How Did the Universe Get So Lopsided?

How could the cosmos have become so skewed?

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

A decade ago cosmologists began to suspect that the universe might be bizarrely lopsided. Hints of a universal imbalance emerged from the afterglow of the big bang, known as the cosmic microwave background, or CMB, which is dotted with hot and cold spots signifying fluctuations in the density of matter. Starting in 2003, data from NASA's Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) suggested that one side of the cosmos is hotter than the other. But the finding rubbed against the prevailing view in cosmology that the universe expanded titanically during an early growth spurt called inflation, which should have left the CMB looking mostly uniform.

In recent months the case for lopsidedness has gotten much stronger—the European Space Agency's Planck satellite, which is newer and more sensitive than WMAP, has returned similarly reliable evidence of an asymmetric cosmos. The question now is whether the enigma demands a cosmic rethink or whether it results from an extremely unlikely—but ultimately explainable—occurrence.

“After quite a few years of claims based on independent researchers' analyses of publicly available WMAP data, we now have redundancy from Planck as convincing support,” says cosmologist Krzysztof Gorski of the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The surprising temperature difference may have become more believable, but it remains a puzzle. Cosmologist Yabebal Fantaye of the University of Oslo, along with Gorski and others, recently ran 10,000 simulations of how the CMB should look, given the Standard Model of the universe's evolution. Only seven outcomes resembled the picture that WMAP has assembled, the researchers reported in Astrophysical Journal Letters. In other words, the standard cosmological paradigm can accommodate a lopsided universe but just barely. “It certainly could happen, but it is not very likely,” Fantaye says.

Researchers are already exploring the possibility that the asymmetry points to something new—whether hypothetical energy fields warping the newborn universe or ancient bruises from collisions with another universe. Further clues will arrive next year when the Planck team releases data on the polarization of the CMB—the way its photons oscillate—which could distinguish between such cosmological exotica and a mere quirk that fits within the prevailing paradigm.

Charles Q. Choi is a frequent contributor to Scientific American. His work has also appeared in The New York Times, Science, Nature, Wired, and LiveScience, among others. In his spare time, he has traveled to all seven continents.

More by Charles Q. Choi
Scientific American Magazine Vol 309 Issue 4This article was published with the title “Universe Out of Balance” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 309 No. 4 (), p. 20
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican1013-20a

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe