Antarctic Experiments Back Cosmic Inflation Theory

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


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.


New data on the early cosmos are providing the strongest evidence yet that our universe underwent an enormous growth spurt shortly after the big bang, according to findings announced yesterday at the American Physical Society meetings in Washington, D.C. This latest support for cosmic inflation theory comes from observations made by two scientific teams using instruments operating from the South Pole.

Inflation theory, first proposed in the early 1980s, predicts that a pattern of tiny temperature differences should exist in the cosmic microwave background (CMB), the afterglow of the big bang. It also predicts that this pattern should exhibit a series of progressively fainter peaks. Experiments conducted in 1992 using NASA's Cosmic Background Explorer provided the first images of the temperature variations, and later observations from other instruments hinted at the presence of a peak. But the new results from the Degree Angular Scale Interferometer (DASI) and the Balloon Observations of Millimetric Extragalactic Radiation and Geophysics (BOOMERANG) project reveal two peaks and strongly suggest the presence of a third one. "With these new data, inflation looks very strong," notes University of Chicago astrophysicist John Carlstrom, leader of the DASI team. "It's always been theoretically compelling. Now it's on very solid experimental ground."

Of particular interest is the ratio of intensity between the first and second peaks, which indicates how much ordinary matter¿the stuff of humans, stars and galaxies¿exists in the universe. According to the data from DASI, it amounts to a mere 4.5 percent of the universe's total mass and energy¿a number that accords well with an estimate made in 1998 based on the amount of the element deuterium produced during the big bang. "The agreement between measures of the amount of ordinary matter is simply stunning," says Michael Turner of the University of Chicago. "The big bang framework and Einstein's general relativity," he adds, "have passed a major new test."

Kate Wong is an award-winning science writer and senior editor for features at Scientific American, where she has focused on evolution, ecology, anthropology, archaeology, paleontology and animal behavior. She is fascinated by human origins, which she has covered for nearly 30 years. Recently she has become obsessed with birds. Her reporting has taken her to caves in France and Croatia that Neandertals once called home to the shores of Kenya’s Lake Turkana in search of the oldest stone tools in the world, as well as to Madagascar on an expedition to unearth ancient mammals and dinosaurs, the icy waters of Antarctica, where humpback whales feast on krill, and a “Big Day” race around the state of Connecticut to find as many bird species as possible in 24 hours. Wong is co-author, with Donald Johanson, of Lucy’s Legacy: The Quest for Human Origins. She holds a bachelor of science degree in biological anthropology and zoology from the University of Michigan. Follow her on Bluesky @katewong.bsky.social

More by Kate Wong

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