Category Archives: Science & Study

The Mountain

The End

And the second angel sounded, and as it were a great mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea: and the third part of the sea became blood.

Revelation 8:8


Backwardly Wired Retina “An Optimal Structure”: New Eye Discovery Further Demolishes Dawkins



On Darwin’s bicentennial last year, his most prominent defender and ardent antitheist Richard Dawkins wrote a new book, The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution. Ironically, he admits about all his previous pro-evolution books:

“Looking back on these books, I realized that the evidence for evolution is nowhere explicitly set out, and that it seemed like a good gap to close.”

One of his favourite examples, one he has been using for decades, is the alleged backwardly wired retina, a favourite example of supposed bad design. First, we republish a sample section from our refutation, The Greatest Hoax on Earth? showing that even with existing knowledge, Dawkins had no case. Then we report on a new discovery, conclusively showing that the allegedly inferior design is actually superior in producing sharper images and better colour distinctions.

From Greatest Hoax?:

Backwardly-Wired Retina?

Dawkins repeats a claim he has been making for over 20 years:

“But I haven’t mentioned the most glaring example of imperfection in the optics. The retina is back to front.

“Imagine a latter-day Helmholtz presented by an engineer with a digital camera, with its screen of tiny photocells, set up to capture images projected directly on to the surface of the screen. That makes good sense, and obviously each photocell has a wire connecting it to a computing device of some kind where images are collated. Makes sense again. Helmholtz wouldn’t send it back.

“But now, suppose I tell you that the eye’s ‘photocells’ are pointing backwards, away from the scene being looked at. The ‘wires’ connecting the photocells to the brain run over all the surface of the retina, so the light rays have to pass through a carpet of massed wires before they hit the photocells. That doesn’t make sense … ” (pp. 353–4)

Actually it does make sense, as ophthalmologists know, and have explained for years, so Dawkins has no excuse for repeating such discredited arguments. Dawkins’ analogy fails because photocells don’t have to be chemically regenerated, while the eye’s photoreceptors are chemically active, and need a rich blood supply for regeneration. As I wrote in By Design [see review], ch. 12:

Regenerating Photoreceptors

Someone who does know about eye design is the ophthalmologist Dr George Marshall, who said:

“The idea that the eye is wired backward comes from a lack of knowledge of eye function and anatomy.”1

He explained that the nerves could not go behind the eye, because the choroid occupies that space. This provides the rich blood supply needed for the very metabolically active retinal pigment epithelium (RPE). This is necessary to regenerate the photoreceptors, and to absorb excess heat from the light. So the nerves must go in front rather than behind. But as will be shown below, the eye’s design overcomes even this slight drawback.

In fact, what limits the eye’s resolution is the diffraction of light waves at the pupil (proportional to the wavelength and inversely proportional to the pupil’s size); so alleged improvements of the retina would make no difference to the eye’s performance.

It’s important to note that the ‘superior’ design of Dawkins with the (virtually transparent) nerves behind the photoreceptors would require either:

  • The choroid in front of the retina—but the choroid is opaque because of all the red blood cells, so this design would be as useless as an eye with a hemorrhage!
  • Photoreceptors not in contact with the RPE and choroid at all—but without a rich blood supply to regenerate, then it would probably take months before we could see properly after we were photographed with a flashbulb or we glanced at some bright object.

Are squid eyes ‘properly’ wired?

Some evolutionists [including Dawkins in The Blind Watchmaker] claim that the cephalopod (e.g. squid and octopus) eye is somehow ‘right’, i.e. with nerves behind the receptor. They use this as a counter-argument to the points in the previous section about the need for the “backward” wiring. But no-one who has actually bothered to study cephalopod eyes could make such claims with integrity. In fact, cephalopods don’t see as well as humans, e.g. no colour vision, and the octopus eye structure is totally different and much simpler. It’s more like ‘a compound eye with a single lens’. And it is no accident that we say ‘eyes like a hawk/eagle’ rather than ‘eyes like a squid’, because the former really are sharper, despite their alleged ‘backward’ wiring.

Fibre Optic Plate

The above section explains why the vertebrate retina must be wired the way it is. But scientists at Leipzig University have recently shown that the vertebrate eye has an ingenious feature that overcomes even the slight disadvantage of the transparent nerves in front of the light receptors [the “carpet of massed wires” that Dawkins complains about].2

The light is collected and funneled through the nerve net to the receptors by the Müller glial cells, which act as optical fibres. Each cone cell has one Müller cell guiding the light to it, while several rods can share the same Müller cell.

The Müller cells work almost exactly like a fibre optic plate that optical engineers can use to transmit an image with low distortion without using a lens. The cells even have the right variation in refractive index for “image transfer through the vertebrate retina with minimal distortion and low loss.”2

Indeed, Müller cells are even better than optical fibres, because they are funnel-shaped, which collects more light for the receptors. The wide entrances to Müller cells cover the entire surface of the retina, so collect the maximum amount of light.

One of the research team, Andreas Reichenbach, commented:

“Nature is so clever. This means there is enough room in the eye for all the neurons and synapses and so on, but still the Müller cells can capture and transmit as much light as possible.”3

Blind Spot

Dawkins complains further:

“…it gets even worse. One consequence of the photocells pointing backwards is that the wires that carry their data somehow have to pass through the retina and back to the brain. What they do, in the vertebrate eye, is all converge on a particular hole in the retina, where they dive through it. The hole filled with nerves is called the blind spot, because it is blind, but ‘spot’ is too flattering, for it is quite large, more like a blind patch, which again doesn’t inconvenience us much because of the ‘automatic Photoshop’ software in the brain. Once again, send it back, it’s not just bad design, it’s the design of a complete idiot.

“Or is it? If it were, the eye would be terrible at seeing, and it is not. It is actually very good. It is good because natural selection, working as a sweeper-up of countless little details, came along after the big original error of installing the retina backwards, and restored it to a high-quality precision instrument.” (pp. 354–5)

Once more, Dawkins shows no understanding of the need to regenerate the photocells, which necessitates this ‘backward wiring’. He also begs the question of how mutations and natural selection could create the sophisticated software, which rather speaks of intelligent programming (as does the real Photoshop). Some of this programming was explained in By Design, ch. 1:

Signal Processing

Another amazing design feature of the retina is the signal processing that occurs even before the information is transmitted to the brain. This occurs in the retinal layers between the ganglion cells and the photoreceptors. For example, a process called edge extraction enhances the recognition of edges of objects. John Stevens, an associate professor of physiology and biomedical engineering, pointed out that it would take “a minimum of a hundred years of Cray [supercomputer] time to simulate what takes place in your eye many times each second.”4 And the retina’s analog computing needs far less power than the digital supercomputers and is elegant in its simplicity. Once again, the eye outstrips any human technology, this time in another area.

Indeed, research into the retina shows that the 12 different types of ganglion cells send 12 different ‘movies’, i.e. distinct representations of a visual scene, to the brain for final interpretation. One movie is mainly a line drawing of the edges of objects, and others deal only in motion in a specific direction, and still others transmit information about shadows and highlights. How the brain integrates these movies into the final picture is still a subject of intense investigation. Understanding this would help researchers trying to design artificial light sensors to help the blind to see.5

Ophthalmologist Peter Gurney, in his detailed response to the question, “Is the inverted retina really ‘bad design’?”6, also addresses the blind spot. He points out that the blind spot occupies only 0.25% of the visual field, so Dawkins is exaggerating to try to call it a patch rather than a spot. Furthermore, it is far (15°) from the visual axis, so that the normal visual acuity of the region is only about 15% of the foveola, the most sensitive area of the retina right on the visual axis. And having two eyes effectively means there is no blind spot. So the alleged defect is only theoretical, not practical. The blind spot is not considered handicap enough to stop a one-eyed person from driving a private motor vehicle. The main problem with only one eye is the lack of stereoscopic vision.

Problem for Dawkins’ own just-so story of eye evolution

In Dawkins’ earlier book Climbing Mt Improbable, he cited a computer simulation by Dan Nilsson and Susanne Pelger from a widely publicized paper.7 Taking their cue from Darwin, who started with a light-sensitive spot when ‘explaining’ the origin of the eye, their simulation starts with a light-sensitive layer, with a transparent coating in front and a light-absorbing layer behind. But the hypothetical ancestor starts with the nerve behind the light-sensitive spot, rather than from in front, as in the vertebrate eye. Yet the evolutionary just-so story can provide no transition from having the nerves behind to in front, with all the other complex coordinated changes that would have to occur as well.8

Indeed, Dawkins has no plausible explanation for the origin of the integrated components that work together to account for vision, such as that seen in vertebrates. Claiming that it is poorly designed because he has not carefully researched the matter does not explain how evolution created it.

New discovery: Müller cells enhance sharpness

At the time the book was written, it was thought that the Müller cells were mainly waveguides to transmit light without distortion, so mitigate the necessary disadvantage of needing the photoreceptors near the blood supply. But researchers Amichai Labin and Erez Ribak at the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology in Haifa found that the Müller cells are much more than that. They said:

“The retina is revealed as an optimal structure designed for improving the sharpness of images. … The fundamental features of the array of glial cells are revealed as an optimal structure designed for preserving the acuity of images in the human retina. It plays a crucial role in vision quality, in humans and in other species.”9

One reason is that images can be distorted by light “noise”, i.e. light that is reflected several times within the eye instead of coming directly through the pupil. But the Müller cells transmit the direct light strongly to the rods and cones, while the noise leaks out. This makes the images sharper.

Another problem with lenses is that they are basically prisms joined face-to-face, and have a tendency to separate the colours. This is called chromatic aberration. Expensive cameras have multiple lenses to try to avoid this problem. But “Müller cells’ wide tops allow them to ‘collect’ any separated colours and refocus them onto the same cone cell, ensuring that all the colours from an image are in focus.”10

Furthermore, the Müller cells are tuned to the visible region of the spectrum, and leak out other wavelengths, minimizing radiation and heat damage.

The researchers say:

“In this study, wave propagation methods allowed us to show that light guiding within the retinal volume is an effective and biologically convenient way to improve the resolution of the eye and reduce chromatic aberration. We also found that the retinal nuclear layers, until now considered a source of distortion, actually improve the decoupling of nearby photoreceptors and thus enhance vision acuity. Although this study was performed on data from human retinas and eyes, most of its consequences are valid for eyes with other retinal structure and different optics. They are also valid for the more common case of eyes without a central fovea.”

New Scientist reports:

“‘It suggests that light-coupling by Müller cells is a crucial event that contributes to vision as we know it,’ says Kristian Franze, a neurophysicist at the University of Cambridge and co-author of the 2007 study.2 “This work nicely complements our experimental data.’”10

Furthermore, this design may inspire scientists to copy it, just another example of biomimetics:

“The new understanding of the role of Müller cells might find applications in more successful eye transplants and better camera designs, says Ribak.”10

Evolutionists dogmatically hang on to dud argument

It’s notable that Kate McAlpine, writing in New Scientist, which is overtly anti-Christian, had to admit, “It looks wrong, but the strange, ‘backwards’ structure of the vertebrate retina actually improves vision,” after admitting that New Scientist had listed the backwardly wired eye as one of evolution’s biggest “mistakes””.

Yet not willing to junk a defunct evolutionary argument, she says:

“However, Kenneth Miller, a biologist at Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island cautions that this doesn’t mean that the backwards retina itself helps us to see. Rather, it emphasises the extent to which evolution has coped with the flawed layout. ‘The shape, orientation and structure of the Müller cells help the retina to overcome one of the principal shortcomings of its inside-out wiring,’ says Miller.”10

Miller is a professing Christian, but his worldview is indistinguishable for all practical purposes from the rabid atheists he loves to ally with against Bible-believers (see refutations of his books Finding Darwin’s God (2000)Only a Theory: Evolution and the Battle for America’s Soul (2008)). He, like Dawkins, has qualifications in neither ophthalmology (unlike Marshall and Gurney) nor physical optics (unlike me). First, he fails to address the important reasons for the backwardly-wired eye retina; second, he fails to show why it is a bad design anyway, especially given the newly discovered advantages of the wave guiding. Last, it is absurd given that the researchers think that this “flawed” layout might help to improve camera design!

This discovery thus nails one of Richard Dawkins’ favourite “proofs” of evolution in The Greatest Show on Earth. But judging by his record, he will not give up his fallacious arguments in the cause of his atheopathic faith.11

 Update: see Refutation of critics of this article, including Dawkins’ fellow atheopath P.Z. Myers.

Related Articles

Further Reading

Original article: The Design of the Retina

There is no greater proof of the danger of over-specialization than the above argument. Dr. Richard Dawkins, an English ethologist and evolutionary biologist made an illegitimate claim concerning the design of the eye, a claim ophthalmologist Dr. George Marshall effortlessly refuted.

Apparently, the sciences have become so rigidly partitioned, an evolutionary biologist was incapable of merely asking an ophthalmologist about the true design of the eye before misrepresenting the implications of its structure.

Or, it could simply be Richard Dawkins believes something more than his own science.

The above article is from 2010 — that is 7 years ago. It was refuted long before that, but just yesterday the “poor design of the retina” was trotted out against by an atheist who wasn’t even aware of this article, or its destruction of his argument.

This has been going on now for well over 50 years.

If you still believe in evolution, I recommend you honestly investigate the scientific journals, as well as the tens of thousands of published dissents to evolutionary theory.

Understand the arguments.

Understand the terms.

Understand what the theory requires.

Understand what evidence there actually is and what evidence is missing.

Understand the probabilities.

If you are capable of honestly appraising premises and proofs, I suspect you will quickly see evolution in an entirely different light.

Hugh Ross – The Science of Genesis and the Anthropic Principle

FDA Advisers Back Gene Therapy For Rare Form of Blindness

Therapy that targets disease-causing mutations could become the first of its kind approved for use in the United States.

Advisers to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have paved the way for the agency’s first approval of a gene therapy to treat a disease caused by a genetic mutation.

On 12 October, a panel of external experts unanimously voted that the benefits of the therapy, which treats a form of hereditary blindness, outweigh its risks. The FDA is not required to follow the guidance of its advisers, but it often does. A final decision on the treatment, called voretigene neparvovec (Luxturna), is expected by 12 January.

An approval in the lucrative US drug market would be a validation that gene-therapy researchers have awaited for decades. “It’s the first of its kind,” says geneticist Mark Kay of Stanford University in California, of the treatment. “Things are beginning to look more promising for gene therapy.”

Gene Replacement

Luxturna is made by Spark Therapeutics of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and is designed to treat individuals who have two mutated copies of a gene called RPE65. The mutations impair the eye’s ability to respond to light, and ultimately lead to the destruction of photoreceptors in the retina.

The treatment consists of a virus loaded with a normal copy of the RPE65 gene. The virus is injected into the eye, where the gene is expressed and supplies a normal copy of the RPE65 protein.

In a randomized controlled trial that enrolled 31 people, Spark showed that, on average, patients who received the treatment improved their ability to navigate a special obstacle course1. This improvement was sustained for the full year during which the company gathered data. The control group, however, showed no improvement overall. This was enough to convince the FDA advisory committee that the benefits of the therapy outweigh the risks.

Long Road

That endorsement is an important vote of confidence for a field that has struggled over the past 20 years. In the early 1990s, gene therapy was red hot, says David Williamschief scientific officer at Boston Children’s Hospital in Massachusetts. “You couldn’t keep young people out of the field,” he says. “Everyone wanted in.” Then came the death of a young patient enrolled in a gene-therapy clinical trial, and the realization that a gene therapy used to treat children with an immune disorder could cause leukaemia.

Investors backed away from gene therapy, and some academics grew scornful of it. Although European regulators approved one such therapy in 2012, for a condition that causes severe pancreatitis, many doubted that it worked. (The company that makes it has announced that it will not renew its licence to market the drug when it expires on 25 October.) “You’re too smart to work in this field,” a colleague told Kay. “It’s a pseudoscience.”

But some researchers kept plugging away at the problem, improving the vectors that shuttle genes into human cells. Over time, new clinical trials began to show promise, and pharmaceutical companies became more interested in developing treatments for rare genetic diseases. Gradually, investors returned.

Now, demand for gene-therapy vectors is so high that suppliers are oversubscribed, and researchers have to wait between 18 months and 2 years to get some of the reagents that they need for clinical studies, says Williams.

Measured Expectations

In the past few years, gene therapies have shown promise in clinical trials for a range of diseases — including haemophilia, sickle cell disease and an immune disorder called Wiskott–Aldrich syndrome. On 4 October, Williams and his colleagues published results of a gene-therapy trial to treat cerebral adrenoleukodystrophy (ALD), a devastating and sometimes fatal disorder that affects the nervous system and adrenal glands2. Disease progression was halted for the roughly 2-year duration of the study in 15 of 17 boys who were treated.

The FDA approved its first gene therapy, a treatment in which immune cells are engineered to combat cancer, on 30 August. Unlike Spark’s therapy, the cancer treatment does not target a specific disease-causing mutation, and is administered to immune cells that are removed from the body, engineered and then reinfused.

That is why researchers say that an FDA approval for voretigene neparvovec would be a landmark. “The general concept of gene therapy is replacing or compensating for a missing gene, and that’s what this does,” says Matthew Porteus, a paediatric haematologist also at Stanford. “People are so excited.”

But Spark’s treatment also highlights the limitations of this generation of gene therapies. Although the treatment seems to improve vision, it is still unclear how long the virus will continue to express the normal RPE65 gene — and thus how long its effects will last. “It isn’t a cure,” says Kay.

Similarly, the cerebral ALD therapy seemed to slow the effects of the disease in the brain, but is not expected to treat symptoms in other parts of the body, which can emerge later in life.

“I think we still need to have major improvements in the technology before we’re going to be able to cure these diseases,” says Kay. “But along the way there may be treatments that help make improvements.”

Original article: Gene Therapy for Blindness

Fine-Tuning for Life in the Universe – Part 1

For physical life to be possible in the universe, several characteristics must take on specific values, and these are listed below. In the case of several of these characteristics, and given the intricacy of their interrelationships, the indication of divine “fine-tuning” seems compelling.

