0|

Before You Begin

Hello everyone!
I am proud to present before you, the very first edition of our annual Club Magazine
- the Arecibo!
Arecibo was the first interstellar message intentionally broadcast by humanity. It
included our position in the universe, human DNA and a message of peace to any
aliens who see the message!
This magazine is also intended as a message - a message to all non-astronomers
and astronomy enthusiasts. We intend to provide you with a sample of some of the
key astronomical events and news from the year. Here, you will give a flavour of
some of the most interesting bits and pieces from all of astronomy, and hopefully
come back for more!
Bringing out our magazine was an aspiration that we have had for some time, and
something that I genuinely wanted to initiate during my term as the Club Head.
I thank all the contributors, and the entire magazine team - particularly Sarisha -
for the effort they put into making this endeavour a success.
And above than that, I thank you the reader for giving our work a chance.

Please enjoy!

Devashish Kaushik
Club Head
The Astronomy Club
IIT Indore

1|
EDITORIAL
Astronomy is a vast, unending, often apparently wins you Nobel prizes, is so
ridiculous puzzle which takes us amazing! Also, to complete the trio of
through the journeys of the smallest sci-fi tropes, we will also explore the
quarks to the largest galaxies, all possibilities of time travel in ‘Is Time
while always packing a surprising Travel Possible?’. Before ending, we
punch we never saw coming. We at will explore neutrinos, those pesky
astronomy club try to understand the things we learnt way back in high
universe, one amazing phenomenon at school produced during nuclear
a time, and this is our attempt to share fusion, and dark matter, the greatest
all the interesting things we have unknown in understanding our
come across to all you guys. universe itself!
In this edition: So here you go, the most intriguing
topics from one of the most ancient
‘How to see a Solar Eclipse’ takes us
sciences to the most modern day, far
back to a day from our unending
fetched ideas. Hope you enjoy this
quarantine, when we had the chance
journey!
to experience a solar eclipse, what can
be seen with the naked eye, and what - Sarisha Das
is when we dig deeper. ‘Alcubierre
Drive’ will explore how we can hope to
travel faster than light, something we
all have wondered after seeing all
those sci-fi movies! Another thing you
might have wondered is whether we
are alone in this universe, and ‘Are We
Alone’ will take you through what we
can guess about that. ‘Understanding
the first ever image of a black hole’
will do exactly that, tell you why the
first ever image of a black hole, which

2|
How To See An Eclipse
WHAT HAPPENED ON JUNE 21 LAST YEAR

Sagar Joshi

I'll never forget this solar

eclipse; it'll forever be
seared into my mind...

...and retinas ... I really

should've worn some
glasses.
-An uninformed person

With the solar eclipse that

was witnessed on June 21, 2020, the
theme for today’s post is nothing but to
marvel at the elegant science behind a
solar eclipse.
Description
When the Earth, the Moon and the Sun
are aligned in just the right way, a part
of the Earth gets engulfed in a shadow
from which the Sun cannot be seen (at
least partially). By pure chance, the
angular diameters of the Sun and the
Moon as seen from the Earth are each
about 0.5 degrees, meaning that they
have roughly the same apparent size
in the sky. This is the sole
circumstance which allows us to
experience solar eclipses.
When the Moon eclipses the Sun, it
casts two types of shadows: A large
shadow called the Penumbra, and a
small but darker shadow called the
Umbra. We observe four types of
eclipses:
1) Total eclipse, which occurs
when the Moon completely
blocks all light from the Sun
2) Annular eclipse, which occurs
when the Moon is not big
enough to cover the Sun
entirely, resulting in the
formation of a ring-like shape

1|
 (Annulus) when their centres
coincide.
3) Partial eclipse, which occurs
when the Moon passes the Sun
off-centre.
4) Hybrid eclipse (relatively rare),
which appears as a total eclipse
as viewed from some places on
the Earth, and as an annular
eclipse when viewed from some
other places.
The places on which the Umbra falls
experience a total eclipse, whereas
the places on which the Penumbra
falls experience a partial eclipse. As
the Earth is rotating about its axis, the
Umbra traces a path along the surface
of the Earth which is called ‘The Path
of Totality’. Partial eclipses are seen
outside of the track of an annular or a
total eclipse. Here is the track of the
annular eclipse that had occurred on
June 21, 2020.
2|
(source: screenshot taken from
NASA’s website)
You must be somewhere within the
central path (between the blue lines)
to see the annular phase of the
eclipse.
Prediction
Generally, a total solar eclipse
happens somewhere on the earth
twice a year. But, a particular place on
the Earth experiences the event only
about once every 400 years.
By means of modern science, we know
that the orbits of the Earth and the
Moon are regular to a large extent and
are hence, predictable. But, since the
axis of the Earth is tilted by about 23.4
degrees from the ecliptic plane (the
plane of revolution about the Sun) and
that the Lunar orbit is inclined by 5.14
degrees to the ecliptic plane, even if
there is regularity to the orbits, there
are a lot of
possible
combinations of the values which
affect the occurrence of a solar
In 1824, the Prussian astronomer and
eclipse.
mathematician Friedrich Bessel
(Source: Wikipedia) introduced a new method for the
prediction of solar eclipses which
Hence, it is very difficult to find a
makes use of Newton’s law of
regular repeating pattern for these
gravitation. Even today, it remains the
eclipses. Even so, that is exactly what
most powerful technique, even with
an ancient Babylonian astronomer
the application of computers. It
(whose name is lost to history)
involves characterizing an eclipse into
achieved in doing about 2 and a half
a set of eight parameters known as the
millennia ago.
Besselian elements.
Before the advent of modern science
and mathematics, ancient
astronomers used to painstakingly
record each and every time a solar
eclipse occurred while also noting the
type of the eclipse. The Babylonian
astronomer referred to the catalogue
of eclipses and saw that the pattern
followed by eclipses repeated every
6,585 days. This cycle of 6,585 days is
known as the Saros Cycle. Even if
predictions from this cycle are pretty
accurate, they are not perfect.

3|
Fundamental plane (Red), outline of
umbra and penumbra (green)
(Source: Wikipedia)

Although we would not go into full

mathematical detail here, the basic
concept is that Besselian elements
describe the movement of the shadow
cast by the Moon on a specifically Annularity, as seen from Beigang,
chosen plane, called the fundamental Yunlin, Taiwan
plane. It is the plane through the
(Source: Wikipedia)
Earth's centre that is perpendicular to
the line through the centres of the Sun
and the Moon. Due to the fact that this
plane is perpendicular to this line, the
outline of the shadow cast on this
plane is always a circle.

Hence, we can see that comparatively

few values (only eight) are needed to
accurately describe the movement of
the shadow on the fundamental plane.
This is quite remarkable because the
next step is just to project the shadow
on the Earth’s surface and voila! we
now know exactly how the umbra and
the penumbra are cast on the Earth.
Here are a few photos of the eclipse of
June 21, 2020:
Partial eclipse, as seen from Pune,
Maharashtra, India
(source: self)
In conclusion, as the Moon is drifting
away from the Earth at a rate of 1.5
inches per year, humans will not be
able to experience solar eclipses after
about a 600 million years. Hence, as
they say, enjoy it while it lasts!

4|
 ALCUBIERRE DRIVE
FASTER THAN LIGHT TRAVEL!
Debtirtha Saha

The following picture is a visualization

of a warp field. This concept, also
known as FTL (Faster than Light)
travel is a valid solution of the Einstein
field equations, specifically about how
space, time and energy interact.
Scientists have been operating under
the restrictions imposed by the
relativistic universe ever since
Einstein proposed his Theory of
relativity in 1905. One of these
restrictions is that the speed of light
can never be exceeded, and hence the
concept of FTL travel is never going to
happen.
But then, in 1994 a Mexican physicist
proposed a method which would allow
FTL travel and would also not violate
Einstein's field equations.
Concept:
This method basically involves
stretching the fabric of space-time in
a wave which would cause the space
ahead of the object to contract and the
space behind to expand.
The object in this wave would then be
able to ride this region called a 'warp
bubble' of flat space.
This is what is known as the
'Alcubierre Metric'. Interpreted in the
context of General Relativity, the
metric allows a warp bubble to appear
in a previously flat region of spacetime
and move away, effectively at speeds
that exceed the speed of light. The
interior of the bubble is the inertial
reference frame for any object
inhabiting it.
As the object(ship) is not moving
within the bubble itself but is being
carried along as the region moves, the
relativistic effects can not apply. And
so, the rules of space-time and the
laws of relativity are not violated in
the conventional sense.
One of the reasons for this is because
this method would not rely on moving

5|
faster than light in the local sense,
since a light beam within this bubble
would still always move faster than
the ship. It is only 'faster than light' in
the sense that the ship could reach its
destination faster than a beam of light
that was traveling outside the warp
bubble.
But there are few
problems :(
There are no known methods to create
such a warp bubble in a region of
space that would not already contain
one. Secondly, assuming there was a
way to create such a bubble, there is
not yet any known way of leaving once
inside it. As a result, the Alcubierre
drive remains in the category of theory
at this time.
Connection to dark
matter and energy
An astrophysicist Jamie Farnes from
the University of Oxford has proposed
a theory that unifies dark energy and
dark matter into a single dark fluid,
and which can be tested by new
scientific instruments. Farnes found
that Albert Einstein had explored the
idea of gravitationally repulsive
negative masses while developing the
equations of general relativity, an idea
which leads to a hypothesis where the
6|
cosmos has equal amounts of positive
and negative qualities. Farnes' theory
relies on negative masses that behave
identically to the physics of the
Alcubierre drive, providing a natural
solution for the current problems.
If the theory is correct, which has been
highly debated in the scientific
literature, it would explain dark
energy, dark matter, allow closed
timelike curves, and suggest that an
Alcubierre drive is physically possible
with exotic matter.
Mathematically, it is represented as:
𝑑𝑠 2 = – (𝑎2 – 𝐵𝑖 𝐵 𝑖 ) 𝑑𝑡 2
+ 2𝐵𝑖 𝑑𝑥 𝑖 𝑑𝑡
+ 𝑔𝑖𝑗 𝑑𝑥 𝑖 𝑑𝑥 𝑗
where,
• a is the lapse function that gives
the interval of proper time
between nearby hypersurfaces,
• Bi is the shift vector that relates
the spatial coordinate systems
on different hypersurfaces,
• gij is a positive-definite metric
on each of the hypersurfaces.
Experiments
conducted:
In 1996, NASA founded a research
project; Breakthrough Propulsion
Physics Project (BPP) to study various
spacecraft proposals and
technologies. In 2002, the project's
funding was discontinued, which
prompted the founder – Marc G. Millis
– and several members to create the
Tau Zero Foundation. Named after the
famous novel of the same name by
Poul Anderson, this organization is
dedicated to researching interstellar
travel.
In 2012, NASA's Advanced Propulsion
Physics Laboratory announced that
they began conducting experiments to
see if a 'warp drive' was in fact
possible. This included developing an
interferometer to detect the spatial
distortions produced by the expanding
and contracting space-time of the
Alcubierre metric.
The team lead – Dr. Harold Sonny
White – described their work in a
NASA paper titled Warp Field
Mechanics 101. He also explained their
work in NASA's 2012 Roundup
publication: "We've initiated an
interferometer test bed in this lab,
where we're going to go through and
try and generate a microscopic
instance of a little warp bubble. And
although this is just a microscopic
instance of the phenomena, we're
perturbing space time, one part in 10
million, a very tiny amount… The math
would allow you to go to Alpha
Centauri in two weeks as measured by
clocks here on Earth. So, somebody's
clock onboard the spacecraft has the
same rate of time as somebody in
mission control here in Houston might
7|
have. There are no tidal forces, no
undue issues, and the proper
acceleration is zero. When you turn
the field on, everybody doesn't go
slamming against the bulkhead,
(which) would be a very short and sad
trip."
In 2013, Dr. White and his team
members published the results of
their 19.6-second warp field test under
vacuum conditions. These results
were deemed to be inconclusive.
Conclusion:
Ever since the sound barrier was
broken, people have turned their
attention to how we can break the light
speed barrier. But “Warp Drive” or any
other term for faster-than-light travel
still remains at the level of
speculation.
The bulk of scientific knowledge
concludes that it’s impossible,
especially when considering
Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. There
are certainly some credible concepts
in scientific literature, however it’s too
soon to know if they are viable.
Science fiction writers have given us
many images of interstellar travel, but
traveling at the speed of light is simply
imaginary at present.
In the meantime, science moves
forward. And while no space
organization is pursuing interstellar
flight, scientists continue to advance REFERENCES:
ion propulsion for missions to deep 1. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.science
space and beyond using solar electric alert.com/how-feasible-is-a-warp-drive-here -
s-the-science/amp
power. This form of propulsion is the 2. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.popula
fastest and most efficient to date. rmechanics.com/science/amp32449240/nas a-
warp-drive-space-time/

