists typically offer probabilities and caveats.^{[citation needed]} However, politicians' ability to be heard in the mass media frequently distorts the scientific understanding by the public. Examples in Britain include the controversy over the MMR inoculation, and the 1988 forced resignation of a government minister, Edwina Currie, for revealing the high probability that battery eggs were contaminated with Salmonella.

Some scientists and philosophers suggest that scientific theories are more or less shaped by the dominant political, economic, or cultural models of the time, even though the scientific community may claim to be exempt from social influences and historical conditions. For example, the Russian philosopher, socialist, and zoologist Peter Kropotkin thought that the Darwinian theory of evolution overstressed a painful "we must struggle to survive" way of life, which he said was influenced by capitalism and the struggling lifestyles people lived within it. Karl Marx also thought that science was largely driven by and used as capital.

Robert Anton Wilson, Stanley Aronowitz, and Paul Feyerabend all thought that the military-industrial complex, large corporations, and the grants that came from them had an immense influence over the research and even results of scientific experiments. Aronowitz even went as far as to say "It does not matter that the scientific community ritualistically denies its alliance with economic/industrial and military power. The evidence is overwhelming that such is the case. Thus, every major power has a national science policy; the United States Military appropriates billions each year for 'basic' as well as 'applied' research".

Search This Blog

Friday, November 28, 2025

Cosmic microwave background

Features

History

Early speculations

Discovery

Cosmic origin

Progress on theory

COBE

Precision cosmology

Observations after COBE

Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe

Degree Angular Scale Interferometer

Atacama Cosmology Telescope

Planck Surveyor

South Pole Telescope

Theoretical models

Predictions based on the Big Bang model

Primary anisotropy

Late time anisotropy

Alternative theories

Polarization

E-modes

B-modes

Primordial gravitational waves

Gravitational lensing

Multipole analysis

CMBR monopole term (ℓ = 0)

CMBR dipole anisotropy (ℓ = 1)

Multipole (ℓ ≥ 2)

Anomalies

Future evolution

Timeline of prediction, discovery and interpretation

Thermal (non-microwave background) temperature predictions

Microwave background radiation predictions and measurements

In popular culture

Last universal common ancestor

Historical background

Inferring LUCA's features

Biochemical mechanisms

An anaerobic thermophile

Undersampled protein families

Possibly a mesophile

Age

Root of the tree of life

LUCA and viruses

Criticism of science

Philosophical critiques

Epistemology

Ethics

Critiques from within science

Reproducibility

Cognitive biases

Feminist critiques

Language in science

Media and politics

Medical diagnosis