Big Bang Gravitational Waves: True or Not?

New results this fall should clarify whether the BICEP2 experiment has really found primordial gravitational waves

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.


The suspense is killing me. In March physicists announced one of the most stunning discoveries in decades—the detection of gravitational waves produced just after the big bang. The finding prompted mass news coverage, and physicists in labs everywhere popped champagne corks. But soon significant doubts emerged. After much debate it became clear, even to the team at the BICEP2 experiment behind the original announcement, that the claims were premature. The experiment may have found primordial gravitational waves. But there is also a decent chance that the measurements were confounded by nearby dust in our galaxy.

Now, all we can do is wait for the dust to clear. Other experiments are hunting for gravitational waves and may find them soon, confirming BICEP2’s discovery. The most anticipated results are those from the Planck satellite, which may be able to observe the same signal BICEP2 did, if it exists. Planck will also reveal more about the Milky Way’s dust effects, which could either cast further doubt on the BICEP2 results or validate them, depending on how prevalent dust turns out to be in the area of the sky that BICEP2 observed. The Planck team members are planning to share their latest data this fall, probably in November.

Cosmologist Lawrence Krauss of Arizona State University in Tempe delves deep into the gravitational waves story in the October Scientific American. Krauss explains what the discovery means if it is true, including implications for the possibility of multiverses and even a way to unify the contradictory theories of general relativity and quantum mechanics. Read the article here (subscription required).

Clara Moskowitz is chief of reporters at Scientific American, where she covers astronomy, space, physics and mathematics. She has been at Scientific American for more than a decade; previously she worked at Space.com. Moskowitz has reported live from rocket launches, space shuttle liftoffs and landings, suborbital spaceflight training, mountaintop observatories, and more. She has a bachelor’s degree in astronomy and physics from Wesleyan University and a graduate degree in science communication from the University of California, Santa Cruz.

More by Clara Moskowitz
Scientific American Magazine Vol 311 Issue 4This article was published with the title “A Beacon from the Big Bang” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 311 No. 4 (), p. 58
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican1014-58

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