posted on Aug, 9 2019 @ 03:44 PM
best measurement of the age of the universe 13.799±0.021 billion
this is a 0.15% accuracy measurement, ie, it is very good and should expect to be wildly different.
The age of this star is 14.46 ± 0.8 billion, ie a 5.5% measurement
SO anyone who has even a basic understanding of statistics and uncertainties will tell you... the age of the star is a weaker measurement by more than
an order of magnitude on its uncertainty. There is absolutely no contention at all on the age of the universe or the cmb based measurement. To suggest
there is is to fundamentally not to understand stats or science.
All this measurement really says is that this star is extremely old. The fact that the star is on the subgiant branch at an advanced evolutionary age,
is a high velocity object not part of a local cluster or group is also a tell that the straight measurement of metallically converted to age will come
with difficulties and to a degree, not a huge number of cross checks and reference points like you can do with say a globular cluster.
It is a very interesting object regardless, but by no means does this in any way at all disprove the big bang, or tell you anything about the model.
All it tells you is that... a star, produced when the universe was young, was of low mass, slow burn, and is now reaching the end of life... it gives
you a look at the metallically of the early universe and isn't some sort of model killer that 'Astronomers hate'