4 The Cheapskate Share your voice Comments Sarah Tew/CNET Are you a Spotify subscriber? Then you’ve no doubt discovered the limitations for listening offline. It requires a phone, which isn’t always convenient — like when you’re at the gym or out for a run. And even if you do have your phone, you’ll have to devote a chunk of precious storage to your Spotify playlists.The Mighty Vibe solves those problems. This portable player — a dead ringer for Apple’s dearly departed Shuffle — absorbs your Spotify playlists and podcasts for easy offline listening. Read CNET’s Mighty Vibe review to learn more.It normally sells for $86 (currently on sale for $5 less), but for a limited time, Cheapskate readers can get the Mighty Vibe for $69.99 with promo code MIGHTYCHEAP. Shipping adds $5.See it at MightyThis is the second-gen version of the Mighty, featuring better battery life (at least 5 hours of play time), broader Bluetooth compatibility, better Bluetooth range and a redesigned mobile app.It’s also now available in a couple snazzy colors. In addition to basic black, you can choose a teal or red case.As noted, the Mighty Vibe looks and operates much like an iPod Shuffle, right down to its spring-loaded clip and simplistic controls. What’s handy here, though, is that you can pair it to Bluetooth earphones for a wireless listening experience. I just tried it with a wire-free set — pretty nice!There is a headphone jack if you want to go wired, and that jack is also used to charge the Vibe. A spare cable will run you $7. The player can hold up to 1,000 songs, but you can’t sync specific artists or albums, only playlists.That minor limitation aside, I can’t understand why this is product isn’t better known or more popular. It is, to my knowledge, the only offline-Spotify gadget currently available, and it’s a very affordable way to carry around your favorite playlists and podcasts without a phone.Note: This post was published previously and has been updated regarding pricing and discount code.CNET’s Cheapskate scours the web for great deals on PCs, phones, gadgets and much more. Note that CNET may get a share of revenue from the sale of the products featured on this page. Questions about the Cheapskate blog? Find the answers on our FAQ page. Find more great buys on the CNET Deals page and follow the Cheapskate on Facebook and Twitter! Best laptops for college students: We’ve got an affordable laptop for every student. Best live TV streaming services: Ditch your cable company but keep the live channels and DVR. Tags MP3 Players
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only. However, as physicists Robert Caldwell of Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire, and Albert Stebbins of Fermilab in Batavia, Illinois, point out, the Copernican principle has never been confirmed as a whole. In a recent paper published in Physical Review Letters called “A Test of the Copernican Principle,” the two researchers set out to prove the 500-year-old principle using observations of the cosmic microwave background (CMB).“The Copernican principle is a cornerstone of most of astronomy, it is assumed without question, and plays an important role in many statistical tests for the viability of cosmological models,” Stebbins told PhysOrg.com. “It is also a necessary consequence of the stronger assumption of the Cosmological Principle: namely, that not only do we not live in a special part of the universe, but there are no special parts of the universe – everything is the same everywhere (up to statistical variation). “It is a very handy principle, since it implies that here and now is the same as there and now, and here and then is the same as there and then. We do not have to look back in time at our current location to see how the universe was in our past – we can just look very far away, and given the large light travel time, we are looking at a distant part of the universe in the distant past. Given the Cosmological Principle, their past is the same as our past.”Cosmic DistortionWhen the universe was just 400,000 years old, matter and radiation decoupled and left a remnant radiation that still pervades the entire universe today. By measuring the tiny temperature fluctuations of this CMB radiation, scientists can learn things about the universe such as its shape, size, and rate of expansion. In the latter case, the observations show that the universe is expanding at an ever-accelerating rate, leading scientists to speculate about the existence of dark energy, new laws of gravity, and other possible – and often exotic – theories.But what if the universe’s accelerating expansion is just an illusion? As Caldwell and Stebbins explained, this scenario is entirely plausible if the Copernican principle is loosened a bit. If, instead of the universe being homogenous and isotropic as the Cosmological Principle states, there is rather “a peculiar distribution of matter centered upon our location,” then the universe would be centered on a low-density, matter-dominated void. Such a universe would be non-accelerating, and there would be no need for dark energy or other similar theories. That’s why it’s important to know if the Copernican principle is correct: it will ensure that CMB observations haven’t been misinterpreted to