A major challenge to dark energy, the mysterious force believed to be driving the universe’s accelerating expansion, has been overturned by a new study. Astronomers say a new analysis has reinforced one of the most important discoveries in modern cosmology, finding that the universe is still expanding at an accelerating rate. The result counters a [...]
On the evening of September 9, 1999, a Harvard graduate student named David Charbonneau drove to a parking lot in Boulder, Colorado, and let himself into a small wooden shed.
Inside was a telescope. Not a large one. The kind of instrument that, by professional astronomical standards, was almost embarrassingly small — a four-inch aperture, the size of something a serious amateur stargazer might keep in their backyard.
Charbonneau was twenty-five years old. He was working with the astronomer Tim Brown at the High Altitude Observatory, on what most of the established astronomical community considered, at best, a long shot. He was trying to detect a planet around another star — not by the wobble it caused in its star’s motion, the standard method of the time, but by the tiny shadow it would cast as it passed between Earth and the star’s face.
The expected dip was around 1%. Smaller than a passing insect crossing a porch light. From a wooden shed. Through Earth’s hazy atmosphere. With a telescope you could buy at a hobby shop.
What happened over the next few hours would help change the entire science of finding planets.
The target was HD 209458, a sun-like star about 150 light-years away in the constellation Pegasus.
Earlier that same year, two teams of astronomers using the Doppler radial-velocity method had detected a planet orbiting HD 209458. The radial-velocity method works by measuring the tiny gravitational wobble a planet causes in its host star — but it can’t directly prove the orbiting body is a planet. It only proves something is tugging on the star. To confirm the body was definitely a planet, and to measure its actual size and density, you needed a different kind of observation.
The geometry of HD 209458’s orbit happened to be favourable. If the planet’s orbital plane was aligned correctly with our line of sight, it would pass directly in front of its star — and from Earth, that would look like a brief, faint dimming of the starlight. A transit. The technique had been theorised for decades but never used to detect a planet.
Tim Brown’s small Colorado setup, called STARE — Stellar Astrophysics and Research on Exoplanets — was built precisely for this kind of measurement. The four-inch telescope, mounted in a small wooden shed in the parking lot of the High Altitude Observatory, would stare at fields of stars and watch for the tiny dimming events that might reveal a planet crossing.
Charbonneau later recalled the moment Brown introduced him to the equipment. “Tim pointed me to a small wooden shed in a parking lot,” he said. The setup was modest enough that the obvious question was whether such a small instrument could possibly detect something that subtle.
The answer arrived on September 9, 1999.
As Charbonneau and Brown watched, HD 209458’s brightness dipped — by close to 2% — for about three hours, then returned to normal. A week later, on September 16, it dipped again. Both events matched the predicted orbital period of the planet that the radial-velocity teams had already proposed. It was the unmistakable signature of a planet — eventually named HD 209458b — passing in front of its star.
It was the first time any human being had directly watched the shadow of a planet outside our solar system cross its star.
Charbonneau and Brown were not alone in the moment. A separate team led by Gregory Henry, working independently, detected a partial transit of the same star in November of that year. Their two papers were submitted to The Astrophysical Journal within a day of each other, and published simultaneously in the same issue. The detection of HD 209458b became one of the cleanest examples of competitive science producing duplicate, mutually confirming results.
It is easy to assume that finding something as faint as a planetary shadow requires the largest, most sophisticated instruments. The HD 209458 detection demonstrated that this is not true.
What made the transit detectable wasn’t the size of the telescope. It was the precision and stability of the measurement. STARE was designed to do one specific thing exceptionally well: measure the brightness of stars with high consistency over time. A tiny dip — even a 1% dip — becomes detectable if your noise floor is low enough.
This was the deeper lesson buried in Charbonneau’s observation. The transit method didn’t require enormous apertures. It required steady measurements of brightness, repeated over long periods. That insight changed how the entire field thought about exoplanet detection — and shaped what came next.
The transit method, validated by that September observation, became the most successful exoplanet detection technique in history.
A decade after Charbonneau’s observation, NASA launched the Kepler space telescope — a mission built on exactly the principle the Colorado shed had demonstrated. Kepler stared continuously at about 150,000 stars in the constellation Cygnus, watching for the tiny dips in light that a transiting planet would cause. By the end of its mission in 2018, Kepler had confirmed more than 2,600 exoplanets, with thousands of additional candidates still being analysed.
