The difficult part of measuring cosmic expansion is measuring the distance of space objects. In 1912, American astronomer Henrietta Levitt first used pulsating stars known as Cephasian variables to calculate distances. These stars flicker at a rate proportional to their intrinsic luminosity. By understanding the luminosity or radiant power of a Cephasian variable, we can compare it with its apparent brightness or dimming to estimate its galaxy’s distance from us.

Edwin Hubble used Levitt’s method to measure the distances to a set of galaxies hosting the Cephasian variable, and in 1929 he noticed that the galaxies that are farther away from us are moving away faster. This finding meant the expansion of the universe. Hubble calculated the expansion rate to be a constant value of 500 km/s per megaparsec. In other words, two galaxies that are 1 megaparsec or approximately 3.2 million light years apart are moving away from each other at a speed of 500 km/s.

As progress was made in calibrating the relationship between the pulsation frequency of Cepheids and their luminosity, measurements of the Hubble constant improved. However, since the Cephasian variables are very bright, the whole approach used has limitations. Scientists need a new way to measure the distance of galaxies from each other in the infinite space.

In the 1970s, researchers used Cephasian variables to measure the distance to bright supernovae, and in this way they achieved more accurate measurements of the Hubble constant. At that time, as now, two research groups undertook the measurements, and using supernovae and Cephasian variable stars, they achieved contradictory values ​​of 50 km/s per megaparsec and 100 km/s per megaparsec. However, no agreement was reached and everything became completely bipolar.

The launch of the Hubble Space Telescope in 1990 gave astronomers a new and multi-layered view of the universe. Friedman led a multi-year observing campaign with Hubble, and in 2001 he and his colleagues estimated the expansion rate to be 72 km/s/Mpa with an uncertainty of at most 10%.

A Nobel laureate for the discovery of dark energy, Reiss got into the expansion game a few years later. In 2011, his group found the Hubble constant to be 73 with a three percent uncertainty. Soon after this, cosmologists excelled in another way. In 2013, they used Planck’s observations of light left over from the early universe to determine the exact shape and composition of the early universe.

In the next step, the researchers connected their findings to Einstein’s theory of general relativity and developed a theoretical model to predict the current state of the universe, up to approximately 14 billion years into the future. Based on these calculations, the universe should be expanding at an approximate rate of 67.4 km/s per megaparsec with an uncertainty of less than one percent.

Reese’s team measurement remained at 73, even with the improved accuracy. This higher value indicates that the galaxies today are moving away from each other at a faster rate than theoretically expected. This is how the Hubble tension was born. According to Reiss, today’s Hubble tension shows us that something is missing in the cosmological model.

The missing factor could be the first new element in the universe to be discovered since dark energy. Theorists still have doubts about the identity of this agent. Perhaps this force is some kind of repulsive energy that lasted for a short time in the early universe, or perhaps it is the primordial magnetic fields created during the Big Bang, or perhaps what is being missed is more about ourselves than the universe.

Some cosmologists, including Friedman, suspected that unknown errors were to blame for Hubble’s tension. For example, Cephasian variable stars are located in the disks of younger galaxies in regions full of stars, dust, and gas. Even with Hubble’s fine resolution, you don’t see a single Cephasian variable, according to George Afstatio, an astrophysicist at the University of Cambridge. Rather, you see it overlapping with other stars. This density of stars makes measurements of brightness difficult.

When the James Webb Telescope launches in 2021, Reiss and his colleagues will use its powerful infrared camera to peer into the crowded regions that host the Cephasian variables. They wanted to know whether the claims of Friedman and other researchers about the effect of the area’s crowding on the observations were correct.

When the researchers compared the new numbers to distances calculated from Hubble data, they saw a surprising match. The latest results from the James Webb telescope confirmed the Hubble constant measured by the Hubble telescope a few years ago: 73 km/s/Mpa with a difference of one kilometer or so.

Concerned about crowding, Friedman turned to alternative stars that could serve as distance indicators. These stars are found in the outer reaches of galaxies and away from the crowd. One of those stars belongs to the group ” Red Giant Branch ” or TRGB for short. A red giant is an old star with a puffy atmosphere that shines brightly in the red light spectrum. As a red giant ages, it eventually burns helium in its core, and at this point, the star’s temperature and brightness suddenly decrease.