There are many “absurd” theories that 3. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_dr

have become reality over the years of
scientific research. But for the near
future, warp drive remains a dream.
ive
The research paper written by Dr.
Miguel Alcubierre:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&
url=https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/0009
013&ved=2ahUKEwihpau98eDsAhXyjOYKHRcwBdsQFjAC
egQIARAB&usg=AOvVaw1L iZLmTzPckHUfEUzSU3wH

A planet nicknamed “The Genesis Planet”

has been found to be 12.7 billion years old
making it the oldest planet found.
More on origins of the universe -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdPzOWlLrbE

8|
ARE WE ALONE?
Hasan Mustafa
Legend has it that Enrico Fermi asked
out loud “So. Where is everybody?”
Guess what? He didn’t receive a reply.
This is the essence of Fermi’s Paradox.
There are several billion habitable
planets in the universe which has
existed for about 13.7 billion years.
However, we see none, not even signs
of a ceased existence. For an
intelligent species it would take just
about a million years to colonize its
own galaxy. Also, the Drake equation
predicts about 1000 to 100,000,000
civilizations in the Milky Way. By any
reason aliens must be lurking around
just about some galactic corner.
Search for extraterrestrial
intelligence started when it became
possible to receive radio signals from
space. Tesla, when working in his
wireless transmission lab received
signals which seemed to be coming
from mars, Tesla wished he had
established contact with the martins.
However, they turned out to be signals
from either Marconi who was
experimenting in Britain or Jovian
emissions. Since then, all efforts to
detect any signs of life beyond Earth
have proven to be futile. Search
however continues, and we are still
“listening” to any potential signal
from extraterrestrial beings.
Maybe everyone is just listening?
One proposed solution to the Fermi
Paradox is that probably everyone is
listening, but no one is transmitting
anything. For example, the only
intelligent life we know about us does
not transmit anything to be received
by other intelligent life forms.
There is just one another major
problem: we have started to look for
alien life forms very recently and have
covered only a small window of time
on a cosmological scale. This was
realized, search for structures such as
the Dyson sphere was proposed to
resolve the conundrum. The idea
behind the Dyson sphere is that any
intelligent life form will try to harness
as much energy from its parent star as
possible which might lead to them
creating a sort of cloud of energy
harnessing structure around the star.
There have been a few near-eureka
moments in the recent history of SETI.
One of the most famous is the “Wow!”
signal received by the Ohio State
University’s Big Ear radio telescope.
The signal had most features of a
possible extraterrestrial signal, it was

9|
at 21cm, regarded as the most
reasonable frequency to communicate
with alien life form, it came from a
single source in the space and had a
small bandwidth. But this signal was
never detected again even after long
repeated searches.
With the advancement of technology
and prospects of deeper space probes,
the question asked by Fermi may soon
be resolved. As Dr Erik Zackrisson
remarked in a talk at IIT Indore, we
may get an answer to the SETI
question before the end of the century
with more extensive and better
observation techniques and faster
laser propelled space-sails to
navigate the nooks and crannies of the
universe.

The largest structure found in the

universe is the Sloan Great Wall, a super
cluster of galaxies 1.37 billion light-years
wide.
Fun stuff on gravity visualization -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTY1Kje0yLg

10 |
The First Ever Image of
a Blackhole:
WHAT THE NOBEL PRIZE, 2020 WAS ABOUT
Manish Sahoo
We must have all in recent times seen
the first ever image of the super
massive blackhole at the centre of the
M87 galaxy observed by the EHT (Event
Horizon Telescope). The M87 galaxy
had been a subject of observation for
the EHT in 2017 and finally on the 10th
of April 2019 the first ever image of the
blackhole was released. So, we had all
seen the image but why was it such an
important discovery in the field of
astronomy, this can be understood
only if the image makes sense to us.
Let's first see how far the M87 is from
us and how difficult it was to get even
the fuzzy image of the blackhole. So,
the answer to the first question is M87
is about 55 million ly away and it
subtends an angle of only 40 micro arc
seconds, and for the second question
the explanation follows. Obviously not
all blackholes are even observable
because of their enormous gravity
which allows no light to escape, but
the super massive blackhole at the
centre of M87 is a very active
11 |
blackhole by which I mean it keeps on
eating up matter present in the
accretion disk around it and this is
what makes it visible.
The actual blackhole or the is
something much smaller than what is
captured in the image. The distance
from the centre of the blackhole to its
event horizon is called Schwarzschild
radius and it is believed that the
innermost layer of the accretion ring
is at a distance about 2-3 times that of
the Schwarzschild radius but why is it
so? Well, there is actually an
innermost stable radius for matter
revolving around a black hole which is
3 times the Schwarzschild radius for
stationary blackholes but decreases
with increase in spin of the blackhole.
But even light goes around the
blackhole in a loop and because of its
speed it can revolve at about 1.5 times
the Schwarzschild radius. Upon
closely seeing the image we can see a
dark patch within a light ring. So, what
actually is this dark patch?
Actually what happens is when light light very similar to the image of
coming perpendicular to accretion blackhole shown in the movie
disk passes near or into the blackhole INTERSTELLAR.
it actually goes around in an path and
Another important piece of
is absorbed by the blackhole some of
information is about the direction of
the rays get absorbed get absorbed
spin of the matter in the accretion disk
directly others curve around the event
which can be understood from relative
horizon and get absorbed at the
brightness of both sides of the
backside and some go around the
accretion disk. What happens is that
blackhole once and then absorb at the
the side of the blackhole moving
front and this goes on till a ray passes
towards us looks much brighter than
at about 2.5 times the Schwarzschild
the side moving away from us due to a
radius and just grazes the surface of
phenomenon called relativistic
the event horizon and returns to our
beaming, from which now we can
telescope.
easily predict the direction of spin of
So, the dark shadow we see at the matter.
middle is actually infinite alternate
This qualitatively summarizes almost
mappings of the front and backside of
all the information we can get from the
the event horizon. Though here I have
image but it is still not correct to say
described everything assuming we are
that we even have 1% complete
perpendicular to the blackhole and
understanding of the blackhole.
luckily, we are in this case which can
be verified by seeing the narrow-
collimated jets created by the
enormous magnetic field which are
almost perpendicular to our telescope.
But the image would have been the
same with a central patch and rings of

If you would place a pinhead sized

piece of the Sun on the Earth you
would die from standing within 145 km
(90 miles) from it.

12 |
 Time Travel
The introduction of Einstein's Relativity
theories opened up gates for space-
time and raised hope for travelling
through the space-time.
The concept of time travel always
fascinated physicist and laypersons
alike.
So, what izz Space-Time???
Let's Check on Wikipedia!! Our only
dependent info source :))
Time travel is the concept of
movement between specific points in
time, analogous to move between
different points in space by an object
or a person.
And in our most commonly sci-fic
mentions a "Time Machine"…. a
hypothetical device to travel across
the time.
Nowadays, movies, super hero comics,
TV –SHWOS amazed us by the
possibility of time travel as well as the
13 |
Mudit Vyas
existence of Multiverse or Parallel
Universe.
MULTIVERSE, QUANTUM REALM,
WORMHOLES: all these words are
trending among the crowd and even
among the
Twelve years old schoolboy too.
But What is Time???
While most people think of time as a
constant, physicist Albert Einstein
showed that time is an illusion; it is
relative — it can vary for different
observers depending on your speed
through space. To Einstein, time is the
"fourth dimension."
Space is described as a three-
dimensional arena, which provides a
traveller with coordinates — such as
length, width and height —showing
location. Time provides another
coordinate — direction — although
conventionally, it only moves forward.
General relativity also provides
scenarios that could allow travellers
to go back in time.
One possibility could be to go faster
than light, which travels at 186,282
miles per second (299,792 kilometers
per second) in a vacuum.
A linked possibility, NASA stated,
would be to create "wormhole"
between points in space-time. While
Einstein's equations provide for them,
they would collapse very quickly and
would only be suitable for microscopic
particles. Also, scientists haven't
actually observed these wormholes
yet. Also, the technology needed to
create a wormhole is far beyond
anything we have today.
While Einstein's theories appear to
make time travel difficult, some
groups have proposed alternate
solutions to jump back and forth in
time. Some of these hypotheses are:
So, is time travel possible??
While time travel does not appear
possible for now... :(
Advances in quantum theories could
perhaps provide some understanding
of how to overcome time travel
paradoxes.
One possibility, although it would not
necessarily lead to time travel, is
solving the mystery of how individual
particles can communicate
instantaneously with each other faster
than the speed of light.
In the meantime, however, interested
time travelers can at least experience
it vicariously through movies,
television and books.

Infinite cylinder

Black Holes

Cosmic String

Grandfather paradox

A single Quasar produce the same

amount of energy as 1 trillion suns.
More about Pulsars:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2L7aNkL01o

14 |
The capricious, neutral,
little one:
THE PHYSICS BEHIND NEUTRINO OSCILLATIONS

Danyal Shahid Shamsi

Well, the observable universe is
baffling and mystifying. The sheer
abundance of exotic structures, the
physical laws under whose hegemony
they evolve, and the volley of particles
moving at speeds close to the speed of
light; all of it is enthralling. Inter alia,
the study of these particles, helps us
unveil the laws of Physics at work in
the universe. Neutrinos are one of
them.
The processes in the universe are
directed by the four fundamental
forces, the gravitational force, the
electromagnetic force, the strong
force, and the weak force. Neutrinos
can interact through the weak
interaction, processes involving
which, produce neutrinos in three
‘flavors’ or kinds, each associated
with a corresponding lepton. The
‘electron’, ‘muon’ and ‘tau’ neutrinos
are associated with the eponymous
particles. Neutrinos can also interact
through the gravitational force,
something we have discovered quite
recently. The earlier paradigm of the
Standard Model with massless
neutrinos was upended by an inclusion
of masses to account for ‘neutrino
oscillation’. As the name suggests, the
neutrino is a ‘neutral’ particle, and
thus the electromagnetic force is off-
limits. Neutrinos don’t interact via the
strong force either.
In the 1960s, the famous Homestake
experiment, found a serious anomaly
in the flux of solar neutrinos received
on Earth. The experimental value was
seriously off from what the theoretical
calculations predicted. Exploring
issues with the experimental set-up
as well as with the solar model

15 |
amounted to nothing. The phenomenon
of neutrino oscillations, or neutrinos
changing their ‘flavor’ and mass, was
presented as a feasible solution to the
conundrum. Eventually, the
experiments conducted over the
Super-Kamiokande, and Sudbury
Neutrino Observatory (SNO)
established unquestionably that the
phenomenon, did in fact occur. The
2015 Nobel prize in Physics was
shared by researchers from both
observatories.
For understanding the process of
Neutrino oscillations, an
understanding of what eigenvalues for
a wavefunction mean, is
indispensable. Unlike in classical
physics, where we can impute a value
for any physical quantity to a particle,
at a given moment, quantum
mechanics requires that one
‘measure’ that quantity for the
particle. Different values, called
‘eigenvalues’, for the same quantity
can be arrived at, with pre-determined
probabilities. The state of the particle
is thus a superposition, or a ‘mixture’
of all possible states, the probability of
the measurement for each thereof,
depending on the ‘weightage’
assigned. This is an interpretation of
quantum mechanics I find best suited
for explaining the phenomenon that
follows next.
16 |
‘Flavor’ as stated before, is a
quantum mechanical property for the
neutrino, like its mass. The ‘flavor
eigenstates’ are different from ‘mass
eigenstates’, and they are
superpositions of one another,
expressed neatly in a matrix form
called the Pontecorvo Maki Nakagawa
Sakata (PMNS) matrix. Any neutrino,
generated in a process involving the
weak interaction, is produced as a
‘flavor eigenstate’. Now, while the
neutrino progresses through space,
the phases of superposed mass
eigenstates move at different speeds
(the phase velocity depends on the
mass), and thus the proportion in
which the ‘mass eigenstates’ are
combined changes. This blurs out the
‘flavor’ of the neutrino, and makes it a
probabilistic measure.
Thus, the ‘flavor’ we observe for the
neutrino, depends on the distance
from the source at which the neutrinos
are detected.
 Currently, studies conducted by
several neutrino observatories spread
across the globe, such as the Super-K,
the SNO, and the Ice Cube, inter alia,
have helped us calculate the
difference in squares of the masses of
the ‘mass eigenstates’. Further
research, and more precise
measurements would help us
calculate the individual masses, and
find more about the physics of our
‘capricious, neutral, little particle’.

Seasons last 21 earth years on Uranus

while each pole has 42 years of sunlight
followed by 42 years of darkness.

17 |
IS DARK MATTER REAL?
By Devashish Kaushik
“Why it's time to take alternatives to
dark matter seriously”, “Maybe dark
matter doesn’t exist after all, new
research suggests”, “Dark Matter may
not actually exist” - such headlines
have become increasingly common
over the last few years. In fact, new
research papers proposing or
discussing alternatives to Dark Matter
are being published on a weekly basis.
While all this seems (and is) very
exciting, those who remember the
replication crises - and the fate of
hyped ideas like Cold Fusion, power
posing, and ego depletion - might find
this a bit concerning. Indeed, a flurry
of proposals working to fit the same
phenomenon, seemingly without any
advance predictions or new data, calls
for some investigation. What exactly is
dark matter? What evidence supports
it? Why are so many people objecting
to it? And do any of the alternatives
hold water? Let’s take a look!
So, what is this dark matter thingy?
18 |
Unlike the impression one might get
from watching Futurama or A Certain
Scientific Dark Matter, astronomers
actually, have a very simple idea in
mind when they refer to dark matter.
One way to understand it is to contrast
it with ordinary (Light?) matter. Look
at anything around you - it will exist
due to its interaction with the basic
forces of nature. The fact that you are
able to look at it relies on the fact that
it interacts with light (a form of
electromagnetic energy) - either by
reflection (as in wood), or by emitting
light (as in a torch or flame). It doesn’t
fall through everything else around it
due to electromagnetic forces holding
individual objects together. And it
doesn’t fly away due to the
gravitational force keeping it bound to
the Earth. Finally, the nuclear (and
electromagnetic) forces hold its
constituent atoms together.
Now imagine an object that was still
affected by gravity, but is otherwise
unaffected by every other force. It
cannot be seen, heard, smelled, or
touched. It passes right through every
other object. And it doesn’t have any
atomic or molecular structure that we
can study.
Congratulations, you just understood speed with distance in the inner region
dark matter! of the galaxy near the core. After that,
the velocity was expected to decrease
.
with distance.
.
This was because most of the galaxy's
. (visible) mass is concentrated at its
Wait so that’s it? But why would that be centre, leading to high gravitational
a thing? forces and velocities in this region. In
the outer disk, the gravitational force
decreases with distance, and the
Well, to answer that we need to go orbital velocity is also expected to
back a bit into the past. decrease.

Specifically, we need to go to Western

Europe in the 1930’s. At the time, What they actually found however,
several astronomers, including the was very different. The velocities in
Swizz Fritz Zwicky and the Dutchman the core regions were as expected, but
Jan Oort (of Oort Cloud fame), were the outer region showed a nearly
looking at the movement of stars constant velocity profile or even a
within galaxies. In particular, they marked increase!
were making radio astronomy
measurements and using the doppler
effect to calculate the speed at which
stars at different distances from the
centre of the galaxy revolved in their
orbits.

From their
observations of the
visible mass in the
galaxies and the
predictions of
Newtonian and
Einsteinian theories
of gravity, they
expected to find a
sharp increase in

19 |
This phenomenon should be clear from
the above image (swiped straight from
Wikipedia, I am lazy that way :P). The
lower dashed line was the theoretical
expectation based on the visible mass
in the galaxy. The upper solid line is
the actual observed result.
To explain this anomaly, these
scientists suggested that there might
be extra mass in the entire galactic
region which was responsible for
extra gravitational force on the stars,
leading to their higher velocity. Since
this matter didn’t leave any other trace
of its existence - whether as visible
light, or as X-ray, Ultraviolet, Infrared
or Radio emissions - it came to be
called ‘Dark’ Matter.
The galactic rotation measurements
were refined and expanded to dozens
of galaxies over the 1960’s and 1970’s,
and they all yielded the same result -
galaxies rotated much faster than they
had any right to. Every galaxy seemed
to have a lot more mass throughout it
than was visible, as if it was embedded
in a cloud of invisible matter.
Based on these observations, Dark
Matter was integrated into our
understanding of our Universe. The
resulting model is called the Lambda
ΛCDM model (also written as ΛCDM,
20 |
with the Greek letter referring to
Dark Energy and ΛCDM being an
abbreviation for Cold Dark Matter -
where ‘Cold’ means that the speed of
the Dark Matter is less than 10% of the
speed of light). Conveniently, this
model makes a number of testable
experimental predictions which we
will look at in a bit.
Overall, the understanding that
emerged was as follows:
It was assumed that in addition to
normal matter which could be
detected due to its interaction with
electromagnetic radiation (light),
there was also a much larger amount
of non-interacting Dark Matter in the
universe which was only detectable by
its gravitational influence. This matter
was supposed to have been part of the
universe since its inception. Since it
did not have any electromagnetic
interaction, it would not be affected by
density perturbations due to radiation
during the era following the Big Bang.
Thus, areas of higher-than-average
Dark Matter density should have
collapsed to form a ‘scaffold’ onto
which ordinary matter could condense
to form galaxies, stars and the world
as we know it.
So, is that all the evidence from which
this Dark Matter stuff comes out?
Spinning galaxies and a just-so story
about the early Universe?