The total number of confirmed exoplanets now stands at over 6,000, with the NASA Exoplanet Archive recording 6,298 confirmed worlds as of June 2026. The transit method has contributed the majority of those detections.
Two newer space telescopes — TESS and the upcoming Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope — are extending the same basic technique. Roman, scheduled to launch in late 2026, is expected to identify and characterise as many as 100,000 additional exoplanets over its five-year primary mission.
All of it, traceable back to a small wooden shed in a Boulder parking lot, on a September night when a 25-year-old graduate student looked at a tiny dip in a star’s light and recognised what he was seeing.
That dip is now one of the most photographed light curves in modern astronomy. The shed is still there.
The post On a September night in 1999, a 25-year-old graduate student stepped into a modest wooden shed in a Colorado parking lot and used a tiny four-inch telescope to spot a 1% dip in a star’s light—a backyard experiment that proved alien planets could be tracked by their shadows and opened the floodgates to discovering thousands of worlds appeared first on Space Daily.
AI could accelerate the hunt for new physics, but sometimes it knows too much to see what’s right in front of it. Artificial intelligence could make it much cheaper and faster to search for new laws of physics, according to a new study published in the Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics (JCAP). But the [...]
A new detector-based method clarifies how gravitational waves should be measured in an evolving universe. Imagine trying to measure a ripple on the surface of a pond while the pond itself is slowly changing shape. That is the challenge scientists face when they study gravitational waves not as isolated signals from colliding black holes, but [...]
A new mathematical breakthrough sheds light on how tiny black holes could emerge from critical states of spacetime. Black holes are often portrayed as cosmic giants, swallowing stars and shaping entire galaxies. But some of the most intriguing black holes predicted by physics could be far smaller than an atom. For decades, scientists have known [...]
There is a pattern found in nature. It is indeed the largest pattern there is. It is so vast that it spans the universe, filling up its observable volume. The pattern is made of individual units in the same way your body is made of cells — if each of your cells were a galaxyContinue reading "Untangling the cosmic web"
The post Untangling the cosmic web appeared first on Astronomy Magazine.
New mathematical research suggests dark energy may not be needed to explain the accelerating expansion of the universe, challenging the foundations of the standard cosmological model. Mathematicians are questioning whether dark energy is actually responsible for the universe’s accelerating expansion. In a new study published in Proceedings of the Royal Society A, researchers at the [...]
In early 1987, a team led by MIT’s Jacqueline Hewitt was imaging radio-emitting objects with the Very Large Array radio telescope as part of a gravitational lens survey. The unusual appearance of object MG1131+0456 – an oval with elongated bright spots at the ends – led to further investigation, and the researchers eventually concluded itContinue reading "June 9, 1988: First image of an Einstein ring"
The post June 9, 1988: First image of an Einstein ring appeared first on Astronomy Magazine.
Small galaxies are expected to have even smaller companion galaxies, according to current cosmological models. A recent study takes a look at one dwarf galaxy and finds more tiny companions than anticipated.
Critical to our understanding of dark matter and galaxy formation, satellite galaxies are small, faint galaxies surrounding a larger host galaxy. The leading cosmological model, known as lambda cold dark matter (ΛCDM), predicts dark matter halos of all masses to host smaller dark matter subhalos whose luminous counterparts make up satellite galaxies.
While the satellite systems of Milky Way-like galaxies are well characterized, the companions of dwarf galaxies are less well studied. Despite being significantly smaller, dwarf galaxies should also host even smaller satellites galaxies around them. These satellites push the limits of observations — extremely faint and hard to distinguish from background sources, dwarf galaxy satellites require innovative imaging techniques to discover.
In recent years, new surveys have identified a number of satellites around dwarf galaxies that appear broadly consistent with ΛCDM predictions, though the sample size is still small. Continuing the search for little galaxies’ little galaxies is critical to testing the ΛCDM framework and will further our understanding of galaxy formation on the smallest scales.
Satellite candidates around DDO 161 as they appear on the sky. Click to enlarge. [Li et al 2026]
Diving into a specific system, a team led by Jiaxuan Li (李嘉轩) from Princeton University began an in-depth search for satellites around the dwarf galaxy DDO 161. Prior to this study, DDO 161 was known to have one companion, UGCA 319, that is about 10 times smaller than its host.