  1. Strong nuclear force constant
  2. Weak nuclear force constant
  3. Gravitational force constant
  4. Electromagnetic force constant
  5. Ratio of electromagnetic force constant to gravitational force constant
  6. Ratio of proton to electron mass
  7. Ratio of number of protons to number of electrons
  8. Ratio of proton to electron charge
  9. Expansion rate of the universe
  10. Mass density of the universe
  11. Baryon (proton and neutron) density of the universe
  12. Space energy or dark energy density of the universe
  13. Ratio of space energy density to mass density
  14. Entropy level of the universe
  15. Velocity of light
  16. Age of the universe
  17. Uniformity of radiation
  18. Homogeneity of the universe
  19. Average distance between galaxies
  20. Average distance between galaxy clusters
  21. Average distance between stars
  22. Average size and distribution of galaxy clusters
  23. Density of giant galaxies during early cosmic history
  24. Electromagnetic fine structure constant
  25. Gravitational fine-structure constant
  26. Decay rate of protons
  27. Ground state energy level for helium-4
  28. Carbon-12 to oxygen-16 nuclear energy level ratio
  29. Decay rate for beryllium-8
  30. Ratio of neutron mass to proton mass
  31. Initial excess of nucleons over antinucleons
  32. Polarity of the water molecule
  33. Epoch for peak in the number of hypernova eruptions
  34. Numbers and different kinds of hypernova eruptions
  35. Epoch for peak in the number of type I supernova eruptions
  36. Numbers and different kinds of type I supernova eruptions
  37. Epoch for peak in the number of type II supernova eruptions
  38. Numbers and different kinds of type II supernova eruptions
  39. Epoch for white dwarf binaries
  40. Density of white dwarf binaries
  41. Ratio of exotic matter to ordinary matter
  42. Number of effective dimensions in the early universe
  43. Number of effective dimensions in the present universe
  44. Mass values for the active neutrinos
  45. Number of different species of active neutrinos
  46. Number of active neutrinos in the universe
  47. Mass value for the sterile neutrino
  48. Number of sterile neutrinos in the universe
  49. Decay rates of exotic mass particles
  50. Magnitude of the temperature ripples in cosmic background radiation
  51. Size of the relativistic dilation factor
  52. Magnitude of the Heisenberg uncertainty
  53. Quantity of gas deposited into the deep intergalactic medium by the first supernovae
  54. Positive nature of cosmic pressures
  55. Positive nature of cosmic energy densities
  56. Density of quasars during early cosmic history
  57. Decay rate of cold dark matter particles
  58. Relative abundances of different exotic mass particles
  59. Degree to which exotic matter self interacts
  60. Epoch at which the first stars (metal-free pop III stars) begin to form
  61. Epoch at which the first stars (metal-free pop III stars) cease to form
  62. Number density of metal-free pop III stars
  63. Average mass of metal-free pop III stars
  64. Epoch for the formation of the first galaxies
  65. Epoch for the formation of the first quasars
  66. Amount, rate, and epoch of decay of embedded defects
  67. Ratio of warm exotic matter density to cold exotic matter density
  68. Ratio of hot exotic matter density to cold exotic matter density
  69. Level of quantization of the cosmic spacetime fabric
  70. Flatness of universe’s geometry
  71. Average rate of increase in galaxy sizes
  72. Change in average rate of increase in galaxy sizes throughout cosmic history
  73. Constancy of dark energy factors
  74. Epoch for star formation peak
  75. Location of exotic matter relative to ordinary matter
  76. Strength of primordial cosmic magnetic field
  77. Level of primordial magnetohydrodynamic turbulence
  78. Level of charge-parity violation
  79. Number of galaxies in the observable universe
  80. Polarization level of the cosmic background radiation
  81. Date for completion of second reionization event of the universe
  82. Date of subsidence of gamma-ray burst production
  83. Relative density of intermediate mass stars in the early history of the universe
  84. Water’s temperature of maximum density
  85. Water’s heat of fusion
  86. Water’s heat of vaporization
  87. Number density of clumpuscules (dense clouds of cold molecular hydrogen gas) in the universe
  88. Average mass of clumpuscules in the universe
  89. Location of clumpuscules in the universe
  90. Dioxygen’s kinetic oxidation rate of organic molecules
  91. Level of paramagnetic behavior in dioxygen
  92. Density of ultra-dwarf galaxies (or supermassive globular clusters) in the middle-aged universe
  93. Degree of space-time warping and twisting by general relativistic factors
  94. Percentage of the initial mass function of the universe made up of intermediate mass stars
  95. Strength of the cosmic primordial magnetic field
  96. Capacity of liquid water to form large-cluster anions
  97. Ratio of baryons in galaxies to baryons between galaxies
  98. Ratio of baryons in galaxy clusters to baryons in between galaxy clusters
  99. Rate at which the triple-alpha process (combining of three helium nuclei to make one carbon nucleus) runs inside the nuclear furnaces of stars
  100. Quantity of molecular hydrogen formed by the supernova eruptions of population III stars
  101. Epoch for the formation of the first population II (second generation) stars
  102. Percentage of the universe’s baryons that are processed by the first stars (population III stars)
  103. Ratio of ultra-dwarf galaxies to larger galaxies
  104. Constancy of the fine structure constants
  105. Constancy of the velocity of light
  106. Constancy of the magnetic permeability of free space
  107. Constancy of the electron-to-proton mass ratio
  108. Constancy of the gravitational constant
  109. Smoothness of the quantum foam of cosmic space
  110. Constancy of dark energy over cosmic history
  111. Mean temperature of exotic matter
  112. Minimum stable mass of exotic matter clumps
  113. Degree of Lorentz symmetry or integrity of Lorentz invariantce or level of symmetry of spacetime
  114. Nature of cosmic defects
  115. Number density of cosmic defects
  116. Average size of the largest cosmic structures in the universe
  117. Quantity of three-hydrogen molecules formed by the hypernova eruptions of population III stars
  118. Maximum size of an indigenous moon orbiting a planet
  119. Rate of growth in the average size of galaxies during the first five billion years of cosmic history
  120. Density of dwarf dark matter halos in the present-day universe
  121. Metallicity enrichment of intergalactic space by dwarf galaxies
  122. Average star formation rate throughout cosmic history for dwarf galaxies
  123. Epoch of rapid decline in the cosmic star formation rate
  124. Quantity of heavy elements infused into the intergalactic medium by dwarf galaxies during the first two billion years of cosmic history
  125. Quantity of heavy elements infused into the intergalactic medium by galactic superwinds during the first three billion years of cosmic history
  126. Average size of cosmic voids
  127. Number of cosmic voids per unit of cosmic space
  128. Percentage of the universe’s baryons that reside in the warm-hot intergalactic medium
  129. Halo occupation distribution (number of galaxies per unit of dark matter halo virial mass)
  130. Timing of the peak supernova eruption rate for population III stars (the universe’s first stars)
  131. Ratio of the number density of dark matter subhalos to the number density dark matter halos in the present era universe
  132. Quantity of diffuse, large-grained intergalactic dust
  133. Radiometric decay rate for nickel-78
  134. Ratio of baryonic matter to exotic matter in dwarf galaxies
  135. Ratio of baryons in the intergalactic medium relative to baryons in the circumgalactic media
  136. Level of short-range interactions between protons and exotic dark matter particles
  137. Intergalactic photon density (or optical depth of the universe)
  138. High spin to low spin transition pressure for Fe++
  139. Average quantity of gas infused into the universe’s first star clusters
  140. Degree of suppression of dwarf galaxy formation by cosmic reionization