To put in plainly - hell no!
The stuff from the previous section is
what motivated the idea of Dark
Matter. But it is far from being the only
evidence for it. In fact, if we consider
all the data that indicates that Dark
Matter exists, it would be among the
weakest evidence.
So, you ask, what is this vaunted
evidence that makes such an unlikely
idea as Dark Matter believable? Let’s
check it out! (in increasing order of
importance)
1. Galaxy rotation curves: We have
already seen how galactic rotation
curves can be explained by postulating
extra mass. The key point to notice is
that just any amount of extra mass
doesn’t suffice to reproduce the curve.
It turns out that the extra gravitational
pull can be explained by assuming that
around 84% of the galaxy’s mass is
Dark Matter - a figure that is almost
constant across galaxies.
2. Masses of stellar and galactic
clusters: A number of methods can be
used to measure the total mass of
gravitationally bound groups of stars
or galaxies. This can be by measuring
the variation in the velocities of the
objects (stars or galaxies) and
calculating the mass via relationships
21 |
such as the Tully-Fisher or Faber-
Jackson relations. It can also be done
by measuring the effect of
gravitational lensing. These
measurements indicate that there is
an excess of mass in all these clusters
which can be explained by Dark
Matter. Moreover, the amount of Dark
Matter calculated by these methods
comes out to around 83-84% - in
direct agreement with the figure
obtained from galaxy rotation curves.
3. Large-scale structure
formation in Cosmology: A direct
confirmation of the usefulness of Dark
Matter as a concept comes from
studies about the large-scale
structure of the Universe - at the scale
of groups of galaxies and higher. These
clusters and superclusters (clusters of
clusters) of galaxies form a ‘foamy’
structure containing filaments, voids
and walls.
The formation of this large-scale
structure of the universe would have
been due to formation of slight
fluctuations in the density of the
initially-homogeneous universe. Since
normal matter interacts with
electromagnetic forces, the regions of
higher density would tend to absorb
radiation, heat up and expand against
gravity, reducing the density. Thus,
very strong gravity (and thus a lot of
mass) would be required to form such
large structures. However, the amount
of visible matter in the universe
(measured across all wavelengths of
the electromagnetic spectrum) is only
enough to create small over-densities
resulting in small clusters of galaxies.
The actual structure of the universe
can therefore be explained by
assuming a large amount of non-
interacting (dark) matter in the
universe. Importantly, simulations
have found that the ~84% dark matter
(or 5:1 dark to normal matter) obtained
from the other methods is consistent
with the observed structure of the
universe. Thus, this provides an
independent confirmation of the Dark
Matter hypothesis.
4. Shape of the Universe: While
understanding the exact meaning of
the ‘shape’ of the universe requires
knowledge of topology, there are
generally 3 possible types of ‘shapes’
for the world:
a. A ‘spherical’ shape were
moving in a straight line for a long
time will bring a person back to the
starting position as if one is moving on
the surface of a sphere. This is called
positive curvature.
b. A ‘flat’ or zero-curvature shape
that obeys the rules of (3D) Euclidean
geometry.
c. A ‘hyperbolic’ shape, distorted
in a way that is similar to the way that
a 2D paper can be distorted to get a
shape like a saddle or mountain pass.
This indicates a negative curvature.
22 |
Observations of the afterglow of the
Big Bang (called the Cosmic
Microwave Background) indicate that
the universe is in fact flat. However,
the shape of the universe depends on
its density and the amount of normal
matter is too less for the universe to
be flat. The curvature is actually
consistent with the universe having
5% ordinary matter, 27% dark matter
and 68% in a form of negative-energy
called Dark Energy. Once again, this is
consistent with around 84% of the
mass of the universe being Dark
Matter.
5. The CMB power spectrum: This
is probably the single strongest piece
of evidence in favour of Dark Matter. It
allows us to say with great confidence
that the mass-discrepancies in the
previous observations are indeed due
to some new non-interacting type of
matter and not simply some
undetected normal matter.
As mentioned above, the early
universe was a nearly homogenous
soup of plasma with minor variation in
temperature and density due to
thermal fluctuations. The Cosmic
Background Microwave (or CMB)
radiation is basically the afterglow
from this early phase which acts as a
snapshot for those early variations.
The power spectrum is basically a
graph of the number (or magnitude) vs
size of these variations. And since (as
explained above), normal matter
interacts with radiation reducing the
extent of the fluctuations as a kind of
‘damping’. Thus, adding Dark Matter in
various proportions would give
dramatically different power spectra -
particularly in comparison to pure
normal matter.
The actual power spectrum agrees
very well with the predicted spectrum
for a roughly 5:1 distribution of Dark vs
Light matter, thus providing very
strong evidence for the ΛCDM model.
6. Baryon Acoustic Oscillations
(BAOs): Baryons are the building
blocks or normal matter (therefore,
also called Baryonic Matter). Any
particle made up of an odd number of
quarks is a Baryon. Thus, the usual
subatomic particles such as protons
and neutrons (but not electrons which
are fermions lacking any quarks)
which make up atomic matter are
baryons. The primordial plasma
mentioned above was primarily
composed of Baryons, electrons and
photons. The fluctuations in the early
universe that appear in the CMB
radiation can be understood as
occurring due to acoustic (sound-like)
oscillations in this Baryonic fluid. The
wavelength of the resonant shell
among these oscillations would
correspond to the displacement that
matter would undergo and thus forms
a sort of ‘Standard Ruler’ for the
Universe. Since Dark Matter is non-
Baryonic it would have remained
23 |
unaffected by these oscillations. The
balance between the gravitational
force of Dark Matter and the resonant
oscillation of Baryonic Matter would
depend on the relative amount of
these two types of matter. This
proportion is reflected as a statistical
bias in the distance between pairs of
galaxies in the Universe and serves as
another independent validation for the
existence of Dark Matter.
The above are, of course, only the most
important among the various tests
which a model of the Universe
(whether or not it includes Dark
Matter), can be subjected to. Some
other observational tests include - the
stability of galactic discs, mass-
temperature slopes in galactic
clusters, the exact rates of the
expansion of the universe over its
history, the exact time and proportion
in which various elements first formed
in the early universe, etc.
To round up, we can check out one
very spectacular example of the way
in which Dark Matter gives us an
unparalleled understanding of
astronomical phenomenon - the Bullet
Cluster.
The Bullet Cluster is basically two
separate clusters of galaxies which
had collided with each other and are
now moving apart. Because stars and
galaxies are so far apart, the actual concentration in the galactic clusters
stars can pass through without - as measured by gravitational lensing
interacting with or hitting any other (the bending of light due to gravity).
star even in such a head-on collision.
However, like in all other galaxies, the
stars themselves only contain a tiny Viewed together, the two colours
portion of the total (normal) matter in allow the Bullet Cluster to tell a clear
these clusters. Rather, the vast story - most of the mass in the galactic
majority of Baryonic/ Light Matter is clusters is not in the form of Baryonic
contained in large clouds of dust and Matter. The recognizable part of the
(primarily Hydrogen) gas. galaxies which contains the stars and
passes without
interaction is in
the same place
as this bulk mass,
while the
interacting gas
clouds slow down
and lag behind
due to collisions.
Thus, we obtain
clear evidence
that the ‘Dark
Matter’ which
forms most of the
galaxies’ mass is
indeed non-
interacting and not simply some
undetected normal matter.
The collision causes the dust clouds to
ram into each other and heat up into
plasma which emits strong X-ray So, is there really no other explanation
radiation. In the above image, the pink for these things?
coloured area denotes the position of
Well, as I mentioned in the beginning,
these gas clouds (and hence most of
there are scores of alternative
the non-Dark Matter) in the galaxy.
theories which have been advanced to
The blue/ purple colour denotes the explain these phenomena.
position of the actual mass