The authors used data from the Legacy Surveys to search for satellites within about 400,000 light-years of DDO 161 — the expected reach of DDO 161’s gravitational influence. After removing bright sources and smoothing the image to bring out very faint objects, they found eight satellite galaxy candidates including UGCA 319.
Images of the satellite candidates of DDO 161 from the Legacy Surveys. The top row shows the confirmed satellites, and the bottom row shows the rejected satellites. Click to enlarge. [Li et al 2026]
How does DDO 161 compare to theoretical predictions for galaxies of its size? The authors ran cosmological simulations to quantify the expected satellite populations around galaxies of similar size to DDO 161. Just as it is an outlier observationally, DDO 161 is also an outlier when compared to the simulation results that predicted fewer satellite galaxies in similarly massive host systems.
Number of satellites versus host galaxy stellar mass for DDO 161 (red circle) compared to other observed low-mass galaxy satellite systems (data points) and predicted ranges from simulations (blue regions). DDO 161 is a clear outlier, having a high number of satellites for the host galaxy’s stellar mass. Click to enlarge. [Modified from Li et al 2026]
“A Possible ‘Too-many-satellites’ Problem in the Isolated Dwarf Galaxy DDO 161,” Jiaxuan Li et al 2026 ApJL 998 L24. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae3ddd
The post Satellite Surplus Around Dwarf Galaxy DDO 161 appeared first on AAS Nova.
Editor’s Note: Astrobites is a graduate-student-run organization that digests astrophysical literature for undergraduate students. As part of the partnership between the AAS and astrobites, we occasionally repost astrobites content here at AAS Nova. We hope you enjoy this post from astrobites; the original can be viewed at astrobites.org.
Title: Examining the Nature of the Starless Dark Matter Halo Candidate Cloud-9 with Very Large Array Observations
Authors: Alejandro Benítez-Llambay et al.
First Author’s Institution: University of Milano-Bicocca
Status: Published in ApJ
Astronomy, in many ways, is the study of light — in every wavelength that exists — coming at us from light-years away. But most of the mass in our universe is made of dark matter, a material that neither emits nor reflects any light. So, how exactly are we supposed to find this dark matter? Well, the dominant theory of what our universe is made of, Lambda cold dark matter (ΛCDM), predicts that this dark matter can form small halos — regions of gravitationally bound matter — that host reservoirs of cold gas but no stars. While we cannot directly observe dark matter, this cold gas can reflect light at radio wavelengths. Finding these dark halos, referred to as reionization-limited neutral atomic hydrogen clouds (RELHICs), is therefore rather important to confirm ΛCDM. The authors of this article are attempting to do just that by taking a close look at Cloud-9, a potential RELHIC.
Cloud-9 was first discovered in 2023 when a team of astronomers noticed an excess of neutral hydrogen (HI) gas with no bright stars around it, near the spiral galaxy Messier 94 (M94). This discovery was made with the Five-hundred-meter Aperture Spherical radio Telescope (FAST), which doesn’t have the best resolution. For reference, this article found Cloud-9’s diameter to be roughly 3 arcminutes in the sky, while FAST’s resolution is 2.9 arcminutes. So, the authors of this article decided to look at Cloud-9 again, this time with the Very Large Array (VLA), an array of radio telescopes that can pick out more of the structure of this system.
With this upgraded resolution, the authors were able to get a clearer picture of the shape of Cloud-9 and compare it to the previous study (see Figure 1). They found that Cloud-9 was slightly smaller and much more lopsided than previously thought. This funky shape is likely due to gravitational interactions with the larger nearby galaxy M94, causing the gas in Cloud-9 to squish and stretch.
Figure 1: Left: The HI gas column density from the previous FAST observations. [Benítez-Llambay & Navarro 2023] Right: The HI gas column density from the VLA observation in this article. [Benítez-Llambay et al. 2024] Corner circles represent the resolution of each telescope and the x and y axes are the position on the sky. Note the scale of the axes in each plot; the right plot is a zoomed-in version of the left.
