Are We Correct? Calculating the Age of the Universe

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Hyperspace2
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of the age of the universe, exploring the implications of various models, particularly the lambda-cdm model, and the complexities involved in measuring time and distance in an expanding universe. Participants express concerns about the assumptions underlying these measurements and the limitations of current models.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the movement of Earth, the solar system, and galaxies complicates our time measurement systems, potentially affecting the accuracy of the calculated age of the universe.
  • One participant emphasizes that the age of the universe is model-dependent, specifically related to the Hubble constant and the lambda-cdm model, which incorporates various physical densities and parameters.
  • Another participant expresses skepticism about the completeness of our understanding, arguing that our observational capabilities are limited and that we may not have a full picture of the universe.
  • Some participants acknowledge the lambda-cdm model as the best available but question its adequacy, suggesting that it might not capture the entirety of cosmic phenomena.
  • There is a discussion about the necessity of physical exploration beyond the solar system versus the capabilities of telescopes to observe distant cosmic events.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit a mix of agreement and disagreement. While there is recognition of the lambda-cdm model as a leading framework, there are significant concerns about its limitations and the complexities of measuring cosmic age. No consensus is reached regarding the validity of current measurements or the necessity of physical exploration for deeper understanding.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the dependence of measurements on various assumptions, the potential for non-uniform expansion of the universe, and the challenges posed by gravitational effects on time measurement. The discussion remains open-ended regarding the implications of these factors.

Hyperspace2
Messages
84
Reaction score
1
We calculated the age of universe. But we may be wrong for following reason I have supposed.


1) Earth is moving, solar system is moving,galaxies are moving. So i think our time system is getting something complexed. By big bang, the galaxies are accelerating, we are in same accelaerating galaxies. Accelerating frames are equivalent to the frames located in gravitaitonal field. So there is time dialtion. Also I suppose the expansion of universe is
not absolutely accelerative, it is non uniform.
And sow how come we think our meeasurement is going to be true because our time measuring system is accelerating or atleast nonuniform of (complex ,it is geeting on my head)

So at least n conclusion, I want to say our measurement of universe age would be correctr if we were extending at uniform motion(velocity)
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Hyperspace2 said:
We calculated the age of universe. But we may be wrong for following reason I have supposed.


1) Earth is moving, solar system is moving,galaxies are moving. So i think our time system is getting something complexed. By big bang, the galaxies are accelerating, we are in same accelaerating galaxies. Accelerating frames are equivalent to the frames located in gravitaitonal field. So there is time dialtion. Also I suppose the expansion of universe is
not absolutely accelerative, it is non uniform.
And sow how come we think our meeasurement is going to be true because our time measuring system is accelerating or atleast nonuniform of (complex ,it is geeting on my head)

So at least n conclusion, I want to say our measurement of universe age would be correctr if we were extending at uniform motion(velocity)

I'm not sure if you understand how the age of the universe is determined. The age of the universe is model dependent and related to the Hubble constant, currently the best model we have for the universe is the lambda-cdm model. This model, given the physical baryon density, physical dark matter density, dark energy density, scalar spectral index, curvature fluctuation amplitude and reionization optical depth, allows you to extract the Hubble constant, which tells us the age of the universe.

It describes the metric expansion of space and all of the relevant information can be extracted from the CMB, cosmic microwave background radiation. The WMAP satellite, which just recently concluded data collection, has obtained a truly remarkable fit of the data, giving an age of the universe of roughly 13.7Gy.

But if you feel the astrophysicists involved didn't properly analyze the data to obtain the actual parameters, feel free to read the paper and write a paper criticizing the analysis.

http://iopscience.iop.org/0067-0049/180/2/306

I feel xkcd/675 might be appropriate.
 
currently the best model we have for the universe is the lambda-cdm model

It is still however just a model. It may be the best we have but I just can't help but feel we are looking out through such a small 'window' and claiming that the backyard is the entire world. Until we are able to leave the solar system and go into real space will we have any chance of knowing exactly what is going on out there.
 
Blenton said:
It is still however just a model. It may be the best we have but I just can't help but feel we are looking out through such a small 'window' and claiming that the backyard is the entire world. Until we are able to leave the solar system and go into real space will we have any chance of knowing exactly what is going on out there.

I'm not sure what else we could have if not a model. If we go out into deep space we'll still only have models, it's kinda how science operates.

And while yes, I don't doubt there may be flaws in the λCDM model, I sort of subscribe to Asimov's "Realtivity of Wrong".

http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm

Yes, we may be wrong, but I still think that given how well the data conforms, we're not colossally wrong.
 
Blenton said:
It is still however just a model. It may be the best we have but I just can't help but feel we are looking out through such a small 'window' and claiming that the backyard is the entire world. Until we are able to leave the solar system and go into real space will we have any chance of knowing exactly what is going on out there.

Well yes, we will have a chance of knowing what's going on, because we have telescopes that can see outside of our solar system (and outside of our galaxy). Why would you think that physically leaving the solar system is necessary?
 

Similar threads

Undergrad How Does the Balloon Analogy Explain the Expansion of the Universe?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
High School If the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate....
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Graduate Strong Progenitor Age Bias in Supernova Cosmology
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
7K
Graduate Can Background Radiation Serve as a New Coordinate System in Astronomy?
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
High School B Calculating the age of the universe with the Hubble constant
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Undergrad The age old age of the universe question
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
High School Distance of Stars / Size of the Universe calculation
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Undergrad How do you get to the conclusion that there is accelerating expansion?
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
Undergrad New research puts age of the Universe at 26.7 billion years
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
High School Clarification on how old the Universe is
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K