24 |

Before we look at these alternative
possibilities however, it might prove
instructive to see why these theories
are being suggested so actively in the
first place. The reason for this is
simple: the concept of Dark Matter has
been around for nearly 90 years and
we’ve been actively searching for Dark
Matter candidates (using particle
accelerators for example) for around
40 years. And the only form of Dark
Matter we have found are neutrinos,
which are not only too light and few to
compensate for more than a tiny
portion of the mass deficit, but also
travel close to the speed of light, thus
being an example of Hot Dark Matter,
and thus not an example of the Cold
Dark Matter which is supposed to form
the bulk of matter under the standard
(ΛCDM) model.
This is exaggerated by the fact that we
do not have any clear idea on exactly
what Dark Matter should be. Two types
of Dark Matter candidates: WIMPS
(Weakly Interacting Massive Particles)
referring to undiscovered non-
interacting elementary particles and
MaCHOS (Massive Compact Halo
Objects) have been proposed referring
to hypothetical highly dense and dark
astronomical objects. However, there
are no practically detected examples
for either of these.
Thus, while experimental searches for
Dark Matter have managed to put
25 |
constraints on the properties Dark
Matter candidates can have (such as
the degree of interaction via nuclear
forces), the lack of actual examples
after decades of searching have led to
increased interest in competing
theories.
As for what these competitors are,
they can be divided into 3 broad
categories:
1. Undetected Baryonic Matter:
This is the contention that the
anomalies in mass are due to
undiscovered or unaccounted for
sources of normal matter.
Particularly, cold areas of normal
matter which may not emit much
radiation might fall in this category.
This was more prominent in the early
days after Dark Matter was proposed
and has fallen out of favour with the
advent of better observational
techniques and cosmological models.
2. Modified Gravity: This is the
largest and most actively studied class
of theories. They attempt to explain
gravitational anomalies by postulating
that it is the laws of gravitation used in
our calculations - and not our
accounting of mass - which are
incorrect.
The most well-known example of this
type of theory is MoND or Modified
Newtonian Dynamics (which itself has
a large number of variations), first
proposed by the Israeli scientist
Mordehai Milgrom. While the pursuant
mathematics (and theory) can get
involved, the basic idea here is to
modify Newton's law of gravitation by
adding extra terms which are
negligible at small distances and/ or
velocities, but become significant at
galactic scales and larger. Thus, the
extra gravitational forces can be
accounted for without any need for
extra matter. One MoND variant, called
RelMoND (after Relativistic MoND)
which attempts to include General
Relativistic corrections into MoND has
attracted significant attention for
providing an impressive fit for parts of
the CMBR.
Other modified gravitational theories
include a wide variety of attempts at
extending General Relativity such as
TeVeS (Tensor Vector Scalar gravity).
There are also a number of more novel
approaches such as Erik Verlinde’s
Entropic Gravity (which derives
gravity as a result of quantum level
disorder from the holographic
principle), GravitoElectromagnetism
(which modifies General Relativity by
analogy with the Electromagnetic
force, and John Moffat’s Non-
symmetric Gravitational Theories.
26 |
3. Anomalies as Errors in Applying
General Relativity: This is a relatively
recent suggestion, championed for
example by Alexandre Deur and G. O.
Ludwig. According to them, the
discrepancies which Dark Matter (and
its alternatives) seek to explain are
not anomalies at all, but rather the
result of incorrect
90-99% of all normal
matter in the universe
is hydrogen.
application of
standard relativity in cosmological
models. As per this view, unmodified
General Relativity can explain these
observations without any need for
postulating extra matter other than
the normal visible one. For example,
Deur proposes that the reason for GR-
based simulations inability to match
observations with normal matter is
that the approximations made to make
the model tractable ignore the self-
interaction (or cross terms) which are
in fact non-negligible. Thus, adding the
appropriate corrections to properly
take these effects into account should
remove all need for Dark Matter.
So, what’s the verdict? Does Dark
Matter still make sense? Or should I
start talking about some other theory
that I don’t understand?