  1. John D. Barrow and Frank J. Tipler, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986), pp. 123-457.
  2. Fred Hoyle, Galaxies, Nuclei, and Quasars, (New York: Harper and Row, 1965), pp. 147-150.
  3. Fred Hoyle, “The Universe: Past and Present Reflection,” Annual Reviews of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 20 (1982), p. 1-16.
  4. Fred Hoyle, The Nature of the Universe, second edition, (Okford, UK: Basil Blackwell, 1952), p. 109-111.
  5. Fred Hoyle, Astronomy and Cosmology: A Modern Course, (San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1975), pp. 684-685.
  6. James S, Trefil, The Moment of Creation, (New York: Collier Books, Macmillan, 1983), pp. 127-134.
  7. John P. Cox and Thomas R. Giuli, Principles of Stellar Structure, Volume II: Applications to Stars, (New York: Gordon and Breach, 1968), pp. 944-1028.
  8. Bernard J. Carr and Martin J. Rees, “The Anthropic Principle and the Structure of the Physical World,” Nature, 278 (1979), pp. 605-612.
  9. John M. Templeton “God Reveals Himself in the Astronomical and in the Infinitesimal,” Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation, December 1984 (1984), pp. 194-200.
  10. Jim W. Neidhardt, “The Anthropic Principle: A Religious Response,” Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation, December 1984 (1984), pp. 201-207.
  11. Brandon Carter, “Large Number Coincidences and the Anthropic Principle in Cosmology,” in Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union Symposium No. 63: Confrontation of Cosmological Theories with Observational Data. Edited by M. S. Longair. (Boston: D. Reidel, 1974), pp. 291-298.
  12. John D. Barrow, “The Lore of Large Numbers: Some Historical Background to the Anthropic Principle,” Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, 22 (1981), pp. 404-420.
  13. Alan Lightman, “To the Dizzy Edge,” Science 82, October (1982), pp. 24-25.
  14. Thomas O’Toole, “Will the Universe Die by Fire or Ice?” Science 81, April (1981), pp. 71-72.
  15. Bernard J. Carr, “On the Origin, Evolution, and Purpose of the Physical Universe,” in Physical Cosmology and Philosophy, edited by John Leslie (New York: Macmillan, 1990), pp. 134-153.
  16. Richard Swinburne, “Argument from the Fine-Tuning of the Universe,” in Physical Cosmology and Philosophy, edited by John Leslie (New York: Macmillan, 1990), pp. 154-173.
  17. R. E. Davies and R, H. Koch, “All the Observed Universe Has Contributed to Life,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 334 (1991), pp. 391-403.
  18. Paul Davies, God and the New Physics. (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1983), pp. viii, 3-42, 142-143.
  19. Paul Davies, Superforce. (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1984), p. 243.
  20. Paul Davies, The Cosmic Blueprint. (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1988), pp. 3-203.
  21. Paul Davies, “The Anthropic Principle,” Science Digest, volume 191, number 10, October 1983, pp. 22-25.
  22. George Greenstein, The Symbiotic Universe. (New York: William Morrow, 1988), p. 13-148.
  23. Tony Rothman, “A ‘What You See Is What You Beget’ Theory,” Discover, May 1987, p. 99.
  24. Freeman Dyson, Infinite in All Directions, (New York: Harper and Row, 1988), p. 298.
  25. Henry Margenau and Roy Abraham Varghese, editors, Cosmos, Bios, and Theos, (La Salle, IL: Open Court, 1992), p. 52-83.
  26. Fang Li Zhi and Li Shu Xian, Creation of the Universe, translated by T. Kiang, (Singapore: World Scientific, 1989), p.
  27. Edward Harrison, Masks of the Universe, (New York: Collier Books, Macmillan, 1985), pp. 239-263.
  28. John Noble Wilford, “Sizing Up the Cosmos: An Astronomer’s Quest,” New York Times, March 12, 1991, p. B9.
  29. Hugh Ross, The Fingerprint of God, 2nd edition (New Kensington, PA: Whitaker House, 1991): 119-138.
  30. Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos, 3rd edition (Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress, 2001): 145-167.
  31. Robert Jastrow, God and the Astronomers, (New York: W. W. Norton, 1978), pp. 89-124.
  32. Richard Swinburne, “Argument from the Fine-Tuning of the Universe,” in Physical Cosmology and Philosophy. edited by John Leslie, (New York: Macmillan, 1990), pp. 154-173.
  33. George F. R. Ellis, “The Anthropic Principle: Laws and Environments,” in The Anthropic Principle, edited by F. Bertola and U. Curi (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993), pp. 27-32.
  34. F. Bertola and U. Curi, editors, The Anthropic Principle (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993).
  35. D. Allan Bromley, “Physics: Atomic and Molecular Physics,” Science, 209 (1980), page 116.
  36. Michael Rowan-Robinson, The Nine Numbers of the Universe (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999).
  37. H. R. Marston, S. H. Allen, and S. L. Swaby, “Iron Metabolism in Copper-Deficient Rats,” British Journal of Nutrition, 25 (1971), pages 15-30.
  38. K. W. J. Wahle and N. T. Davies, “Effect of Dietary Copper Deficiency in the Rat on Fatty Acid Composition of Adipose Tissue and Desaturase Activity of Liver Microsomes,” British Journal of Nutrition, 34 (1975), pages 105-112.
  39. Walter Mertz, “The Newer Essential Trace Elements, Chromium, Tin, Vanadium, Nickel, and Silicon,” Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 33 (1974), pages 307-313.
  40. Hubert Reeves, “Growth of Complexity in an Expanding Universe,” in The Anthropic Principle, edited by F. Bertola and U. Curi (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993), pages 67-84.
  41. H. Oberhummer, A. Csótó, and H. Schlattl, “Stellar Production Rates of Carbon and Its Abundance in the Universe,” Science, 289 (2000), pp. 88-90.
  42. Lawrence M. Krauss, “The End of the Age Problem and the Case for a Cosmological Constant Revisited,” Astrophysical Journal, 501 (1998), pp. 461-466.
  43. Christopher C. Page, et al, “Natural Engineering Principles of Electron Tunneling in Biological Oxidation-Reduction,” Nature, 402 (1999), pp. 47-52.
  44. S. Perlmutter, et al, “Measurements of Ω and L from 42 High-Redshift Supernovae,” Astrophysical Journal, 517 (1999), pp. 565-586.
  45. P. deBarnardis, et al, “A Flat Universe from High-Resolution Maps of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation, Nature, 494 (2000), pp. 955-959.
  46. A. Melchiorri, et al, “A Measurement of Ω from the North American Test Flight of Boomerang,” Astrophysical Journal Letters, 536 (2000), pp. L63-L66.
  47. Lawrence M. Krauss and Glenn D. Starkman, “Life, the Universe, and Nothing: Life and Death in an Ever-Expanding Universe,” Astrophysical Journal, 531 (2000), pp. 22-30.
  48. Volker Bromm, Paolo S. Coppi, and Richard B. Larson, “Forming the First Stars in the Universe: The Fragmentation of Primordial Gas, “Astrophysical Journal Letters, 527 (1999), pp. L5-L8.
  49. Jaume Garriga, Takahiro Tanaka, and Alexander Vilenkin, “Density Parameter and the Anthropic Principle,” Physical Review D, 60 (1999), 5-21.
  50. Jaume Garriga and Alexander Vilenkin, “On Likely Values of the Cosmological Constant,” Physical Review D, 61 (2000), 1462-1471.
  51. Max Tegmark and Martin Rees, “Why is the Cosmic Microwave Background Fluctuation Level 10-5?” Astrophysical Journal, 499 (1998), 526-532.
  52. Jaume Garriga, Mario Livio, and Alexander Vilenkin, “Cosmological Constant and the Time of Its Dominance,” Physical Review D, 61 (2000), id.023503.
  53. J. Garriga and A. Vilenkin, “Solutions to the Cosmological Constant Problems,” Physical Review D, 64 (2001), id.023517.
  54. Peter G. van Dokkum, et al, “A High Merger Fraction in the Rich Cluster MS 1054-03 at z = 0.83: Direct Evidence for Hierarchical Formation of Massive Galaxies,” Astrophysical Journal Letters, 520 (1999), pp. L95-L98.
  55. Theodore P. Snow and Adolf N. Witt, “The Interstellar Carbon Budget and the Role of Carbon in Dust and Large Molecules,” Science 270 (1995), pp. 1455-1457.
  56. Elliott H. Lieb, Michael Loss, and Jan Philip Solovej, “Stability of Matter in Magnetic Fields,” Physical Review Letters, 75 (1995), pp. 985-989.
  57. B. Edvardsson et al, “The Chemical Evolution of the Galactic Disk. I. Analysis and Results,” Astronomy & Astrophysics, vol. 275 (1993), pp. 101-152.
  58. Hugh Ross, “Sparks in the Deep Freeze,” Facts & Faith, v. 11, n. 1 (1997), pp. 5-6.
  59. T. R. Gabella and T. Oka, “Detectiion of H3 + in Interstellar Space,” Nature, 384 (1996), pp. 334-335.
  60. David Branch, “Density and Destiny,” Nature, 391 (1998), p. 23.
  61. Andrew Watson, “Case for Neutrino Mass Gathers Weight,” Science, 277 (1997), pp. 30-31.
  62. Dennis Normile, “New Experiments Step Up Hunt for Neutrino Mass,” Science, 276 (1997), p. 1795.
  63. Joseph Silk, “Holistic Cosmology,” Science, 277 (1997), p. 644.
  64. Frank Wilczek, “The Standard Model Transcended,” Nature 394 (2 July 1998): 13-15.
  65. Limin Wang, et al, “Cosmic Concordance and Quintessence,” Astrophysical Journal, 530 (2000), pp. 17-35.
  66. Robert Irion, “A Crushing End for our Galaxy,” Science, 287 (2000), pp. 62-64.
  67. Roland Buser, “The Formation and Early Evolution of the Milky Way Galaxy,” Science, 287 (2000), pp. 69-74.
  68. Joss Bland-Hawthorn and Ken Freeman, “The Baryon Halo of the Milky Way: A Fossil Record of Its Formation,” Science, 287 (2000), pp. 79-83.
  69. Robert Irion, “Supernova Pumps Iron in Inside-Out Blast, Science, 287 (2000), pp. 203-205.
  70. Gary Gibbons, “Brane-Worlds,” Science, 287 (2000), pp. 49-50.
  71. Anatoly Klypin, Andrey V. Kravtsov, and Octavio Valenzuela, “Where Are the Missing Galactic Satellites?” Astrophysical Journal, 522 (1999), pp. 82-92.
  72. Inma Dominguez, et al, “Intermediate-Mass Stars: Updated Models,” Astrophysical Journal, 524 (1999), pp. 226-241’ Part 1.
  73. J. Iglesias-Páramo and J. M. Vilchez, “On the Influence of the Environment in the Star Formation Rates of a Sample of Galaxies in Nearby Compact Groups,” Astrophysical Journal, 518 (1999), pp. 94-102.
  74. Dennis Normile, “Weighing In on Neutrino Mass, Science, 280 (1998), pp. 1689-1690.
  75. Eric Gawiser and Joseph Silk, “Extracting Primordial Density Fluctuations,” Science, 280 (1998), pp. 1405-1411.
  76. Joel Primack, “A Little Hot Dark Matter Matters,” Science, 280 (1998), pp. 1398-1400.
  77. Stacy S. McGaugh and W. J. G. de Blok, “Testing the Dark Matter Hypothesis with Low Surface Brightness Galaxies and Other Evidence,” Astrophysical Journal, 499 (1998), pp. 41-65.
  78. Nikos Prantzos and Joseph Silk, “Star Formation and Chemical Evolution in the Milky Way: Cosmological Implications,” Astrophysical Journal, 507 (1998), pp. 229-240.
  79. P. Weiss, “Time Proves Not Reversible at Deepest Level,” Science News, 154 (1998), p. 277.
  80. E. Dwek, et al, “The COBE Diffuse Infrared Background Experiment Search for the Cosmic Infrared Background. IV. Cosmological Implications,” Astrophysical Journal, 508 (1998), pp. 106-122.
  81. G. J. Wasserburg and Y.-Z. Qian, “A Model of Metallicity Evolution in the Early Universe,” Astrophysical Journal Letters, 538 (2000), pp. L99-L102.
  82. Ron Cowen, “Cosmic Axis Begets Cosmic Controversy,” Science News, 151 (1997), p. 287.
  83. Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time (New York: Bantam Books, April 1988), pp. 120-133, 160-166.
  84. Peter D. Ward and Donald Brownlee, Rare Earth (New York: Copernicus, 2000).
  85. Vaclav Smil, The Earth’s Biosphere (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2002): 27-227.
  86. John Leslie, editor, Physical Cosmology and Philosophy (New York: Macmillan, 1990), pp. 121-180.
  87. Weihsueh A. Chiu, Nickolay Y. Gneden and Jeremiah P. Ostriker, “The Expected Mass Function for Low-Mass Galaxies in a Cold Dark Matter Cosmology: Is There a Problem?” Astrophysical Journal, 563 (2001), pp. 21-27.
  88. Martin Elvis, Massimo Marengo, and Margarita Karovska, “Smoking Quasars: A New Source for Cosmic Dust,” Astrophysical Journal Letters, 567 (2002), pp. L107-L110.
  89. Martin White and C. S. Kochanek, “Constraints on the Long-Range Properties of Gravity from Weak Gravitational Lensing,” Astrophysical Journal, 560 (2001), pp. 539-543.
  90. P. P. Avelino and C. J. A. P. Martins, “A Supernova Brane Scan,” Astrophysical Journal, 565 (2002), pp. 661-667.
  91. P. deBernardis, et al, “Multiple Peaks in the Angular Power Spectrum of the Cosmic Microwave Background: Significance and Consequences for Cosmology,” Astrophysical Journal, 564 (2002), pp. 559-566.
  92. A. T. Lee, et al, “A High Spatial Resolution Analysis of the MAXIMA-1 Cosmic Microwave Background Anisotropy Data,” Astrophysical Journal Letters, 561 (2001), pp. L1-L5.
  93. R. Stompor, et al, “Cosmological Implications of MAXIMA-1 High-Resolution Cosmic Microwave Background Anisotropy Measurement,” Astrophysical Journal Letters, 561 (2001), pp. L7-L10.
  94. Andrew Watson, “Cosmic Ripples Confirm Universe Speeding Up,” Science, 295 (2002), pp. 2341-2343.
  95. Anthony Aguirre, Joop Schaye, and Eliot Quataert, “Problems for Modified Newtonian Dynamics in Clusters and the Lya Forest?” Astrophysical Journal, 561 (2001), pp. 550-558.
  96. Chris Blake and Jasper Wall, “A Velocity Dipole in the Distribution of Radio Galaxies,” Nature, 416 (2002), pp. 150-152.
  97. G. Efstathiou, et al, “Evidence for a Non-Zero L and a Low Matter Density from a Combined Analysis of the 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey and Cosmic Microwave Background Anisotropies,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 330 (2002), pp. L29-L35.
  98. Susana J. Landau and Hector Vucetich, “Testing Theories That Predict Time Variation of Fundamental Constants, “Astrophysical Journal, 570 (2002), pp. 463-469.
  99. Renyue Cen, “Why Are There Dwarf Spheroidal Galaxies?” Astrophysical Journal Letters, 549 (2001), pp. L195-L198.
  100. Brandon Carter, “Energy Dominance and the Hawking-Ellis Vacuum Conservation Theorem,” a contribution to Stephen Hawkingís 60th birthday workshop on the Future of Theoretical Physics and Cosmology, Cambridge, UK, January, 2002, arXiv:gr-qc/0205010v1, May 2, 2002.
  101. Joseph F. Hennawi and Jeremiah P. Ostriker, “Observational Constraints on the Self-Interacting Dark Matter Scenario and the Growth of Supermassive Black Holes,” Astrophysical Journal, 572 (2002), pp. 41-54.
  102. Robert Brandenberger, Brandon Carter, and Anne-Christine Davis, “Microwave Background Constraints on Decaying Defects,” Physics Letters B, 534 (2002), pp. 1-7.
  103. Lawrence M. Krauss, “The End of the Age Problem, and the Case for a Cosmological Constant Revisited,” Astrophysical Journal, 501 (1998), pp. 461-466.
  104. Q. R. Ahmad, et al, “Measurement of the Rate of ne + d þ p + p + e- Interactions Produced by 8 B Solar Neutrinos at the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory,” Physical Review Letters, 87 (2001), id. 071301.
  105. R. E. Davies and R. H. Koch, “All the Observed Universe Has Contributed to Life,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 334B (1991), pp. 391-403.
  106. George F. R. Ellis, “The Anthropic Principle: Laws and Environments,” in The Anthropic Principle, edited by F. Bertola and U. Curi (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993), p. 30.
  107. H. R. Marston, S. H. Allen, and S. L. Swaby, “Iron Metabolism in Copper-Deficient Rats,” British Journal of Nutrition, 25 (1971), pp. 15-30.
  108. K. W. J. Wahle and N. T. Davies, “Effect of Dietary Copper Deficiency in the Rat on Fatty Acid Composition of Adipose Tissue and Desaturase Activity of Liver Microsomes,” British Journal of Nutrition, 34 (1975), pp. 105-112;.
  109. Walter Mertz, “The Newer Essential Trace Elements, Chromium, Tin, Vanadium, Nickel, and Silicon,” Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 33 (1974), pp. 307-313.
  110. Bruno Leibundgut, “Cosmological Implications from Observations of Type Ia Supernovae,” Annual Reviews of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 39 (2001), pp. 67-98.
  111. C. L. Bennett, et al, “First Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations, Preliminary Maps, and Basic Results,” Astrophysical Journal Supplement, 148 (2003), pp. 1-27.
  112. G. Hinshaw, et al, “”First Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Angular Power Spectrum,” Astrophysical Journal Supplement, 148 (2003), pp. 135-159.
  113. A. Balbi, et al, “Probing Dark Energy with the Cosmic Microwave Background: Projected Constraints from the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe and Planck,” Astrophysical Journal Letters, 588 (2003), pp. L5-L8.
  114. A. Vikhlinin, et al, “Cosmological Constraints from the Evolution of the Cluster Baryon Mass Function at z = 0.5,” Astrophysical Journal, 590 (2003), pp. 15-25.
  115. Frank Thim, et al, “The Cepheid Distance to NGC 5236 (M83) with the ESO Very Large Telescope,” Astrophysical Journal, 590 (2003), pp. 256-270.
  116. Kazuhide Ichikawa and M. Kawasaki, “Constraining the Variation of the Coupling Constants with Big Bang Nucleosynthesis,” Physical Review D, 65 (2002), id 123511.
  117. Eubino-Martin José Alberto, et al, “First Results from the Very Small Array-IV. Cosmological Parameter Estimation,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 341 (2003), pp. 1084-1092.
  118. Takuji Tsujimoto and Toshikazu Shigeyama, “Star Formation History of v Centauri Imprinted in Elemental Abundance Patterns,” Astrophysical Journal, 590 (2003), pp. 803-808.
  119. Santi Cassissi, Maurizio Salaris, and Alan W. Irwin, “The Initial Helium Content of Galactic Globular Cluster Stars from the R-Parameter: Comparison with the Cosmic Microwave Background Constraint,” Astrophysical Journal, 588 (2003), pp. 862-870.
  120. Naoki Yoshida, et al, “Early Structure Formation and Reionization in a Warm Dark Matter Cosmology,” Astrophysical Journal Letters, 591 (2003), pp. L1-L4.
  121. Robert R. Caldwell, et al, “Early Quintessence in Light of the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe,” Astrophysical Journal Letters, 591 (2003), pp. L75-L78.
  122. V. Luridiana, et al, “The Effect of Collisional Enhancement of Balmer Lines on the Determination of the Primordial Helium Abundance,” Astrophysical Journal, 592 (20030, pp. 846-865.
  123. Y. Jack Ng, W. A. Christiansen, and H. van Dam, “Probing Planck-Scale Physics with Extragalactic Sources?” Astrophysical Journal Letters, 591 (2003), pp. L87-L89.
  124. J. L. Sievers, et al, “Cosmological Parameters from Cosmic Background Imager Observations and Comparisons with BOOMERANG, DASI, and MAXIMA,” Astrophysical Journal, 591 (2003), pp. 599-622.
  125. R. Scranton, et al, “Physical Evidence for Dark Energy,” submitted July 20, 2003 to Physical Review Letters,
  126. Pablo Fosalba, Enrique Gaztanaga, and Francisco Castander, “Detection of the Integrated Sachs-Wolfe and SunyaevZeldovich Effects from the Cosmic Microwave Background-Galaxy Correlation.” Astrophysical Journal Letters, 597 (2003), pp. L89-L92.
  127. M. R. Nolta, et al, “First Year Wilkinson Anistropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Dark Energy Induced Correlation with Radio Sources,” submitted May 7, 2003 to Astrophysical Journal,
  128. Stephen Boughn and Robert Crittenden, “A Correlation Between the Cosmic Microwave Background and Large-Scale Structure in the Universe,” Nature, 427 (2004), pp. 45-47.
  129. T. Jacobson, S. Liberati, and D. Mattingly, “A Strong Astrophysical Constraint on the Violation of Special Relativity by Quantum Gravity,” Nature, 424 (2003), pp. 1019-1021.
  130. Sean Carroll, “Quantum Gravity: An Astrophysical Constraint,” Nature, 424 (2003), pp. 1007-1008.
  131. D. J. Fixsen, “The Spectrum of the Cosmic Microwave Background Anisotropy from the Combined COBE FIRAS and WMAP Observations,” Astrophysical Journal Letters, 594 (2003), pp. L67-L70.
  132. John L. Tonry, et al, “Cosmological Results from High-z Supernovae,” Astrophysical Journal, 594 (2003), pp. 1-24.
  133. Jean-Pierre Luminet, et al, “Dodecahedral Space Topology as an Explanation for Weak-Angle Temperature Correlations in the Cosmic Microwave Background,” Nature, 425 (2003), pp. 593-595.
  134. George F. R. Ellis, “The Shape of the Universe,” Nature, 425 (2003), pp. 566-567.
  135. Charles Seife, “Polyhedral Model Gives the Universe an Unexpected Twist,” Science, 302 (2003), p. 209.
  136. Neil J. Cornish, et al, “Constraining the Topology of the Universe,” astro-ph/0310233, submitted to Physical Review Letters, 2003.
  137. David Kirkman, et al, “The Cosmological Baryon Density from the Deuterium-to-Hydrogen Ratio in QSO Absorption Systems: D/H Toward Q1243+3047,” Astrophysical Journal Supplement, 149 (2003), pp. 1-28.
  138. Jeremiah P. Ostriker, et al, “The Probability Distribution Function of Light in the Universe: Results from Hydrodynamic Simulations,” Astrophysical Journal, 597 (2003), pp. 1-8.
  139. M. Tegmark, et al, “Cosmological Parameters from SDSS and WMAP,” preprint, 2003 posted at
  140. Wolfram Freudling, Michael R. Corbin, and Kirk T. Korista, “Iron Emission in z ~ 6 QSOs,” Astrophysical Journal Letters, 587 (2003), pp. L67-L70.
  141. Lennox L. Cowie and Antoinette Songaila, “The inconstant constant?” Nature 428 (2004), pp. 132-133.
  142. H. Chand, et al., “Probing the cosmological variation of the fine-structure constant: Results based on VLT-UVES sample,” Astronomy and Astrophysics, 417 (2004), pp. 853-871.
