Astronomy & Celestial Mechanics
the sky, computed
Concept

Olbers's paradox — where it appears

The argument that in an infinite static universe of stars every sight line ends on a stellar surface, so the whole sky should be as bright as the Sun's disc. It fails because the universe is young: the horizon cuts the integral fourteen orders of magnitude short of saturation.

Named by 3 essays across one field — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

Every shell contributes the same. Concentric shells of equal thickness around an observer, with stars scattered uniformly in volume. The number of stars in a shell grows as its radius squared and the flux from each falls as the radius squared, so the two cancel exactly and every shell delivers the same total light — the drawn counts are 6, 15, 31, 55, 88, in proportion to r³ − r₀³, and the drawn sizes fall as 1/r. That cancellation is the paradox, and it is why no amount of dust helps: dust absorbs the light and then re-radiates it, and in a universe old enough for the sum to converge it would come to the same temperature as the stars. The sum diverges linearly with radius, so something has to stop it — and the only two candidates are that the shells eventually overlap, or that there are no shells beyond a certain distance because there has not been time for their light to arrive.

Why the sky is dark

In an infinite universe of stars every sight line ends on a stellar surface, so the whole sky should be as bright as the Sun's disc. It is not, and the usual answer — that the expansion redshifts the light away — accounts for a factor of six out of a hundred trillion.

cosmology · Olbers's paradox The darkness, itemised. The extragalactic background light as a spectrum: νIᵥ against wavelength, in nanowatts per square metre per steradian, with wavelength logarithmic. The total under the two humps is not read off a plot — it is the integral (c/4π)∫ε(z)(1+z)⁻¹|dt/dz|dz of the Madau–Dickinson star formation history, taking a continuously star-forming population to radiate 10¹⁰ solar luminosities per solar mass per year, and it comes to 37.5 nW m⁻² sr⁻¹. Half of it was emitted beyond z = 0.91, which is the figure's real content: the dark sky is dominated by light released when the universe was 45 per cent of its present age. The split between the two humps is an assumption rather than a result — 50 per cent of the starlight is taken to be absorbed by dust and re-radiated near 140 µm, and the shapes are lognormals of about the observed widths — but the AREA under each is the computed quantity. Measured, the two come to about 24 and 26: the calculation falls 25 per cent short, and whether the missing light is real or a residual foreground is unsettled.

The darkness has a number in it

The night sky is not black. It carries about sixty nanowatts per square metre per steradian, and that number is the sum of every photon every star has ever emitted, redshifted and added up over thirteen billion years.

cosmology · Olbers's paradox Three messengers, and the three walls they end on. The redshift of the last opaque surface, for the three things that cross the universe, on one logarithmic axis spanning thirty-one decades. Olbers' argument compares how far a sight line runs before it ends on something against how far anything has had time to come — and for starlight the first is 1.7·10¹⁸ Mpc against a horizon of 1.4·10⁴ Mpc, which is why the optical sky is dark. That comparison is not what decides the other two. A relic neutrino's mean free path against ordinary matter works out at 7.7·10³⁷ Mpc — 4·10¹⁹ times starlight's, so on the mean-free-path argument alone the neutrino sky should be darker still. It is not, because the quantity that terminates a sight line is the WALL, and the walls are at z = 1,090, z ≈ 6×10⁹ and nowhere at all. Every neutrino sight line ends on a surface from one second after the beginning; every gravitational-wave sight line runs to the beginning, or to a binary. Both of those skies are saturated — which is what Olbers' argument predicted, and what the optical sky refuses to do. The three are also wildly unequal in brightness: the microwave sky is 996 nW m⁻² sr⁻¹, and the gravitational-wave background at Ω = 10⁻⁹ is 0.018 — a saturated sky five decades fainter than a dark one.

Two skies where the paradox comes out right

Olbers argued that every sight line should end on a source and the sky should blaze. In neutrinos and in gravitational waves it does — the walls are at one second and at no time at all — and both of those skies have now been detected.

cosmology · Olbers's paradox

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Surface brightnessCosmological dimmingExtragalactic background lightLuminosity densityMean free pathOptical depthParticle horizonComoving distanceConfusion limitCosmic neutrino backgroundFinite ageGravitational-wave background

All concepts