To determine if Cloud-9 really is a RELHIC, the authors needed to compare its HI radial density profile to the profiles of simulated RELHICs. Density profiles are a good tool to use here since although we don’t fully understand what dark matter is, we do know how it will affect things around it gravitationally. If the only matter hosted by Cloud-9 is HI gas and dark matter, then that gas will have a specific distribution that we can observe. If other baryonic matter is hosted by Cloud-9 that we just aren’t picking up right now, it will affect that density profile.
The authors found that for a detailed, general simulation the profiles did not match well, specifically in the outer regions. But when they compared it to a sphere of gas with a constant, specific temperature, they were able to get the fits to line up (see Figure 2). However, the authors point out that these simulations are isolated, meaning there is no big galaxy next to them affecting their shape, unlike Cloud-9.
Figure 2: Left: Comparison of Cloud-9’s HI profile (grey dots) to a general simulated RELHIC’s profile (green line) and a simulated RELHIC at a specific temperature (red line). Right: Comparison of Cloud-9’s profile (black dots) to Leo T’s profile (orange line). Although the positions are shifted, the slopes of the profiles match. [Benítez-Llambay et al. 2024]
The authors conclude that, as of right now, they can’t definitively say whether Cloud-9 is or is not a RELHIC, but there are a few things astronomers can do to clear things up. First, theorists can re-run the RELHIC simulations with halos that have been affected by gravity like Cloud-9. This will allow them to better compare their observations to the simulations.
Second, observers can image Cloud-9 with an optical telescope that is powerful enough to detect any stars that could be there. They suggest the Hubble Space Telescope since it would be able to detect the brightest handful of stars in the potential dim population. JWST would be an even better choice, with its even deeper imaging capabilities, but it is very difficult to get observing time on it. (JWST recently received the most proposals in one year for any telescope ever!)
We will likely have to wait a bit for a definitive answer on the nature of Cloud-9, but either way the authors are excited by this gas cloud. Either it is the first starless dark matter halo, a confirmation of one of the predictions of ΛCDM, or it is the most distant ultra-faint dwarf galaxy ever detected! Although Cloud-9 is not much to look at right now, you should still definitely keep your eye on it.
Original astrobite edited by Maggie Verrico and Cole Meldorf.
About the author, Veronika Dornan:
Veronika is a final-year PhD candidate at McMaster University. Her research is in observations of extragalactic globular star clusters and what they can tell us about galaxy evolution and dark matter distribution in the universe.
The post A Long, Hard Look at (Potentially) Nothing to See appeared first on AAS Nova.
Understanding the nature of our cosmos requires an accurate map of how galaxies are spread throughout it. For decades, astronomers suspected that something vast lurked behind the Milky Way’s dense, dusty disk in our sky. There were indirect, subtle distortions present in galaxy motions that we could see, showing unexplained gravitational pulls. But the structureContinue reading "Giant supercluster discovered hiding behind the Milky Way"
The post Giant supercluster discovered hiding behind the Milky Way appeared first on Astronomy Magazine.
Particle physics is the epitome of ‘big science’. To answer our most fundamental questions out about physics requires world class experiments that push the limits of whats technologically possible. Such incredible sophisticated experiments, like those at the LHC, require big facilities to make them possible, big collaborations to run them, big project planning to make dreams of new facilities a reality, and committees with big acronyms to decide what to build.
Enter the Particle Physics Project Prioritization Panel (aka P5) which is tasked with assessing the landscape of future projects and laying out a roadmap for the future of the field in the US. And because these large projects are inevitably an international endeavor, the report they released last week has a large impact on the global direction of the field. The report lays out a vision for the next decade of neutrino physics, cosmology, dark matter searches and future colliders.
P5 follows the community-wide brainstorming effort known as the Snowmass Process in which researchers from all areas of particle physics laid out a vision for the future. The Snowmass process led to a particle physics ‘wish list’, consisting of all the projects and research particle physicists would be excited to work on. The P5 process is the hard part, when this incredibly exciting and diverse research program has to be made to fit within realistic budget scenarios. Advocates for different projects and research areas had to make a case of what science their project could achieve and a detailed estimate of the costs. The panel then takes in all this input and makes a set of recommendations of how the budget should be allocated, what should projects be realized and what hopes are dashed. Though the panel only produces a set of recommendations, they are used quite extensively by the Department of Energy which actually allocates funding. If your favorite project is not endorsed by the report, its very unlikely to be funded.