  143. Thibault Damous and Freeman Dyson, “The Oklo bound on the time variation of the fine-structure constant revisited,” Nuclear Physics B, 480 (1996), pp. 37-54.
  144. Anton M. Koekemoer, et al, “A Possible New Population of Sources with Extreme X-Ray/Optical Ratios,” Astrophysical Journal Letters, 600 (2004), pp. L123-L126.
  145. Henry C. Ferguson, et al, “The Size Evolution of High-Redshift Galaxies,” Astrophysical Journal, 600 (2004), pp. L107-L110.
  146. Charles Seife, “Light from Most-Distant Supernovae Shows Dark Energy Stays the Course,” Science, 303 (2004), p. 1271.
  147. Jonathan C. Tan and Christopher F. McKee, “The Formation of the First Stars. I. Mass Infall Rates, Accretion Disk Structure, and Protostellar Evolution,” Astrophysical Journal, 603 (2004), pp. 383-400.
  148. Charles Seife, “Galactic Stripling Gives a Glimpse of the Universe’s Raw Youth,” Science, 303 (2004), p. 1597.
  149. Alan Heavens, et al, “The Star Formation History of the Universe from the Stellar Populations of Nearby Galaxies,” Nature, 428 (2004), pp. 625-627.
  150. Pavel D. Naselsky, et al, “Primordial Magnetic Field and Non-Gaussianity of the One-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe Data,” Astrophysical Journal, 615 (2004), pp. 45-54.
  151. Gang Chen, et al, “Looking for Cosmological Alfvén Waves in Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe Data,” Astrophysical Journal, 611 (2004), pp. 655-659.
  152. Tommaso Treu and Léon V. E. Koopmans, “Massive Dark Matter Halos and Evolution of Early-Type Galaxies to z = 1,” Astrophysical Journal, 611 (2004), pp. 739-760.
  153. B. Aubert, et al (the BaBar Collaboration), “Observations of Direct CP Violation in B0→ K+pi- Decays,” preprint, August, 2004, high energy physics – experiment.
  154. Peter Bond, “Hubble’s Long View,” Astronomy & Geophysics, volume 45, issue 3, June 2004, p. 328.
  155. A. C. S. Readhead, et al, “Polarization Observations with the Cosmic Background Imager,” Science, 306 (2004), pp. 836-844.
  156. Nickolay Y. Gneidin, “Reionization, Sloan, and WMAP: Is the Picture Consistent?” Astrophysical Journal, 610 (2004), pp. 9-13.
  157. Amr A. El-Zant, et al, “Flat-Cored Dark Matter in Cuspy Clusters of Galaxies,” Astrophysical Journal Letters, 607 (2004), pp. L75-L78.
  158. J. R. Lin, S. N. Zhang, and T. P. Li, “Gamma-Ray Bursts Are Produced Predominantly in the Early Universe,” Astrophysical Journal, 605 (2004), pp. 819-822.
  159. Timothy P. Ashenfelter and Grant J. Mathews, “The Fine-Structure Constant as a Probe of Chemical Evolution and Asymptotic Giant Branch Nucleosynthesis in Damped Lyα Systems,” Astrophysical Journal, 615 (2004), pp. 82-97.
  160. Naoki Yoshida, Volker Bromm, and Lars Hernquist,, “The Era of Massive Population III Stars: Cosmological Implications and Self-Termination,” The Astrophysical Journal, 605, (2004), pp. 579-590.
  161. Yeshe Fenner, Jason X. Prochaska and Brad K. Gibson, “Constraints on Early Nucleosynthesis from the Abundance Pattern of a Damped Lyα System at z = 2.626,” The Astrophysical Journal, 606 (2004), pp. 116-125.
  162. Andreas Heithausen,, “Molecular Hydrogen as Baryonic Dark Matter,” The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 606 (2004), pp. L13-L15.
  163. Douglas Clowe, Anthony Gonzalez, and Maxim Markevitch, “Weak-Lensing Mass Reconstruction of the Interacting Cluster IE 0657-558: Direct Evidence for the Existence of Dark Matter,” Astrophysical Journal, 604 (2004), pp. 596-603.
  164. Sean T. Prigge, et al, “Dioxygen Binds End-On to Mononuclear Copper in a Precatalytic Enzyme Complex,” Science, 304 (2004), pp. 864-867.
  165. H. Jakubowski, Biochemistry: Chapter 8: Oxidative-Phosphorylation, A: The Chemistry of Dioxygen, November 17, 2005,
  166. Robert H. Abeles, Perry A. Frey, and William P. Jencks, Biochemistry (Boston: Jones and Bartlett, 1992), pp. 655-673.
  167. P. Caresia, S. Matarrese, and L. Moscardini, “Constraints on Extended Quintessence from High-Redshift Supernovae,” Astrophysical Journal, 605 (2004), pp. 21-28.
  168. Amr A. El-Zant, et al, “Flat-Cored Dark Matter in Cuspy Clusters of Galaxies,” Astrophysical Journal Letters, 607 (2004), pp. L75-L78.
  169. Kyu-Hyun Chae, et al, “Constraints on Scalar-Field Dark Energy from the Cosmic Lens All-Sky Survey Gravitational Lens Statistics,” Astrophysical Journal Letters, 607 (2004), pp. L71-74.
  170. Max Tegmark, et al, “The Three-Dimensional Power Spectrum of Galaxies From the Sloan Digital Sky Survey,” Astrophysical Journal, 606 (2004), pp. 702-740.
  171. Adrian C. Pope, et al, “Cosmological Parameters from Eigenmode Analysis of Sloan Digital Sky Survey Galaxy Redshifts,” Astrophysical Journal, 607 (2004), pp. 655-660.
  172. Yun Wang and Pia Mukherjee, “Model-Independent Constraints on Dark Energy Density from Flux-Averaging Analysis of Type Ia Supernova Data,” Astrophysical Journal, 606 (2004), pp. 654-663.
  173. Adam G. Riess, et al, “Type Ia Supernova Discoveries at z>1 from the Hubble Space Telescope: Evidence for Past Deceleration and Constraints on Dark Energy Evolution,” Astrophysical Journal, 607 (2004), pp. 665-687.
  174. A. Kashlinsky, et al, “Detecting Population III Stars Through Observations of Near-Infrared Cosmic Infrared Background Anisotropies,” Astrophysical Journal, 608 (2004), pp. 1-9.
  175. Nickolay Y. Gneidin, “Reionization, Sloan, and WMAP: Is the Picture Consistent?” Astrophysical Journal, 610 (2004), pp. 9-13.
  176. Paul Martin and Luis C. Ho, “A Population of Massive Globular Clusters in NGC 5128,” Astrophysical Journal, 610 (2004), pp. 233-246.
  177. L. Pasquini, et al, “Beryllium in Turnoff Stars of NGC6397: Early Galaxy Spallation Cosmochronology and Cluster Formation,” Astronomy and Astrophysics, in press, 2004.
  178. Peter Bond, “Hubble’s Long View,” Astronomy & Geophysics, volume 45, issue 3, June 2004, p. 328.
  179. T. Harko and K. S. Cheng, “Time Delay of Photons of Different Energies in Multidimensional Cosmological Models,” Astrophysical Journal, 611 (2004), pp. 633-641.
  180. I. H. Stairs, S. E. Thorsett, and Z. Arzoumanian, “Measurement of Gravitational Soin-Orbit Coupling in a Binary Pulsar System,” Physical Review Letters, 93 (2004), id. 141101.
  181. Daniel B. Zucker, et al, “Andromeda IX. A New Dwarf Speroidal Satellite of M31,” Astrophysical Journal Letters, 612 (2004), pp. L121-L124.
  182. J. Patrick Henry, “X-Ray Temperatures for the Extended Medium-Sensitivity Survey High-Redshift Cluster Sample: Constraints on Cosmology and the Dark Energy Equation of State,” Astrophysical Journal, 609 (2004), pp. 603-616.
  183. S. W. Allen, et al, “Constraints on Dark Energy from Chandra Observations of the Largest Relaxed Galaxy Clusters,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 353 (2004), pp. 457-467.
  184.  Ruth A. Daly and S. G. Djorgovski, “Direct Determination of the Kinematics of the Universe and Properties of the Dark Energy as Functions of Redshift,” Astrophysical Journal, 612 (2004), pp. 652-659.
  185. Ruth A. Daly and S. G. Djorgovski, “A Model-Independent Determination of the Expansion and Acceleration Rates of the Universe as a Function of Redshift and Constraints on Dark Energy,” Astrophysical Journal 597 (2003), pp. 9-20.
  186. E. Peik, et al, “Limit on the Present Temporal Variation of the Fine Structure Constant,” Physical Review Letters, 93 (2004), id # 170801.
  187. I. Ciufolini and E. C. Pavils, “A Confirmation of the General Relativistic Prediction of the Lense-Thirring Effect,” Nature, 431 (2004), pp. 958-960.
  188. Timothy P. Ashenfelter and Grant J. Mathews, “The Fine-Structure Constant as a Probe of Chemical Evolution and Asymptotic Giant Branch Nucleosynthesis in Damped Lya Systems,” Astrophysical Journal, 615 (2004), pp. 82-97.
  189. Signe Riemer-Sorensen, Steen H. Hansen, and Kristian Pedersen, “Sterile Neutrinos in the Milky Way: Observational Constraints,” Astrophysical Journal Letters, 644 (2006), pp. L33-L36.
  190. D. G. Yamazaki, et al, “Constraints on the Evolution of the Primordial Magnetic Field from the Small-Scale Cosmic Microwave Background Angular Anisotropy,” Astrophysical Journal, 646 (2006), pp. 719-729.
  191. Oliver S. Wenger, et al, “Electron Tunneling Through Organic Molecules in Frozen Glasses,” Science, 307 (2005), pp. 99-102.
  192. J. R. R. Verlet, et al, “Observation of Large Water-Cluster Anions with Surface-Bound Excess Electrons,” Science, 307 (2005), pp. 93-96.
  193. B. R. McNamara, et al, “The Heating of Gas in a Galaxy Cluster by X-Ray Cavities and Large-Scale Shock Fronts,” Nature, 433 (2005), pp. 45-47.
  194. Hans O. U. Fynbo, “Revised Rates for the Stellar Triple-Alpha Process from Measurement of 12C Nuclear Resonances,” Nature, 433 (2005), pp. 136-139.
  195. Fabrizio Nicastro, et al, “The Mass of the Missing Baryons in the X-Ray Forest of the Warm-Hot Intergalactic Medium,” Nature, 433 (2005), pp. 495-498.
  196. Ping He, Long-Long Feng, and Li-Zhi Fang, “Distributions of the Baryon Fraction on Large Scales in the Universe,” Astrophysical Journal, 623 (2005), pp. 601-611.
  197. Brian W. O’Shea, Tom Abel, Dan Whalen, and Micheal L. Norman, “Forming a Primordial Star in a Relic H II Region,” Astrophysical Journal 628 (2005): L5-L8.
  198. O. Le Fèvre et al., “A Large Population of Galaxies 9 to 12 Billion Years Back in the History of the Universe,” Nature 437 (2005): 519-21.
  199. A. Kashlinksy et al., “Tracing the First Stars with Fluctuations of the Cosmic Infrared Background,” Nature 438 (2005): 45-50.
  200. A. Kashlinsky, “Cosmic Infrared Background from Population III Stars and Its Effect on Spectra of High-z Gamma-Ray  Bursts,” Astrophysical Journal 633 (2005): L5-L8.
  201. Robert Irion, “Astronomers Sweep Space for the Sources of Cosmic Dust,” Science 310 (2005): 614-15.
  202. Beth Willman, et al, “A New Milky Way Dwarf Galaxy in Ursa Major,” Astrophysical Journal Letters, 626 (2005), pp. L85-L88.
  203. David Martinez-Delgado et al., “The Closest View of a Dwarf Galaxy: New Evidence on the Nature of the Canis Major Overdensity,” Astrophysical Journal 633 (2005): 205-09.
  204. Daniel J. Eisenstein et al., “Detection of the Baryon Acoustic Peak in the Large-Scale Correlation Function of SDSS Luminous Red Galaxies,” Astrophysical Journal 633 (2005): 560-74.
  205. M. J. Lee et al., “Hubble Space Telescope Advanced Camera for Surveys Weak-Lensing and Chandra X-Ray Studies of the High-Redshift Cluster MS 1054-0321,” Astrophysical Journal 634 (2005): 813-32.
  206. N. Kanekar et al., “Constraints on Changes in Fundamental Constants from a Cosmologically Distant OH Absorber or Emitter,” Physical Review Letters 95 (2005): 261301.
  207. John N. Bahcall, Charles L. Steinhardt, and David Schlegel, “Does the Fine-Structure Constant Vary with Cosmological Epoch?” Astrophysical Journal, 600 (2004), pp. 520-543.
  208. P. C. W. Davies, Tamara M. Davis, and Charles H. Lineweaver, “Cosmology: Black Holes Constrain Varying Constants,” Nature, 418 (2002), pp. 602-603.
  209. Alexander Y. Potekhin, et al, “Testing Cosmological Variability of the Proton-To-Electron Mass Ratio Using the Spectrum of PKS 0528-250,” Astrophysical Journal, 505 (1998), pp. 523-528.
  210. D. B. Guenther, “Testing the Constancy of the Gravitational Constant Using Helioseismology,” Astrophysical Journal, 498 (1998), pp. 871-876.
  211. E. Peik, et al, “Limit on the Present Temporal Variation of the Fine Structure Constant,” Physical Review Letters, 93 (2004), id # 170801.
  212. Adrian Cho, “Ring Around a Quasar May Deflate Quantum Foam After All,” Science 311 (2006): 594.
  213. Ariel G. Sánchez et al., “Cosmological Parameters from Cosmic Microwave Background Measurements and the Final 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey Power Spectrum,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 366 (2006): 189-207.
  214. Roya Mohayaee and R. Brent Tully, “The Cosmological Mean Density and Its Local Variations Probed by Peculiar Velocities,” Astrophysical Journal 635 (2005): L113-116.
  215. Enrique Gaztañaga, Mark Manera, and Tuomas Multamäki, “New Light on Dark Cosmos,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 365 (2006): 171-77.
  216. Daniel Clery, “Dwarf Galaxies May Help Define Dark Matter,” Science 311 (2006): 758-59.
  217. Philip J. Humphrey and David A. Buote, “A Chandra Survey of Early-Type Galaxies. I. Metal Enrichment in the Interstellar Medium,” Astrophysical Journal 639 (2006): 136-56.
  218. Phil Schewe and Ben Stein, “Have Particle Masses Changed Since the Early Universe?” Physics News Update 774 (2006): #1.
  219. F. Y. Wang and Z. G. Dai, “Constraining the Cosmological Parameters and Transition Redshift with Gamma-Ray Bursts and Supernovae,” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 368 (2006): 371-378.
  220. B. Altschul, “Limits on Lorentz Violation from Synchrotron and Inverse Compton Sources,” Physical Review Letters 96 (2006): id 201101.
  221. R. Monaco et al., “Zurek-Kibble Mechanism for the Spontaneous Vortex Formation in Nb-Al/Alox/Nb Josephson Tunnel Junctions: New Theory and Experiment,” Physical Review Letters 96 (2006): i
  222. C. Fröhlich et al., “Neutrino-Induced Nucleosynthesis of A>64 Nuclei: the n-p Process,” Physical Review Letters 96 (2006): id 142502.
  223. Peter L. Biermann and Alexander Kusenko, “Relic keV Sterile Neutrinos and Reionization,” Physical Review Letters 96 (2006): e091301.
  224. Masataka Fukugita and Masahiro Kawasaki, “Primordial Helium Abundance: A Reanalysis of the Izotov-Thuan Spectroscopic Sample,” Astrophysical Journal 646 (2006): 691-695.
  225. Takeshi Oka, “Interstellar H3+,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 103, no. 33 (2006): 12235-12242.
  226. Douglas Clowe, et al, “A Direct Empirical Proof of the Existence of Dark Matter,” Astrophysical Journal Letters 648 (2006): L109-L113.
  227.  Signe Riemer-Sørensen, Steen H. Hansen, and Kristian Pedersen, “Sterile Neutrinos in the Milky Way: Observational Constraints,” Astrophysical Journal 644 (2006): L33-36.
  228.  Charles L. Bennett, “Cosmology from Start to Finish,” Nature 440 (2006): 1126-1131.
  229. D. N. Spergel et al., “Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Three Year Results: Implications for Cosmology,” preprint, March 17, 2006.
  230. Simon Rainville et al., “World Year of Physics: A Direct Test of E=mc2,” Nature 438 (2005): 1096-1097.
  231. Brian J. Barris and John L. Tonry, “The Rate of Type Ia Supernovae at High Redshift,” The Astrophysical Journal 637 (2006): 427-438.
  232. Mario Livio and Martin J. Rees, “Anthropic Reasoning,” Science 309 (2005): 1022-1023.
  233. Stelios Kazantzidis et al., “Density Profiles of Cold Dark Matter Substructure: Implications for the Missing-Satellites Problem,” The Astrophysical Journal 608 (2004): 663-679.
  234. Stacy S. McGaugh, “The Mass Discrepancy-Acceleration Relation: Disk Mass and The Dark Matter Distribution,” The Astrophysical Journal 609 (2004): 652-666.
  235. Frédéric Daigne et al., “Cosmic Star Formation, Reionization, and Constraints on Global Chemical Evolution,” The Astrophysical Journal 617 (2004): 693-706.
  236. Yasuhiro Kuwayama et al., “The Pyrite-Type High-Pressure Form of Silica,” Science 309 (2005): 923-925.
  237. Geoff Brumfiel, “Outrageous Fortune,” Nature 439 (2006): 10-12.
  238. Greg Dash, “Book Review: Ice: The Nature, the History and the Uses of an Astonishing Substance,” Nature 440 (2006): 608.
  239. Michael Schirber, “Emergence of the Galactic Heavyweights,” ScienceNOW Daily News, 18 May 2006.,” ScienceNOW 306 (2006): 1099.
  240. Robin M. Canup and William R. Ward, “A Common Mass Scaling for Satellite Systems of Gaseous Planets,” Nature 441 (2006): 834-839.
  241. F. Governato et al., “The Formation of a Realistic Disk Galaxy in Λ-Dominated Cosmologies,” The Astrophysical Journal 607 (2004): 688-696.
  242. Bouwens et al., “Galaxy Size Evolution at High Redshift and Surface Brightness Selection Effects: Constraints from the Hubble Ultra Deep Field,” The Astrophysical Journal Letters 611 (2004): L1-L4.
  243. P. Colín et al., “Dwarf Dark Matter Halos,” The Astrophysical Journal 612 (2004): 50-57.
  244. Akima Fujita et al., “Cosmological Feedback from High-Redshift Dwarf Galaxies,” The Astrophysical Journal 613 (2004): 159-179.
  245. Varsha Kukarni et al., “Hubble Space Telescope Observations of Element Abundances in Low-Redshift Damped Lyα Galaxies and Implications for the Global Metallicity-Redshift Relation,” The Astrophysical Journal 618 (2005): 68-90.
  246. Anthony Aguirre et al., “Confronting Cosmological Simulations with Observations of Intergalactic Metals,” The Astrophysical Journal Letters 620 (2005): L13-L17.
  247. Joshua D. Younger, Neta A. Bahcall, and Paul Bode, “Evolution of the Cluster and Correlation Functions in a ΛCDM Cosmology,” The Astrophysical Journal 622 (2005): 1-5.
  248. Robert Minchin et al., “A Dark Hydrogen Cloud in the Virgo Cluster,” The Astrophysical Journal Letters 622 (2005): L21-L24.
  249. Eric F. Bell et al., “Toward an Understanding of the Rapid Decline of the Cosmic Star Formation Rate,” The Astrophysical Journal 625 (2005): 23-36.
  250. Critiano Porciana and Piero Madau, “The Origin of Intergalactic Metals Around Lyman Break Galaxies,” The Astrophysical Journal Letters 625 (2005): L43-L46.
  251. R. J. Wilman et al., “The Discovery of a Galaxy-Wide Superwind from a Young Massive Galaxy at Redshift z ≈ 3,” Nature 436 (2005): 227-229.
  252. Timothy C. Bears, “The First Generation of Stars,” Science 309 (2005): 390-391.
  253. Nobuyuki Iwamoto et al., “The First Chemical Enrichment in the Universe and the Formation of Hyper Metal-Poor Stars,” Science 309 (2005): 451-453.
  254. Nicolas Bouché et al., “Measuring the Halo Mass of z ~ 3 Damped Lyα Absorbers from the Absorber-Galaxy CrossCorrelation,” The Astrophysical Journal 628 (2005): 89-103.
  255. Brian W. O’Shea et al., “Forming a Primordial Star in a Relic H II Region,” The Astrophysical Journal Letters 628 (2005): L5-L8.
  256. Haruka Mii and Tomonori Totani, “Ultraluminous X-Ray Sources: Evidence for Very Efficient Formation of Population III Stars Contributing to the Cosmic Near-Infrared Background Excess?,” The Astrophysical Journal 628 (2005): 873-878.
  257. N. Panagia et al., “Direct Evidence for an Early Reionization of the Universe,” The Astrophysical Journal Letters 633 (2005): L1-L4.
  258. Asantha Cooray and Renyue Cen, “The Rise of Dwarfs and the Fall of Giants: Galaxy Formation Feedback Signatures in the Halo Satellite Luminosity Function,” The Astrophysical Journal Letters 633 (2005): L69-L72.
  259. C. Simon Jeffery, Christopher A. Tout, John C. Lattanzio, “Nucleosynthesis in Binary Stars,” Science 311 (2006): 345-346.
  260. A. N. Straugh et al., “Tracing Galaxy Assembly: Tadpole Galaxies in the Hubble Ultra Deep Field,” The Astrophysical Journal 639 (2006): 724-730.
  261. C. Maier et al., “Oxygen Gas Abundances at z ~ 1.4: Implications for the Chemical Evolution History of Galaxies,” The Astrophysical Journal 639 (2006): 858-867.
  262. Jason Tumlinson, “Chemical Evolution in Hierarchical Models of Cosmic Structure. I. Constraints on the Early Stellar Initial Mass Function,” The Astrophysical Journal 641 (2006): 1-20.
  263. Aparna Venkatesan, “A Cosmic Milestone: Constraints from Metal-Poor Halo Stars on the Cosmological Rionization Epoch,” The Astrophysical Journal Letters 641 (2006): L81-L84.
  264. J. Stuart B. Wyithe and Abraham Loeb, “Suppression of Dwarf Galaxy Formation by Cosmic Reionization,” Nature 441 (2006): 322-324.
  265. Ben E. K. Sugerman et al., “Massive-Star Supernovae as Major Dust Factories,” Science Express, 10.1126/science.1128131 (2006).,” Science 309 (2006): 1431.
  266. Jeremy L. Tinker et al., “Cosmic Voids and Galaxy Bias in the Halo Occupation Framework,” The Astrophysical Journal 647 (2006): 737-752.
  267. Ignacio Trubillo et al., “The Size Evolution of Galaxies Since z~3: Combining SDSS, GEMS, and FIRES,” The Astrophysical Journal 650 (2006): 18-41.
  268. L. Dyson, M. Kleban, L. Susskind, “Disturbing Implications of a Cosmological Constant,” SU/MIT arXiv (2002): hepth/020813 v1.
  269. Max Tegmark et al., “The Three-Dimensional Power Spectrum of Galaxies from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey,” The Astrophysical Journal 606 (2004): 702-740.
  270. Joachim Wambsganss, Paul Bode, and Jeremiah Ostriker, “Giant Arc Statistics in Concordance Lambda Cold Dark Matter Universe,” The Astrophysical Journal Letters 606 (2004): L93-L96.
  271. Adrian Cho, “Galaxy Clusters Bear Witness to Universal Speed-Up,” Science 304 (2004): 1092.
  272. Alexandre Refregier et al., “Weak Lensing from Space. III. Cosmological Parameters,” The Astronomical Journal 127 (2004): 3102-3114.
  273. Adrian C. Pope et al., “Cosmological Parameters from Eigenmode Analysis of Sloan Digital Sky Survey Galaxy Redshifts,” The Astrophysical Journal 607 (2004): 655-660.
  274. Adam G. Riess et al., “Type Ia Supernova Discoveries at z > 1 from the Hubble Space Telescope: Evidence for Past Deceleration and Constraints on Dark Energy Evolution,” The Astrophysical Journal 607 (2004): 665-687.
