What is the correlation between the age and size of the universe?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the relationship between the age and size of the universe, specifically addressing the apparent discrepancy between the age of the universe (approximately 13.8 billion years) and the estimated size of the observable universe (about 93 billion light years). Participants explore concepts related to cosmic expansion and the nature of observable distances.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question why the universe's radius is estimated at over 46 billion light years instead of simply 13.8 billion light years, given that the oldest light reaches us from that distance.
  • It is noted that the size discussed refers to the observable universe, which is the portion of the universe from which light has reached us.
  • One participant explains that the radius exceeds 13.8 billion light years because the universe has been expanding during the time it takes for light to travel to us.
  • Another participant emphasizes that in a static universe, one could calculate distances simply as the speed of light multiplied by time, but this does not apply due to the expansion of space.
  • There is a mention that the distance to faraway objects, as measured now, is greater than the distance at the time the light was emitted, which was much closer.
  • One participant suggests that the confusion does not necessarily require invoking inflationary theory, attributing it instead to misunderstandings about regular cosmic expansion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding regarding the implications of cosmic expansion on the relationship between the age and size of the universe. There is no consensus on the necessity of invoking inflationary theory, and the discussion reflects multiple viewpoints on the interpretation of distances in an expanding universe.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge the complexity of measuring distances in an expanding universe and the limitations of static calculations. The discussion highlights the need for careful consideration of how cosmic expansion affects the perception of distances over time.

somebodyelse
Messages
15
Reaction score
3
Please help me understand this.

The age of the universe is given as being about 13.8 billion years. The size of the universe is estimated to be 93 billion light years
( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe)

Since the oldest light to reach us comes from 13.8 light years away, why do we estimate that the universe has a radius of 46+ billion light years instead of 13.8 ?

I know that the universe expanded faster than the speed of light but why do we think that and why 93 billion light years?

Thank you.
 
Space news on Phys.org
somebodyelse said:
Please help me understand this.

The age of the universe is given as being about 13.8 billion years. The size of the universe is estimated to be 93 billion light years
( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe)

Since the oldest light to reach us comes from 13.8 light years away, why do we estimate that the universe has a radius of 46+ billion light years instead of 13.8 ?

Thank you.

First of all, it is important to emphasize this is the size of the observable universe, the part of the universe we can receive light from.

Second, the radius is larger than 13.8 light years since the universe expands during the journey the photons make to reach us. So, the point where a photon that reaches us today started from can be 46+ billion light years away since it was much closer to us when the journey started.
 
If the universe were static, that is not expanding, then you could indeed do the simple calculation of the speed of light times the age of the universe to find out where the farthest objects you can see were at the time of emission (and still are).
However, since the space in-between the source and the observer has been expanding, such calculations won't give you the right answer. The light has to travel the extra bits of space, so it takes it more time to reach us than it would in a static universe.

In the expanding universe the light coming from faraway objects that you see was emitted closer than c*t, and the objects are at this very moment farther than c*t. The 46 billion ly figure is the distance to the farthest objects we see now, if you could stop the expansion and measure the distance as it is NOW. The distance to those objects at the time of emission was much closer - about 42 million ly.

@Doug Huffman : I think inflation doesn't need to be invoked here, the confusion stems purely from not taking into account the regular expansion.
 
Thank you all.
I forgot that the universe is expanding further during the 13.8 billion years it takes for the oldest light to reach us.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
6K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 103 ·
4
Replies
103
Views
13K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K