A typical galaxy has many red giants. If you plot the brightness of these stars against their temperature, you reach a point where the brightness drops off. The star population before this brightness drop is a good distance indicator; Because in each galaxy, such a population has a similar distribution of luminosity. By comparing the brightness of these star populations, astronomers can estimate their relative distances.

On March 13, 2024, Friedman, Lee, and the rest of the team meet in Chicago to find out what they’ve been hiding from each other. Over the past months, they were divided into three groups, each tasked with measuring distances to 11 galaxies using one of three methods: Cephasian variable stars, TRGBs, and JAGBs.

These galaxies also host related types of supernovae, so their distances can calibrate the distances of supernovae in many more distant galaxies. The rate at which galaxies move away from us divided by their distance gives the value of the Hubble constant.

Three groups of researchers calculated distance measures with a unique, random counterbalancing value added to the data. During the face-to-face session, they removed those values ​​and compared the results.

All three methods obtained similar distances with three percent uncertainty. Finally, the group calculated three values ​​of Hubble’s constant for each distance index. All values ​​were within the theoretical prediction range of 67.4. Therefore, Hubble’s tension seemed to be resolved. However, they ran into problems with further analysis to write the results.

The JAGB analysis was good, But the other two were wrong. The team found that there were large error bars in the TRGB measurements. They tried to minimize the errors by including more TRGBs; But when they started doing this, they found that the distance to the galaxies was less than they first thought. This change caused the value of Hubble’s constant to increase.

Friedman’s team also discovered an error in Cephaus’s analysis: in almost half of the pulsating stars, the term crowd was applied twice. Correcting this error increased the value of Hubble’s constant significantly. Hubble’s tension was revived.

Finally, after efforts to fix the errors, the researchers’ paper presents three distinct values ​​of Hubble’s constant. The JAGB measurement yielded a result of 67.96 km/s/megaparsec. The TRGB result was equal to 69.85 with similar error margins. Hubble’s constant was obtained at a higher value of 72.05 in the Kyphousian variable method. In this way, different hypotheses about the characteristics of these stars caused Hubble’s stress value to vary from 69 to 73.

By combining the aforementioned methods and uncertainties, the average Hubble stress value equal to 69.96 was obtained with an uncertainty of four percent. This margin of error overlaps with the theoretical prediction of the expansion rate of the universe, as well as the higher value of Tim Reiss.

These two theories competed with each other in astronomy for a while; But for the first time, we were able to reach definitive evidence that a gravitational instability pathway is possible.

Gravitationally unstable disks can be the birthplace of massive planets, far from their host stars, and thus the core accretion method is not very suitable for these planets. In 2022, astronomers published a report of the discovery of a protoplanet with nine times the mass of the planet Jupiter around the star EB Chariot, which is not more than four million years old. The object was located at a distance of 13.8 billion kilometers from its star, which is twice the distance between our Sun and Pluto.

Similar planets have been discovered elsewhere. It is almost impossible to describe how these planets formed through the “bottom-up” process; Because there is not enough solid material to form these objects through the core accretion pattern.

In the 1980s, astronomers proposed a hypothesis based on which gravitational instability could create these unusual planets; But they did not find a way to prove this. According to a 2020 simulation by Dr. Hall and colleagues, the initial velocity of the material in the gravitationally unstable disk changes in a distinct pattern.

A few years later, Dr. Hall’s group pointed the Atacama Massive Submillimeter/Millimeter Array, the Large Chile Radio Telescope, at the star EB Chariot and obtained the exact effect predicted in the simulations.

Even if the results are correct, they only prove that gravitational instability occurs and its role in planet formation remains to be proven. Probably, this mechanism helps the formation of planets along with the growth of the core. Indeed, we expect all planet-forming environments to undergo a phase of gravitational instability during which planets may form through gravitational collapse and core accretion.

Astronomers in the current study want to look for signs of gravitational instability in younger star systems in the future. They hope to eventually find signs of a gravitational instability mechanism in fully formed worlds.

Speedy also seeks to learn more about the diversity of planets, the different forms of formation, and what is revealed about the solar system. “I believe the world is much more creative than we think,” he says. Therefore, we are interested in exploring the possibilities.