Skip to comments.
Universe Might be Bigger and Older than Expected
Space.com on Yahoo ^
| 8/7/06
| Ker Than
Posted on 08/07/2006 1:55:19 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-53 last
To: MineralMan
Hubble observed the 'red shift' of stars moving away which he attributed to a 'Big Bang'.
Stars are part of the physical universe.
Ergo, it was the physical universe that was observed to be expanding.
Matter was moved from one physical location to another across billions of light years in a fraction of a second smashing the speed of light.
To: RightWhale
If this holds up under scrutiny it will change a whole load of thinking and calculation. The volume of the universe is 50% more than thought before this. The density is 33% lower.
Major differences will have to be considered.
42
posted on
08/07/2006 3:48:33 PM PDT
by
AFPhys
((.Praying for President Bush, our troops, their families, and all my American neighbors..))
To: Jack Wilson
Well, this news screws up a lot of my plans. My advice is don't tow the boat behind the RV. I know it saves only a coupla miles a gallon but over 18 billion miles it adds up.
To: Stark_GOP
No. That is entirely unrelated.
44
posted on
08/07/2006 4:29:14 PM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Repeal the law of the excluded middle)
To: AFPhys
The volume of the universe is 50% more. It seems to work out that way if the explanation here is what it seems to be. I don't know if that also makes the rest of the universe 50% greater in volume. I suspect it has to.
45
posted on
08/07/2006 4:33:32 PM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Repeal the law of the excluded middle)
To: All
If the universe is expanding not at a constant, but rather at an accelerating rate, how does that affect our sense of time? Someone else mentioned that light may have traveled at a different speed in the distant past? How would that fact (if it's true), affect time measurement?
Interesting stuff...
46
posted on
08/07/2006 4:40:26 PM PDT
by
IFly4Him
To: IFly4Him
Before getting to our sense of time we need to nail down what we mean by time.
47
posted on
08/07/2006 4:41:35 PM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Repeal the law of the excluded middle)
To: NormsRevenge
If the universe were created and sustained by an eternal God, how old and how big should it be? How young and how small?
To: RightWhale
I was afraid you might say something like that cause my head will probably explode but I am curious nonetheless!!!
49
posted on
08/07/2006 4:43:41 PM PDT
by
IFly4Him
To: IFly4Him
It would be most amazing if the mystery of time were solved on FR.
50
posted on
08/07/2006 4:47:41 PM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Repeal the law of the excluded middle)
To: NormsRevenge
The world is 6000 years old. Nothing you can say will change my mind. Fossils were planted by God. Carbon dating is false.
My book and my pastor are right. You all are wrong, and will go to hell for doubting my book.
--signed, Mohhamed
p.s. Fornicators will go to hell first. Have you seen my fat wife? You do her, you are almost there.
51
posted on
08/07/2006 5:23:08 PM PDT
by
MonroeDNA
(I've got a possum in my pants.)
To: NormsRevenge
52
posted on
08/07/2006 8:46:36 PM PDT
by
LiteKeeper
(Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
To: NormsRevenge
"It's extremely important to have independent measurements of the Hubble constant,"
So long as the yardstick has the same graduations.
53
posted on
08/07/2006 9:03:44 PM PDT
by
azhenfud
(He who always is looking up seldom finds others' lost change.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-53 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson