New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Measuring the Universe with Cepheid Stars

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.


Determining the expansion rate of the universe, known as the Hubble constant, is a tall order. Astronomers have approached this problem in part by studying celestial objects whose observed brightness relates in a predictable manner to their distance from us, such as the so-called Cepheid variable stars. Large and luminous, the Cepheid variables are a class of pulsating stars that regularly change in size and brightness. By measuring the period of the shifts and using the period-luminosity relationship, researchers can infer the distance of Cepheids from their luminosity. And because these stars are so bright, they can serve as distance indicators in galaxies beyond our own. For theorists to derive the Hubble constant from such distances, they must first calibrate the period-luminosity relationship--a task made difficult by the low number of neighboring Cepheids. As a result, astronomers have had to rely on indirect methods of calibration.

But no more. According to a report in this week¿s issue of the journal Nature, astronomers have for the first time measured the changing diameter of a Cepheid star directly. Using the Palomar Testbed Interferometer on Palomar Mountain in California, researchers studied the Cepheids in the Large Magellanic Cloud--a satellite galaxy of the Milky Way. Although their results come with an uncertainty of 15 percent, the distance derived from the team¿s observations accords well with previous indications. Further work should fine-tune the results."We anticipate that over the next few years, distances to several dozen Cepheids will be determined with an accuracy of a few percent," the researchers wrote in their report, "providing a direct calibration of the Cepheid period-luminosity relation."

Kate Wong is an award-winning science writer and was formerly senior editor for features at Scientific American, where she 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

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe