How Does Time Dilation Impact the Calculated Age of the Universe?

AI Thread Summary
The age of the universe is estimated to be approximately 13.7 billion years, based on the FLRW time coordinate, which reflects the time for stationary objects in the universe. Time dilation effects are considered, but they primarily apply to objects in motion relative to stationary ones, such as galaxies. Light, or electromagnetic radiation, does not experience time in a conventional sense, as it is massless, leading to the conclusion that its "experienced" time is effectively zero. The 13.7 billion-year estimate is supported by various independent sources, reinforcing its reliability. Overall, while time dilation is an interesting factor, it does not significantly alter the calculated age of the universe.
ravisastry
Messages
52
Reaction score
0
Hi All,

how is the age of universe calculated ? i read a few articles/wiki etc and its estimated to be roughly 13.7 billion yrs old. Have we considered the time dilation effect here ? cause we are measuring the electro magnetic radiation traveling in an expanding universe and in an accelerating environment, time runs slow. Hence the actual age of universe should be greater than 13.7 ??

Thanks,
Ravi
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
13.7 billion years is the value of the FLRW time coordinate here and now. It's also the time experienced by an object that's been at constant spatial coordinates for the entire age of the universe. Any object that's been moving relative to such a "stationary" object will have experienced a shorter time.

So what objects are "stationary" in FLRW coordinates? The answer may surprise you. All the galaxies are approximately stationary in these coordinates.
 
thanks for the explanation and it seems logical that all the galaxies are "stationary" as the whole of universe is expanding uniformly. but, a ray of light(or any EMR) which originated during the big bang, is traveling in the accelerating universe. It is subjected to various gravitational pull (from different astronomical bodies) and hence won't the time for this ray of light be different when compared to all the stationary galaxies ?
 
"The time for this ray of light" suggests that there's a meaningful way to define the time "experienced" by a massless particle. There isn't. And the most meaningful definition would be to define it as 0. See e.g. my posts in this thread about the "photon's point of view". In particular, #8 and #14. You can also check out the currently active thread on the same topic.
 
The 13.7 billion years number has been derived from a number of independent sources, so it seems pretty solid. Do you have a particular objection?
 

Thread 'Does it make sense to build new radio telescopes?'

TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
View full post »
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'

Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'

This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
View full post »

Thread 'Can the signal WOW be explained by the maser effect?'

This hypothesis of scientists about the origin of the mysterious signal WOW seems plausible only on a superficial examination. In fact, such a strong coherent radiation requires a powerful initiating factor, and the hydrogen atoms in the cloud themselves must be in an overexcited state in order to respond instantly. If the density of the initiating radiation is insufficient, then the atoms of the cloud will not receive it at once, some will receive it earlier, and some later. But then there...
View full post »

Similar threads

I How fast were distant galaxies moving?
Replies
7
Views
2K
B Relativity and Biological Aging: How Time Dilation Slows Cell Activity
Replies
14
Views
1K
B Acceleration of time due to entropy
Replies
1
Views
2K
Determining The Size and Age of Our Universe
Replies
8
Views
3K
B Time Dilation: How Does Speed Affect Aging?
Replies
10
Views
6K
The age old age of the universe question
Replies
11
Views
4K
Do relativistic effects make the age of the universe moot?
Replies
14
Views
2K
B B Calculating the age of the universe with the Hubble constant
Replies
8
Views
3K
I Twin Paradox Time Dilation in Positively Curved Universe
Replies
24
Views
2K
Time Dilation vs Percieved age of Universe
Replies
16
Views
4K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top