B Age of the universe: observable or entire universe?

[PeterDonis]

once we extend the notion of observable universe from pure electromagnetic spectrum to neutrino/gravitational-wave detectors or/and interpreting the patterns upon a higher resolution background radiation map etc... I see no logical reason to stop there and do not look at a more general picture

As I said before, the definition of the observable universe already does include "a more general picture". Even though the definition is usually stated in terms of EM radiation, it actually covers any detectable thing whatsoever, since any detectable thing can travel no faster than light. So the region of spacetime from which EM radiation is in principle observable is also the region from which any detectable thing whatsoever is in principle observable.

 

[StandardsGuy]

How is the age measured? According tot GR time clicks different for clocks in different regions. Which clock reads 14 billion years?

One on the surface of the earth, but the Gravitational time dilation is minimal there so it's not much different than one far away from all gravitations.

 

[phinds]

One on the surface of the earth, but the Gravitational time dilation is minimal there so it's not much different than one far away from all gravitations.

Have you not been paying attention to this thread? That is NOT what we use. As has been pointed out, we use the clock of a co-moving observer. The Earth is not a co-moving observer

 

[Comeback City]

but we don't know if it is infinite or finite but unbounded.

Seems like you forgot to mention my personal favorite, finite and bounded

 

[StandardsGuy]

Have you not been paying attention to this thread? That is NOT what we use. As has been pointed out, we use the clock of a co-moving observer. The Earth is not a co-moving observer

I try not to pay attention to whims and opinions when I see some replies that are radically wrong. So does YOUR clock co-move with the observable universe or the entire universe? How much different is it from the one I spoke of?

 

[PeterDonis]

I try not to pay attention to whims and opinions when I see some replies that are radically wrong.

@phinds reply was not "radically wrong"; in fact it was not wrong at all, it was correct. Your post, that he responded to, was incorrect; the "age of the universe" quoted by cosmologists is the age according to a comoving observer--not a clock on the Earth's surface. You are correct that the difference between the two is small, but the fact remains that you gave an incorrect reply to @facenian and @phinds corrected it, so your attitude displayed here is not appropriate.

 

[PeterDonis]

This thread has run its course and is now closed.