Like many things is science, the
answer here is a bit nuanced.
To start with, the presence of
undetected Baryonic Matter has been
ruled out pretty conclusively by
through searches across multiple
wavelengths across the spectrum, and
also by considerations such as the
Bullet Cluster and CMB spectrum
which are inconsistent with the
presence of extra Baryonic Matter as
explained above.
The situation with Modified Gravity is
more complicated.
A large number of these have
managed to explain the anomalous
gravitational behaviour in galaxies
and their clusters - particularly the
galactic rotation curves. However,
almost all proposed theories fail to
explain phenomena beyond these -
such as the expansion and shape of
the universe, Big Bang
Nucleosynthesis, the CMB spectrum
and the Bullet Cluster observations.
Since, all these observations fit well
into the standard Dark Matter ΛCDM
model; this is a major deficiency - and
one that is unfortunately often
ignored, with some proposals never
making any attempt to take anything
27 |
other than the original Rotation Curve
problem into consideration at all.
However, this is not a universal
shortcoming among Modified Gravity
proposals. For example, the current
MoND iteration manages to explain
some cosmological observations such
as Nucleosynthesis and reionisation
era measurements better than ΛCDM.
Such successes have greatly
encouraged proponents of Modified
Gravity.
In particular, in a 2020 review, Stacy
McGaugh uses the excellent fit of
MoND with a wide variety of galactic
rotation data to argue that General
Relativistic extensions of MoND should
be treated as the primary
cosmological model in preference to
ΛCDM.
However, despite these impressive
achievements, the fact remains that
no Modified Gravity theory has been
successful in explaining observations
outside of galactic dynamics -
observations which form the strongest
evidence for ΛCDM. Thus, the
fundamental disagreement between
proponents of Modified Gravity and
Dark Matter is about prioritising
different sets of explained
observations as more important for
deciding the validity of the theories.
That is to say, they disagree over the
relative evidential weight of different
pieces of evidence.

Viewing the evidence as a whole, it is
clear that while Modified Gravity
theories are as good as (or even better
than) Dark Matter at explaining the
dynamics of galaxies. However, they
almost entirely fail to accommodate
the other sources of evidence in
favour of ΛCDM. In particular, even
theories which include General
Relativity fail to explain Cosmological
observations and CMB observations.
Moreover, these theories also tend to
require greater fiddling and
adjustment than the standard model to
match observations. This has led some
proponents of Modified Gravity to
conclude that even a successful
Relativistic MoND like theory would
need to include Dark Matter (and Dark
Energy).
Thus, while it is certainly advisable to
investigate Modified Gravity in greater
depth, and it is entirely possible that
some future evidence might greatly
increase our confidence in these
theories; the currently available
evidence markedly favours Dark
Matter.
Finally, we come to the proposal that
Dark Matter is simply an artefact of
the incorrect computation of solutions
to the General Relativistic governing
equations. While this is a very
interesting and significant point which
28 |
demands through investigation, it is
still in a fairly nascent state. The
current research on the topic is
focused on the original Galaxy
Rotation Curve problem. If this
suggestion is indeed correct, it is far
from clear what the implications will
be for cosmological models in general
and ΛCDM in particular. It is possible
that the suggested corrections will
only lead to relatively small
adjustments and leave the larger
model intact. It is possible that they
might explain all the observations
which support Dark Matter putting an
end to Dark Matter for good (though a
priori it seems quite unlikely that, for
example, the universe curvature
problem can be solved in this manner).
Finally, it is possible that these
proposals will correct away the
galactic measurements while still
leaving a need for Dark Matter for the
larger cosmological models. This
might potentially require a
fundamental change in our
understanding of the universe.
All of the above, of course, is only if the
suggested changes in the way General
Relativistic approximations are
computed are indeed sound. The work
is still in a relatively preliminary
stage. It will probably take at least a
few years of review by other
researchers in the field - involving
checking the soundness of the new
computational approaches, testing
with a wider selection of data across
more criteria, as well as theoretical
work to understand the broader
implications of these changes for
cosmology - before anything definite
can be said.
TL; DR
In conclusion, we can say that while
the idea of Dark Matter is certainly not
perfect; it does have strong supporting
evidence from a number of different
sources. It is clearly the best among
all available theories, and is very
much the default hypothesis. And
while the alternatives are certainly
worth investigating by specialists,
they are neither particularly new, nor
particularly damning.
Unfortunately, science journalists, like
(almost) all other journalists, are
neither specialists in the topics they
report on, nor scrupulous enough to
exercise due caution when a
sensational story is at stake. Thus, the
plethora of popular press articles that
will make you think that the death
knell has sounded for Dark Matter.
While researchers in the field should
and will look into the alternatives,
anyone who isn’t an active
astrophysicist specializing in this topic
can safely ignore the media hype and
assume that Dark Matter exists.

Only 5% of the universe is made up of

normal matter, 25% is dark matter and
70% is dark energy.
Watch a video on dark matter:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAa2O_8wBUQ

29 |
QUIZ TIME!

We present a short rapid-fire word rush to test your astrophysics knowledge and
have fun at the same time. Either you learn about new words or overpower the quiz.
Play with your friends and find out who fares.

i. The Astronomical Almanac (9 letters)

ii. Useful results from an interaction between subatomic particles (It’s _ _ _ for
a six)
iii. Light seen from stars behind a dark nebula

Now for a brain teaser:

Assume that you arrive at a crossroad (just like one of those you arrive at in life),
and you meet a machine, which has been programmed to answer a question, in just
'Yes' or 'No'. But the instruction manual it holds within, just specifies that it either
answers all questions truthfully all the time, or lies all the time. One of the roads
leads to human civilisation, which seeing that you are a weary traveller, you'd like
to reach as soon as you can. The other leads to a colony of cannibals, who take
delight in devouring unwary travellers who happen to come that way. Assume that
you aren't suicidal, and want to live to see the next day, and you can ask only one
question to the machine to know which road leads where, what would you ask?

Send us your solutions, with explanations. The first three correct entries would be
mentioned on our social media handles! We would post another riddle soon, building
on this one. So, till then, give this a try! (FIND THE ANSWER IN NEXT EDITION!)

Till The Next Edition!

30 | Answers to Quiz

i. EPHEMERIS
ii. HIT
iii. INFRARED