indicate cosmic acceleration when there is none. To test the principle, Caldwell and Stebbins developed a “CMB-distortion test”: they looked for deviations of the CMB spectrum from a perfect blackbody as might have been caused by a large, local void. A void or other “non-Copernican structure” would cause ionized gas to move relative to the CMB, and the Doppler-shifted CMB scattered toward us could contain detectable deviations from a blackbody. “In essence, we use the reionized Universe as a mirror to look at ourselves in CMB light,” the researchers explained. “If we see ourselves in the mirror, it is because ours is a privileged location. If we see nothing [i.e. no peculiar distortions] in the mirror, then the Copernican principle is upheld.”The Hubble BubbleAs an initial test, Caldwell and Stebbins focused on a universe model consisting of a simple, spherically symmetric void, which is also known as a “Hubble bubble.” This void universe resembles an open (low-density) universe embedded inside a flat (medium-density) universe. The size of the void depends on how gas is distributed throughout the universe. Basically, gas can exist in three zones – neutral, reflection, and Doppler – depending on its redshift. Depending on how these three zones overlap, the void can come in five sizes, from small to “superhorizon,” where the void encompasses the entire observable universe.Using their CMB-distortion test, the researchers calculated that only the smaller void models could lead to the type of distortion associated with a violation of the Copernican principle. Then, by analyzing data for the CMB spectrum, they were able to rule out nearly all of these non-Copernican Hubble bubble void universes – meaning the Copernican principle passed this first test. However, Caldwell and Stebbins also noted that other models – such as those with a higher density or smaller radius – may still exist that evade this test.The researchers added that this is not the first time that bits of the Copernican principle have been tested, but it is one of the first tests of the remaining radial inhomogeneity on very large scales. Caldwell explained that, in 1995, physicist Jeremy Goodman of Princeton proposed a similar test of spectral distortions. Goodman’s implementation resulted in a weaker constraint, or test, of the Copernican principle.“This [large-scale testing] is not easy to do because, when we look far away, we are looking back in time, and it is difficult to say whether what we see is due to changes with time, which does not violate the Copernican principle, or changes with distance, which does,” Stebbins explained. “Thus, it is a hard question to answer, which is why it has not been done.”More TestsIn the future, the scientists plan to further pinpoint the CMB distortions that could be caused by a local non-Copernican structure, and also apply the test to other more general universe models. These tests should be useful in potentially ruling out alternative hypotheses for dark energy, as Caldwell explained. More fundamentally, the tests could either verify the foundation of centuries of astronomical work, or – and the chance is slim – suggest that the Copernican principle may not be as certain as we think.“If our test of the Copernican principle were to fail, it would probably not be believed, and a variety of other observations would be required to test it,” Stebbins said. “If all these further tests confirmed the large void, then we would have to rethink our ideas about dark energy, or, namely, unthink them. “I think the scientific community would not be too unhappy with the idea of a large under-dense region – it is not hard to think of ideas of how they might come to be, even in the context of a hot big bang model. What is hard to understand is why we would be so close to the center of one. No doubt someone would come up with an ‘anthropic’ argument for it – but I’ve thought a bit about that, and don’t really think there is a salable anthropic explanation. (By the way, I don’t think there is a salable intelligent design reason, either.) In the end, we might have to live with the Walter Cronkite explanation ‘… and that’s the way it is …. ’”More information: Caldwell, R. R. and Stebbins, A. “A Test of the Copernican Principle.” Physical Review Letters 100, 191302 (2008). Copyright 2008 PhysOrg.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or part without the express written permission of PhysOrg.com. This image shows a cross-section of a void universe with an observer (O) in the center, in violation of the Copernican principle. CMB photons (yellow lines) can scatter off reionized gas, and some may lead to CMB distortions. Credit: Caldwell, R. R. and Stebbins, A. ©2008 APS. Explore further Earth not center of the universe, surrounded by ‘dark energy’: cosmologists report Citation: A Test of the Copernican Principle (2008, May 22) retrieved 18 August 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2008-05-copernican-principle.html The Copernican principle states that the Earth is not the center of the universe, and that, as observers, we don’t occupy a special place. First stated by Copernicus in the 16th century, today the idea is wholly accepted by scientists, and is an assumed concept in many astronomical theories.