  275. J. Patrick Henry, “X-Ray Temperature for the Extended Medium-Sensitivity Survey High-Redshift Cluster Sample: Constraints on Cosmology and Dark Energy Equation of State,” The Astrophysical Journal 609 (2004): 603-616.
  276. Steven E. Boggs et al., “Testing Lorentz Invariance with GRB 021206,” The Astrophysical Journal Letters 611 (2004): L77-L80.
  277. Gang Chen and Bharat Ratra, “Constraints on Scalar-Field Dark Energy from Galaxy Cluster Gas Mass Fraction Versus Redshift Data,” The Astrophysical Journal Letters 612 (2004): L1-L4.
  278. Ruth A. Daly and S. G. Djorgovski, “Direct Determination of the Kinematics of the Universe and Properties of the Dark Energy as Functions of Redshift,” The Astrophysical Journal 612 (2004): 652-659.
  279. Z. G. Dai, E. W. Liang, and D. Xu, “Constraining ΩM and Dark Energy with Gama-Ray Bursts,” The Astrophysical Journal Letters 612 (2004): L101-L104.
  280. A. C. S. Readhead et al., “Polarization Observations with the Cosmic Background Imager,” Science 306 (2004): 836-844.
  281. Pavel D. Naselsky et al., “Primordial Magnetic Field and Non-Gaussianity of the One-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anistropy Probe Data,” The Astrophysical Journal 615 (2004): 45-54.
  282. Masataka Fukugita and P. J. E. Peebles, “The Cosmic Energy Inventory,” The Astrophysical Journal 616 (2004): 643-668.
  283. David Tytler et al., “Cosmological Parameters σ8, the Baryon Density Ωb, The Vacuum Energy Density ΩΛ, The Hubble Constant and the UV Background Intensity from a Calibrated Measurement of H I Lyα Absorption at z = 1.9,” The Astrophysical Journal 617 (2004): 1-28.
  284. Robert Irion, “Galaxy Patterns Preserve an Imprint of the Big Bang,” Science 307 (2005): 508-509.
  285. Fabrizio Nicastro et al., “The Mass of the Missing Baryons in the X-ray Forest of the Warm-Hot Intergalactic Medium,” Nature 433 (2005): 495-498.
  286. Jonathan Mitchell et al., “Improved Cosmological Constraints from Gravitational Lens Statistics,” The Astrophysical Journal 622 (2005): 81-98.
  287. S. Dye and S. J. Warren, “Decomposition of the Visible and Dark Matter in the Einstein Ring 0047-2808 by Semilinear Inversion,” The Astrophysical Journal 623 (2005): 31-41.
  288. Sergey Mashchenko, H. M. P. Couchman, and Alison Sills , “Modeling Star Formation in Dwarf Spheroidal Galaxies: A Case for Extended Dark Matter Halos,” The Astrophysical Journal 624 (2005): 726-741.
  289. D. G. Yamazaki, K. Ichiki, and T. Kajino, “Constraining the Primordial Magnetic Field from Cosmic Microwave Background Anisotropies at Higher Multipoles,” The Astrophysical Journal Letters 625 (2005): L1-L4.
  290. Kevork Abazajian et al., “Cosmology and the Halo Occupation Distribution from Small-Scale Galaxy Clustering in the Sloan Digital Sky Survey,” The Astrophysical Journal 625 (2005): 613-620.
  291. E. R. Siegel and J. N. Fry, “The Effects of Inhomogeneities on Cosmic Expansion,” The Astrophysical Journal Letters 628 (2005): L1-L4.
  292. David L. Weinberg, “Mapping the Large-Scale Structure of the Universe,” Science 309 (2005): 564-565.
  293. Mario Livio and Martin J. Rees, “Anthropic Reasoning,” Science 309 (2005): 1022-1023.
  294. John H. Wise and Tom Abel, “The Number of Supernovae from Primordial Stars in the Universe,” The Astrophysical Journal 629 (2005): 615-624.
  295. Karl Glazebrook and Christ Blake, “Measuring the Cosmic Evolution of Dark Energy with Baryonic Oscillations in the Galaxy Power Spectrum,” The Astrophysical Journal 631 (2005): 1-20.
  296. Roberto Mainini, Loris P. L. Colombo, and Silvio A. Bonometto, “Dark Matter and Dark Energy from a Single Scalar Field and Cosmic Microwave Background Data,” The Astrophysical Journal 632 (2005): 691-705.
  297. Daniel J. Eisenstein et al., “Detection of the Baryon Acoustic Peak in the Large-Scale Correlation Function of SDSS Luminous Red Galaxies,” The Astrophysical Journal 633 (2005): 560-574.
  298. P. Astier et al., “The Supernova Legacy Survey: Measurement of ΩM, ΩΛ and w from the First Year Data Set,” Astronomy & Astrophysics 447 (2006): 31-48.
  299. George Ellis, “Physics Ain’t What It Used to Be,” Nature 438 (2005): 739-740.
  300. Kiyotomo Ichiki et al., “Cosmological Magnetic Field: A Fossil of Density Perturbations in the Early Universe,” Sciencexpress 10.1126/Science.11206090 (2006): 1-7; Science Express 311 (2006): 7.
  301. Robert Irion, “Astronomers Push and Pull Over Dark Energy’s Role in Cosmos,” Science 311 (2006): 316.
  302. Jounghun Lee and Xi Kang, “Reconstructing the Triaxial Shapes of Dark Matter Halos from the Anisotropic Spatial Distributions of Their Substructures in the Concordance Cosmology,” The Astrophysical Journal 637 (2006): 561-566.
  303. Jenny Hogan, “Microwave Data Refine Picture of Universe,” Nature 440 (2006): 395.
  304. D. N. Spergel, et al, “Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Three Year Results: Implications for Cosmology,” Astrophysical Journal Supplement (2007): in press.
  305. L. Page, et al, “Three Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Polarization Analysis,” Astrophysical Journal Supplement (2007): in press.
  306. Joey Key Shapiro, et al, “Extending the WMAP Bound on the Size of the Universe,” eprint arXiv:astro-ph/0604616.
  307. Alexander Vilenkin, “The Vacuum Energy Crisis,” Science 312 (2006): 1148-1149.
  308. Paul J. Steinhardt and Neil Turok, “Why the Cosmological Constant is Small and Positive,” Science 312 (2006): 1180-1183.
  309. Jounghun Lee, “The Axis-Ratio Distribution of Galaxy Clusters in the SDSS-C4 Catalog as a New Cosmological Probe,” The Astrophysical Journal 643 (2006): 724-729.
  310. A. Conley et al., “Measurement of Ωm,ΩΛ from a Blind Analysis of Type Ia Supernovae with CMAGIC: Using Color Information to Verify the Acceleration of the Universe,” The Astrophysical Journal 644 (2006): 1-20.
  311. Jiajian Shen, “An Excursion Set Model of the Cosmic Web: The Abundance of Sheets, Filaments, and Halos,” The Astrophysical Journal 645 (2006): 783-791.
  312. Laurie D. Shaw et al., “Statistics of Physical Properties of Dark Matter Clusters,” The Astrophysical Journal 646 (2006): 815-833.
  313. Kaiki Taro Inoue and Joseph Silk, “Local Voids as the Origin of Large-Angle Cosmic Microwave Background Anomalies. I.,” The Astrophysical Journal 648 (2006): 23-30.
  314. Yun Wang and Pia Mukherjee, “Robust Dark Energy Constraints from Supernovae, Galaxy Clustering, and 3 yr Wilkinson Anisotrophy Probe Observations,” The Astrophysical Journal 650 (2006): 1-6.
  315. Andreea Petric et al., “A Direct Upper Limit on the Density of Cosmological Dust from the Absence of an X-Ray Scattering Halo Around the z = 4.3 Quasar QSO 1508+5714,” The Astrophysical Journal 651 (2006): 41-45.
  316. D0 Collaboration, “A Precision Measurement of the Mass of the Top Quark,” Nature 429 (2004): 638-642.
  317. Daniel H. McIntosh, Hans-Walter Rix, and Nelson Caldwell, “Structural Evidence for Environment-Driven Transformation of the Blue Galaxies in Local Abel Clusters: A85, A496 and A754,” The Astrophysical Journal 610 (2004): 161-182.
  318. Lawrence M. Krauss and Glenn D. Starkman, “Life, the Universe, and Nothing: Life and Death in An Ever-Expanding Universe,” The Astrophysical Journal 531 (2000): 22-30.
  319. Somnath Bharadwaj, Suketu P. Bhavsar, and Jatush V. Sheth, “The Size of the Longest Filaments in the Universe,” The Astrophysical Journal 606 (2004): 25-31.
  320. Mark Peplow, “Particle Physics: The Bs Have It,” Nature 430 (2005): 739.
  321. B. Aubert, et al, “Direct CP Asymmetry in B0 → K+π-Decays,” ArXiv:hep-ex/0407057 v2 25 Jan 2005.
  322. Jeremy Darling, “A Laboratory for Constraining Cosmic Evolution of the Fine Structure Constant: Conjugate 18
  323. Centimeter OH Lines Toward PKS 1413+135 at z = 0.24671,” The Astrophysical Journal 612 (2004): 58-63.
  324. Joel N. Bregman, Renato A. Dupke, and Eric D. Miller, “Cosmic Filaments in Superclusters,” The Astrophysical Journal 614 (2004): 31-36.
  325. Bruce A. Bassett, Pier Stefano Corasaniti, and Martin Kunz, “The Essence of Quintessence and the Cost of Compression,” The Astrophysical Journal Letters 617 (2004): L1-L4.
  326. Priyamvada Natarajan and Volker Springel, “Abundance of Substructure in Clusters of Galaxies,” The Astrophysical Journal Letters 617 (2004): L13-L16.
  327. J. Michael Shull, “Hot Pursuit of Missing Matter,” Nature 433 (2005): 465-467.
  328. David W. Hogg et al., “Cosmic Homogeneity Demonstrated with Luminous Red Galaxies,” The Astrophysical Journal 624 (2005): 54-58.
  329. J. Richard Gott III et al., “A Map of the Universe,” The Astrophysical Journal 624 (2005): 463-484.
  330. P. W., “Astrophysics: Test Puts Pedal to Heavy Metal,” Science News 167 (2005): 318.
  331. Xiao Wang et al., “Estimating Dark Matter Distributions,” The Astrophysical Journal 626 (2005): 145-158.
  332. F. J. Sánchez-Salcedo, “The Dark Halo of NGC 5963 as a Constraint of Dark Matter Self-Interaction of the Low-Velocity Regime,” The Astrophysical Journal 631 (2005): 244-251.
  333. F. D. A. Hartwick, “Early Cosmic Chemical Evolution: Relating the Origin of a Diffuse Intergalactic Medium and the First Long-Lived Stars,” The Astrophysical Journal 640 (2006): 41-46.
  334. Leonid Chuzhoy and Adi Nusser, “Consequences of Short-Range Interactions Between Dark Matter and Protons in Galaxy Clusters,” The Astrophysical Journal 645 (2006): 950-954.
  335. F. W. Stecker, M. A. Malkan and S. T. Scully, “Intergalactic Photon Spectra from the Far-IR to the UV Lyman Limit for 0 < z < 6 and the Optical Depth of the Universe to the High-Energy Gamma Rays,” The Astrophysical Journal 648 (2006): 774-783.
  336. Douglas Clowe et al., “A Direct Empirical Proof of the Existence of Dark Matter,” The Astrophysical Journal Letters 648 (2006): L109-L113.
  337. Takashi Yoshida et al., “Neutrino Oscillation Effects on Supernova Light-Element Synthesis,” The Astrophysical Journal 649 (2006): 319-331.
  338. Renyue Cen and Jeremiah P. Ostriker, “Where Are the Baryons? II. Feedback Effects,” The Astrophysical Journal 650 (2006): 560-572.
  339. Renyue Cen and Taotao Fang, “Where Are the Baryons? III. Nonequilibrium Effects and Observables,” The Astrophysical Journal 650 (2006): 573-591.
  340. Alexander F. Goncharov, Viktor V. Struzhkin, and Steven D. Jacobsen, “Reduced Radiative Conductivity of Low-Spin (Mg,Fe)O in the Lower Mantle,” Science 312 (2006): 1205-1208.
  341. Paula Jofré, Andreas Reisenegger, and Rodrigo Fernández, “Constraining a Possible Time Variation of the Gravitational Constant through ‘Gravitochemical Heating’ of Neutron Stars,” Physical Review Letters 97 (2006): 131102.
  342. Phil Schewe and Ben Stein, “Have Particle Masses Changed Since the Early Universe,” Physics News Update 774 (2006) #1.