Particle physics is an incredibly diverse field, covering sub-atomic to cosmic scales, so recommendations are divided up into several different areas. In this post I’ll cover the panel’s recommendations for neutrino physics and the cosmic frontier. Future colliders, perhaps the spiciest topic, will be covered in a follow up post.
For those in the neutrino physics community all eyes were on the panels recommendations regarding the Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (DUNE). DUNE is the US’s flagship particle physics experiment for the coming decade and aims to be the definitive worldwide neutrino experiment in the years to come. A high powered beam of neutrinos will be produced at Fermilab and sent 800 miles through the earth’s crust towards several large detectors placed in a mine in South Dakota. Its a much bigger project than previous neutrino experiments, unifying essentially the entire US community into a single collaboration.
DUNE is setup to produce world leading measurements of neutrino oscillations, the property by which neutrinos produced in one ‘flavor state’, (eg an electron-neutrino) gradually changes its state with sinusoidal probability (eg into a muon neutrino) as it propagates through space. This oscillation is made possible by a simple quantum mechanical weirdness: neutrino’s flavor state, whether it couples to electrons muons or taus, is not the same as its mass state. Neutrinos of a definite mass are therefore a mixture of the different flavors and visa versa.
Detailed measurements of this oscillation are the best way we know to determine several key neutrino properties. DUNE aims to finally pin down two crucial neutrino properties: their ‘mass ordering’, which will solidify how the different neutrino flavors and measured mass differences all fit together, and their ‘CP-violation’ which specifies whether neutrinos and their anti-matter counterparts behave the same or not. DUNE’s main competitor is the Hyper-Kamiokande experiment in Japan, another next-generation neutrino experiment with similar goals.
Construction of the DUNE experiment has been ongoing for several years and unfortunately has not been going quite as well as hoped. It has faced significant schedule delays and cost overruns. DUNE is now not expected to start taking data until 2031, significantly behind Hyper-Kamiokande’s projected 2027 start. These delays may lead to Hyper-K making these definitive neutrino measurements years before DUNE, which would be a significant blow to the experiment’s impact. This left many DUNE collaborators worried about its broad support from the community.
It came as a relief then when P5 report re-affirmed the strong science case for DUNE, calling it the “ultimate long baseline” neutrino experiment. The report strongly endorsed the completion of the first phase of DUNE. However, it recommended a pared-down version of its upgrade, advocating for an earlier beam upgrade in lieu of additional detectors. This re-imagined upgrade will still achieve the core physics goals of the original proposal with a significant cost savings. With this report, and news that the beleaguered underground cavern construction in South Dakota is now 90% complete, was certainly welcome holiday news to the neutrino community. This is also sets up a decade-long race between DUNE and Hyper-K to be the first to measure these key neutrino properties.
While we normally think of particle physics as focused on the behavior of sub-atomic particles, its really about the study of fundamental forces and laws, no matter the method. This means that telescopes to study the oldest light in the universe, the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB), fall into the same budget category as giant accelerators studying sub-atomic particles. Though the experiments in these two areas look very different, the questions they seek to answer are cross-cutting. Understanding how particles interact at very high energies helps us understand the earliest moments of the universe, when such particles were all interacting in a hot dense plasma. Likewise, by studying the these early moments of the universe and its large-scale evolution can tell us about what kinds of particles and forces are influencing its dynamics. When asking fundamental questions about the universe, one needs both the sharpest microscopes and the grandest panoramas possible.
The most prominent example of this blending of the smallest and largest scales in particle physics is dark matter. Some of our best evidence for dark matter comes analyzing the cosmic microwave background to determine how the primordial plasma behaved. These studies showed that some type of ‘cold’, matter that doesn’t interact with light, aka dark matter, was necessary to form the first clumps that eventually seeded the formation of galaxies. Without it, the universe would be much more soup-y and structureless than what we see to today.
To determine what dark matter is then requires an attack from two fronts: design experiments here on earth attempting directly detect it, and further study its cosmic implications to look for more clues as to its properties.
