Study: Universe 13 Billion Years Old

AP | Wednesday, April 24, 2002; 4:21 PM | Paul Recer

[Northpaw]

These scientists sure have a thing for older universes. I myself, prefer younger ones with perkier nebula.

[Osinski]

Oh yeah, right. 13 Billion. The whole universe that goes on for infinity. hehechchchee. Who's paying this guy. Please tell me not us.

[longshadow]

Nothing really matters ... grumble, grumble. Still, I persevere.

What does your mascot, Plato the Platypus, say about it?

[PatrickHenry]

You can measure till the sun goes down ...

You'll get better results if you do it after the sun goes down.

[longshadow]

I myself, prefer younger ones with perkier nebula.

Watch it; this is a family forum.

;-)

[PatrickHenry]

What does your mascot, Plato the Platypus, say about it?

Plato says 14.2 billion years.

[Reaganwuzthebest]

I don't doubt the intelligence of these people, and for our survival, that of mankind it's good to research these things as best they can. But I prefer to see proof, not theories. And the age of the universe is way to speculative. They're not even certain about the so-called big-bang theory, so the whole origins of the universe will probably never be be known for certain.

[jlogajan]

You start by spending twelve years in college

Oh heck, I could do that. :-)

[PatrickHenry]

And the age of the universe is way to speculative. They're not even certain about the so-called big-bang theory, so the whole origins of the universe will probably never be be known for certain.

There are dozens of very good books on the subject, written in layman's language by the very people who are doing this research. You'd be amazed to discover how much in agreement they all are. They explain their thinking, their evidence, and how they arrive at their conclusions. Very stimulating reading. Try it.

[longshadow]

But I prefer to see proof, not theories.

Then I suggest you restrict yourself to logic, Mathematics, and distilled spirits, the only realms in which absolute "proof" is possible.

Scientific theories are based on consonance with observed evidence and multiple unsuccessfull attempts at falsification. Thus, they are NEVER "proven" in the sense of metaphysical certitude. That is the nature of science, and it has seerved us very well, despite it's shortcomings.

[F16Fighter]

"These people actually get paid to make educated guesses like this?"

This has to be the ultimate job --predicting the age of the Universe as one of the "important" tasks of an astronomer. Sorta like the "job" of counting the angels on the head of a pin.

I remember the scientists a few years ago who "discovered" asteroids colliding with the planet Jupiter. They were dancing in the streets. Total contribution to Mankind for this crucial "discovery"? Nada. Zilch. Nothing.

[longshadow]

Oh yeah, right. 13 Billion. The whole universe that goes on for infinity.

If you are having trouble understanding that these two concepts are NOT mutually exclusive, I suggest you avail yourself of "Physicists" knowledge, expertise, and amazing ability to explain complex scientific concepts in a manner easily understood by layman.

He's right here on this thread. I'm sure he'd be happy to explain it to you if you were to ask him.

[jlogajan]

The whole universe that goes on for infinity.

Does it?

[Reaganwuzthebest]

Before you can find proof of something, you have to work out theories so you have some idea what you're trying to prove. So what you're saying I'm in total agreement with. But the laws of physics are not necessarily absolute. There have been instances out there in space where what they thought, or expected to be ocurring was not.

They're going back 13 billion light years in time to see what happened then because that's how long it took for the light to reach us. But for all we know, as another poster said the universe goes on in infinity, there are probably galaxies a hundred trillion light years away, and farther. My point is, and it's a theory, fifteen billion years for the universe is like a second for us. It's been around a lot longer than that.

[DennisR]

Yay! Yet another contradictory story about the age of the earth. These "scientists" (and I use the term loosely) will never get a clue.

[DennisR]

". . . between 13 and 14 billion years ago."

You would thank that, given the utter and sheer brilliance of these "experts," that they would be able to get the age of the earth closer than to within 1,000,000,000 years.

[longshadow]

Yet another contradictory story about the age of the earth.

Okay; I'll bite.

Show us the contradiction you alluded to.

[jlogajan]

the universe goes on in infinity

Does it?

the universe [has] been around a lot longer than [fifteen billion years].

Has it?

[DennisR]

". . . multiple independent methods . . ." is no guarantee that accuracy is achieved, especially if the "multiple independent methods" are all erroneous.