Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Study: Universe 13 Billion Years Old
AP | Wednesday, April 24, 2002; 4:21 PM | Paul Recer

Posted on 04/24/2002 6:30:34 PM PDT by longshadow

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 221-222 next last
To: apochromat
So what's the furthest distance from me that anything in the universe can be?

If the Inflationary Cosmology is correct, and thus the geometry of Space is Euclidean (or even if Inflation is wrong, but space is still Euclidean or Hyperbolic), there should be no limit on distance between two points in the Universe. If the Universe is closed, the maximum distance is finite.

Note: this is not the same as the maximum distance we can measure another object from us.

61 posted on 04/24/2002 8:23:25 PM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: DennisR
My cynicism for the wide range of years for the age of the earth .....

We were discussing the age of the Universe. The methods used to determine the age of the Universe have nothing to do with the methods used to determine that age of the Earth.

62 posted on 04/24/2002 8:25:16 PM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: DennisR
I do not remember saying the multiple methods "were" erroneous; I said "if," a hypothetical.

And if pigs could fly (hypothetically), they'd make great pets.

Either you have evidence that the methods are erroneous, or you don't.

If you do, post them.

If you don't, why did you bring it up? It makes as much sense as my bring up flying pigs.

63 posted on 04/24/2002 8:27:46 PM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
They're always working with the data they have. When new data arrives, from new telescopes and better technology, what do you suggest they do? Supress the new information? They don't do that. They welcome the opportunity to revise their understanding, in the light of the best available information. Why do you find this objectionable?

I don't.
Maybe it's how you worded it or how I read it, but you made it sound like that it was now pretty much a settled thing because so many of them agreed with each other.

When in fact many things that seemed settled 20 years ago..... today aren't.
New information will show up and everything will change.
I try and keep up with all this but there are still huge unsettled speculations that this is all built on.
So you can read all you want but you'll be much more ignorant when you finish than when you began.
Because you will have a better feeling for how little we really know.

And that's not a bad thing.......just a little humbling.

64 posted on 04/24/2002 8:29:03 PM PDT by Politically Correct
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
The universe has been around longer than thirteen billion years, and I don't need 12 years of college education to come to that conclusion.

And your evidence for your assertion is....?

And your evidence that two different INDEPENDENT methods for estimating the age of the Universe are BOTH in error is....?

65 posted on 04/24/2002 8:30:12 PM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
eventually it all comes to an end, so it doesn't really matter

That is not acceptable. Come up with a better theory.

66 posted on 04/24/2002 8:30:51 PM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: DennisR
Did you do the search on google? If so, what did you find?

Burden of proof of YOUR assertion is YOURS.

Post your evidence at your leisure.

67 posted on 04/24/2002 8:31:23 PM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: jlogajan
On post #35, I stated that it's my opinion the universe goes on in infinity, there are galaxies way beyond what we can see. If this true, then they'll never know the real age of the universe because as of now they're basing their theories only on what our limited technology can show them. The scientists, or at least some of them apparently believe the universe has an ending.

How about you, do you think it ends, or goes on forever?

68 posted on 04/24/2002 8:31:34 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: apochromat
In 1998, Pearlmutter announced a supernova that exploded 10 billion years ago and that was estimated to be 18 billion light years away. There must be a lot of dark energy acceleration at work to push it that far away, since light speed would limit things in the Universe to being 13 billion light years apart otherwise. The greater the acceleration, the larger the estimate should become, as far as I know.
69 posted on 04/24/2002 8:32:18 PM PDT by apochromat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
The universe has been around longer than thirteen billion years

Doesn't look that way. The Big Bang is unacceptable, of course, but why would it look only 13 gigayears old?

70 posted on 04/24/2002 8:34:07 PM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
They haven't got a clue, neither do I, and neither do you.

Actually, I do. You might take Physicist's and Longshadow's advice. Just because you fail to understand something does not mean that everyone else fails to.

Few, if any, scientists have claimed the universe is contracting. Hubble's measurements have been improved upon, but not refuted.

71 posted on 04/24/2002 8:36:01 PM PDT by Doctor Stochastic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
the universe goes on in infinity

Maybe not. What if we are inside a gravastar?

72 posted on 04/24/2002 8:36:37 PM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: apochromat
announced a supernova that exploded 10 billion years ago and that was estimated to be 18 billion light years away.

Is it 18 giga-lightyears away now, or was it 18 giga-lightyears away when it exploded?

73 posted on 04/24/2002 8:39:12 PM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: DennisR
Personally, I believe the discoveries coming, will turn physics and cosmology on it's head and blow lid off just about everything once thought to be credible and established theories. I base this on the advances computers and telescope technology.
74 posted on 04/24/2002 8:40:09 PM PDT by Joe Hadenuf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
The universe has been around longer than thirteen billion years, and I don't need 12 years of college education to come to that conclusion.

Please cite evidence for "a lot longer than thirteen billion years" from a refereed journal. Any such evidence would certainly be of interest.

75 posted on 04/24/2002 8:40:19 PM PDT by Doctor Stochastic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: apochromat
The greater the acceleration, the larger the estimate should become, as far as I know.

This was discussed in the press conference today.

The greater the "repulsive" effect (dark energy?), the older the Universe is, relative to the age that would be acertained by the Hubble parameter alone.

The example given in the press conference was that based only on Hubble expansion observations (no repulsion/accelerating expansion effect), the age of the Universe would be about 9 billion years. When they factored in the repulsive effects on expansion, the result was about 14 billion years, which coincidentaly, is almost exactly the figure that these scientists came up with using the completely independent white dwarf cooling model methodology.

76 posted on 04/24/2002 8:42:16 PM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Reaganwuzthebest
there are probably galaxies a hundred trillion light years away, and farther.

It doesn't look that way. The galaxies seem to be closer together the deeper. If you go much farther, the trend is that the galaxies will all be jammed together solid.

77 posted on 04/24/2002 8:45:06 PM PDT by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
Actually, that's not quite true.

I apologize, I was engaging in a little hyperbole.
Just trying to make the point that an argument from consensus is flawed.
They all come to the same conclusion because they all use the same model.
But there are huge assumptions underlying the current popular model, most of which still have little support.

Thus I'll bide my time and keep a jaundiced eye on the whole endevor.
For instance the use of a globular cluster to arrive at this data point is fraught with difficulties since the age distribution of stars in globular clusters varies significantly from that of our galaxy.
We have no idea how they form.
Or even why they are where they are.

78 posted on 04/24/2002 8:45:18 PM PDT by Politically Correct
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic
A simple search into Google and I come up with this esteemed "theory" the universe may be contracting. It's just that, a theory, like the one that says it's expanding.
79 posted on 04/24/2002 8:46:49 PM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
Because you stated it as though having multiple independent methods would, incontrovertably, seal your argument for the age of the universe. I was simply pointing out that that is not necessarily the case. Do you agree or not?
80 posted on 04/24/2002 8:50:33 PM PDT by DennisR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 221-222 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson