Time from big bang / size of universe

AI Thread Summary
The elapsed time since the big bang can be measured despite the universe's unknown extent, as cosmological models, particularly inflationary cosmology, suggest rapid expansion from a singularity. The universe's size and age are assessed based on observable cosmic microwave background radiation and the Hubble flow, which describes the average motion of matter and radiation. Observers in different states, such as near black holes or moving at relativistic speeds, may perceive varying ages of the universe. The most distant galaxies recede faster than light, complicating the understanding of the universe's size and age. Ultimately, the universe's age is inferred from the properties of its background radiation, regardless of its potential infinite size.
Pjpic
Messages
235
Reaction score
1
How can the elapsed time from the big bang be known if it isn't known how far the universe extends past the ability to observe it? In other words, would a larger universe take longer to contract towards a singularity? Or, if the universe were infinitely large how could it have expanded from a big bang in less than an infinite time?
 
Space news on Phys.org
You seem to be imagining the big bang as an explosion at a certain point in a previously empty space. That's not what it was. We have a FAQ about that: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=506991

Pjpic said:
Or, if the universe were infinitely large how could it have expanded from a big bang in less than an infinite time?
If it's infinite now, then it was also infinite at all previous times. Cosmological models don't start out finite and then become infinite.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is a type of cosmology called inflationary cosmology, where with a certain burst from a negative pressure energy field that pushes with a uniform energy out into the fabric of space, this energy field yields a vast amount of energy that could have multiplied the size of the universe millions of times in a fraction of a second, if this cosmic expansion was faster then the speed of light then light from the furthest reaches of space would not have reached us. therefore we can only see what is in our space, say let's call the radius of what we can see our "cosmic horizon", then that is all we can see
we can measure the size of this energy field and also the speed at which is must be expanding and accelerating at, meaning we can measure the size and the amount of time it must have been expanding for ;)
 
Here is an explanation I saved from a usually reputable source here...Crowell:

The age of the universe as usually discussed is for an observer who is at rest relative to the average motion of the matter and radiation in the universe (the "Hubble flow"), and is in the context of homogeneous models, which wouldn't include any structure such as black holes, etc. Yes, you're right, different observers can measure different ages of the universe on their clocks. You can't be "on" a black hole, but an observer hovering just outside a black hole's event horizon would say that according to her clock, the universe is very young. There is no limit on how young the universe could be according to such an observer. The same applies to an observer moving at nearly the speed of light relative to the Hubble flow


Here are some other questions and answers about the age of the universe...they are consistent with Crowell's post above...but may offer some different perspective:


http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmology_faq.html#ct2

You may be interested to know if you don't already that the most distant galaxies are receding from our vantage point (Earth) at faster than the speed of light...and always have been. And so are the most distant galaxies from all other similar vantage points throughout the universe! But nobody knows for sure if the universe is infinite or not...
 
Another perspective:

About 380,000 years after inflation concluded, what we now see as cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR) could begin to get through early matter after all the initial high energy ionization subsided...we see it coming from everywhere..as Crowell implied...it all happened at once, everywhere...

We only get the CMBR light from some particular batch of early matter once and it passes by. Tomorrow we will get light from matter that is farther away than that batch whose light we got yesterday because the universe continues to expand. The source of the CMBR is NOW about 45b light yrs away but the light we get from it was emittied 41 million light years ago. It has taken so long to get here because the universe has expanded...by a factor of about 1080 times...

At the UCLA souce I posted previously, there is a "nedwright calculator"...you can plug in numbers and it will do calculations for you...

In essence, it makes no real difference how much bigger the universe is than the observable universe.
 
I think that the age of the universe was determined from the properties of its background radiation. Not sure though.
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
The formal paper is here. The Rutgers University news has published a story about an image being closely examined at their New Brunswick campus. Here is an excerpt: Computer modeling of the gravitational lens by Keeton and Eid showed that the four visible foreground galaxies causing the gravitational bending couldn’t explain the details of the five-image pattern. Only with the addition of a large, invisible mass, in this case, a dark matter halo, could the model match the observations...
Hi, I’m pretty new to cosmology and I’m trying to get my head around the Big Bang and the potential infinite extent of the universe as a whole. There’s lots of misleading info out there but this forum and a few others have helped me and I just wanted to check I have the right idea. The Big Bang was the creation of space and time. At this instant t=0 space was infinite in size but the scale factor was zero. I’m picturing it (hopefully correctly) like an excel spreadsheet with infinite...

Similar threads

Back
Top