The panel recommended next generation telescopes to study the CMB as a top priority. The so called ‘Stage 4’ CMB experiment would deploy telescopes in both the south pole and Chile’s Atacama desert to better characterize sources of atmospheric noise. The CMB has been studied extensively before, but the increased precision of CMS-S4 could shed light on mysteries like dark energy, dark matter, inflation, and the recent Hubble Tension. Given the past fruitfulness of these efforts, I think few doubted the science case for such a next generation experiment.
The P5 report recommended a suite of new dark matter experiments in the next decade, including the ‘ultimate’ liquid Xenon based dark matter search. Such an experiment would follow in the footsteps of massive noble gas experiments like LZ and XENONnT which have been hunting for a favored type of dark matter called WIMP’s for the last few decades. These experiments essentially build giant vats of liquid Xenon, carefully shield from any sources of external radiation, and look for signs of dark matter particles bumping into any of the Xenon atoms. The larger the vat of Xenon, the higher chance a dark matter particle will bump into something. Current generation experiments have ~7 tons of Xenon, and the next generation experiment would be even larger. The next generation aims to reach the so called ‘neutrino floor’, the point as which the experiments would be sensitive enough to observe astrophysical neutrinos bumping into the Xenon. Such neutrino interactions would look extremely similar to those of dark matter, and thus represent an unavoidable background which would signal the ultimate sensitivity of this type of experiment. WIMP’s could still be hiding in a basement below this neutrino floor, but finding them would be exceedingly difficult.
WIMP’s are not the only dark matter candidates in town, and recent years have also seen an explosion of interest in the broad range of dark matter possibilities, with axions being a prominent example. Other kinds of dark matter could have very different properties than WIMPs and have had much fewer dedicated experiments to search for them. There is ‘low hanging fruit’ to pluck in the way of relatively cheap experiments which can achieve world-leading sensitivity. Previously, these ‘table top’ sized experiments had a notoriously difficult time obtaining funding, as they were often crowded out of the budgets by the massive flagship projects. However, small experiments can be crucial to ensuring our best chance of dark matter discovery, as they fill in the blinds pots missed by the big projects.
The panel therefore recommended creating a new pool of funding set aside for these smaller scale projects. Allowing these smaller scale projects to flourish is important for the vibrancy and scientific diversity of the field, as the centralization of ‘big science’ projects can sometimes lead to unhealthy side effects. This specific recommendation also mirrors a broader trend of the report: to attempt to rebalance the budget portfolio to be spread more evenly and less dominated by the large projects.
Any report like this comes with some tough choices. Budget realities mean not all projects can be funded. Besides the pairing down of some of DUNE’s upgrades, one of the biggest areas that was recommended against were ‘accessory experiments at the LHC’. In particular, MATHUSULA and the Forward Physics Facility were two experiments that proposed to build additional detectors near already existing LHC collision points to look for particles that may be missed by the current experiments. By building new detectors hundreds of meters away from the collision point, shielded by concrete and the earth, they can obtained unique sensitivity to ‘long lived’ particles capable of traversing such distances. These experiments would follow in the footsteps of the current FASER experiment, which is already producing impressive results.
While FASER found success as a relatively ‘cheap’ experiment, reusing detector components from and situating itself in a beam tunnel, these new proposals were asking for quite a bit more. The scale of these detectors would have required new caverns to be built, significantly increasing the cost. Given the cost and specialized purpose of these detectors, the panel recommended against their construction. These collaborations may now try to find ways to pare down their proposal so they can apply to the new small project portfolio.
Another major decision by the panel was to recommend against hosting a new Higgs factor collider in the US. But that will discussed more in a future post.
The P5 panel was faced with a difficult task, the total cost of all projects they were presented with was three times the budget. But they were able to craft a plan that continues the work of the previous decade, addresses current shortcomings and lays out an inspiring vision for the future. So far the community seems to be strongly rallying behind it. At time of writing, over 2700 community members from undergraduates to senior researchers have signed a petition endorsing the panels recommendations. This strong show of support will be key for turning these recommendations into actual funding, and hopefully lobbying congress to even increase funding so that more of this vision can be realized.
For those interested the full report as well as executive summaries of different areas can be found on the P5 website. Members of the US particle physics community are also encouraged to sign the petition endorsing the recommendations here.
And stayed tuned for part 2 of our coverage which will discuss the implications of the report on future colliders!
Login
