A nice pic from that site:
Enough said.
Ping
God's work is truly amazing. Of course one must understand that his "timepiece" is quite different from ours.
Astronomers Find the Earliest Signs Yet of a Violent Baby Universe
Would you want to stand next to the marble-sized universe, if you could be assured of escaping to a safe distance before detonation?
Source please? Thanks.
My feeble understanding of science, is that you can't make something out of nothing. How can you take mass the size of a marble and generate the relative mass of the universe, much less our solar system, or even my back yard, without adding something along the line?
Someone ping me when we have answers to questions such as: Where did the marble-size universe come from? If the Big Bang happened at time X, what was there before time X? Seems to me any Theory of Everything must explain how space-time started and what existed (if that's the right word) before it started (if that concept means anything).
"Oldest light shows universe grew fast, researchers say [inflationary cosmology gets a big boost]"
Faster than you think. Seven days, in fact.
And these guys will laugh when somebody says it was created in seven days???
"Scientists examining the oldest light in the universe say they've found clear evidence that matter expanded at an almost inconceivable rate after the big bang, creating conditions that led to the formation of the first stars."
Hmmm. Sounds like, "And God said, 'Let there be light'," to me.
The article excerpt states that the universe grew to 'an astronomical size', not to a size larger than the observable universe. Does the full article support your statement?
|
Leigh Dayton, Science writer 18mar06 SCIENTISTS have obtained the best evidence yet that the universe expanded from the size of a marble to the vastness of known space in the first trillion trillion trillionth of a second of its existence. This phenomenal growth, called "inflation", is part of a set of cosmic events known collectively as the Big Bang and was first proposed in 1979 by US physicist Alan Guth. "It's something of a triumph for Guth and the people who developed the inflation scenario that 25 years later we get this level of detail and confirmation of inflation," said cosmologist Paul Davies of Macquarie University. That key detail came from NASA's Wilkinson Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) satellite, launched in 2001. Using WMAP data, researchers mapped the directionality, or polarisation, of the faint afterglow of the intense heat of the Big Bang, the cosmic microwave background radiation. Like a cosmological fossil, the polarisation reveals the shape of space preceding it, thus providing the evidence for inflation. And since the polarisation was affected by the first stars, the team determined that those stars formed 400million years after the Big Bang. "We have never before been able to understand the infant universe with such precision," said WMAP principal investigator Charles Bennett of The Johns Hopkins University and Goddard Spaceflight Center, both in Maryland. "It appears that the infant universe had the kind of growth spurt that would alarm any mom or dad," he said. What caused that growth spurt? Cosmologists suspect it was the breakdown of a "superforce" that co-existed with the force of gravity. It split into the electromagnetic force and the strong and weak nuclear forces. But to find out for sure, Professor Davies says the next step is to obtain evidence about exactly what went on during the inflation phase.
|
What about the universal constant-the speed of light? Where's Einstein when he's needed? This is truly baffling to non-astronomers like me.
This piece of news is getting wide publication, many articles, many threads. No doubt many minds are tripping out on this information if it is new to them. However, it seems to be confirmation of Guth's inflation hypothesis rather than a new model.
wink, wink....