It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The universe just changed age and size

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 07:23 PM
Thinking of the new information from the January astrology conference, i have formed an opinion
That the universe just changed age and size, how you may ask does the universe change age and size?
The first change is the tool we use to gauge or measure distance between celestial objects,

They are called cephids, they are stars who are the “standard candle” for a luminosity equation that is relayed on to gauge or measure cosmological distances these “candles” were previously thought to be of a constant brightness and this was used in a luminosity diagram equation to measure distance.
Now data from the January conference shows these candles are not as static as thought, so our cosmological distance calculations are incorrect. And because each cephid is measured as a distance from the last cephid the inaccuracy compounds the further out into the universe you go.
So the distance calculation are affected by the gas medium around the star and can change over time making them less reliable for distance calculations. Up to 20 % of these “standard candles” are changing luminosity (under study atm).

So if we also consider some other news from the same astro conference
a significant gravitational lensing bias in high-redshift galaxy samples
when we assume the announcement means what is said,
a great proportion of observable universes with red shift owe their red shift to gravitational lensing
we can imagine alot of cephids would also be gravitationally lensed, further affecting the “standard candle” distance and luminosity calculations.
The best bit is this

We show that gravitational lensing by foreground galaxies will lead to a higher number of galaxies to be counted at redshifts z>8-10. This number may be boosted significantly, by as much as an order of magnitude. If there existed only three galaxies above the detection threshold at redshifts z>10 in the Hubble field-of-view without the presence of lensing, the bias from gravitational lensing may make as many as 10-30 of them visible in the Hubble images," explains Windhorst

so here the scientists are saying the luminosity and red shift of galaxies may encoumpass up to 20% of visable objects AND THIS ESTIMITE MAY GROW BY AN ORDER OF MAGNATUDE.
So if we look at the fact that further study may reveal that 10-30 of galaxies or celestial objects may being lensed the whole universe just changed size and what we are looking at has just changed age.
The reason i say the age of the universe has just changed is if 90% of the observable universe is being lensed then we are looking at the universe in a time before our current time, we may be looking at the universe how it was millions of years ago.
We would be seeing light from millions of years that is,
Brighter and more luminous than actually correct
Red shifted and lower frequency than is actually correct
Location of object is “skewed” due to the light bending gravitational lens
So if distance , luminosity and red shift are in question,
Does hubbles expanding universe really exist?

Edwin Hubble

After all hubble used cephids, luminosity and red shift to calculate the expansion
And all of these areas are changing and taking a “new” look at “foundation fundamentals”

This calculation was famously performed by astronomer Edwin Hubble in 1924, leading to the revelation that our galaxy is just one of many in a vast cosmic sea. Cepheids also helped in the discovery that our universe is expanding and galaxies are drifting apart.

Dr Mattia Negrello, of the Open University and lead researcher of the study, explained, "Our survey of the sky looks for sources of sub-millimetre light. The big breakthrough is that we have discovered that many of the brightest sources are being magnified by lenses, which means that we no longer have to rely on the rather inefficient methods of finding lenses which are used at visible and radio wavelengths."

so is the big bang now in question?
Well not yet but the study ongoing will associate what is being lensed from their red shifted values and i suspect all but the closest objects will be lensed.
Hopefully we can use the new data to re guage and account for multiple lenses and the changes to cephids luminosity calculation and come to a new age and size of the universe.

edit on 16-1-2011 by XPLodER because: spelling

posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 09:37 PM

NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope was able to show that a "standard candle" used to measure cosmological distances is shrinking -- a finding that affects precise measurements of the age, size and expansion rate of our universe. Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/Iowa State

Astronomers have turned up the first direct proof that "standard candles" used to illuminate the size of the universe, termed Cepheids, shrink in mass, making them not quite as standard as once thought. The findings, made with NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope, will help astronomers make even more precise measurements of the size, age and expansion rate of our universe.

Standard candles are astronomical objects that make up the rungs of the so-called cosmic distance ladder, a tool for measuring the distances to farther and farther galaxies. The ladder's first rung consists of pulsating stars called Cepheid variables, or Cepheids for short. Measurements of the distances to these stars from Earth are critical in making precise measurements of even more distant objects. Each rung on the ladder depends on the previous one, so without accurate Cepheid measurements, the whole cosmic distance ladder would come unhinged.

Now, new observations from Spitzer show that keeping this ladder secure requires even more careful attention to Cepheids. The telescope's infrared observations of one particular Cepheid provide the first direct evidence that these stars can lose mass—or essentially shrink. This could affect measurements of their distances.


Everything crumbles in cosmology studies if you don't start up with the most precise measurements of Cepheids possible," said Pauline Barmby of the University of Western Ontario, Canada, lead author of the follow-up Cepheid study published online Jan. 6 in the Astronomical Journal. "This discovery will allow us to better understand these stars, and use them as ever more precise distance indicators."

interseting times ahead for the hubble constant

posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 10:08 AM
Very good research and heads up on finding this out. Keep us updated on any other news??

posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 12:47 PM
Very intriguing. Star and flag for this!
I do hope that more information will be posted in about various other thoughts and thesis' that the scientific community brings up about the age of our universe. With light of this coming to mind I don't really know what to think at this point yet all the same I am quite intrigued by what is going on in their minds.

posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 12:48 PM
The universe is vast and amazing, we are but a speck.

posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 03:45 PM
reply to post by kalenga

thank you for replying
the interesting point to this new area of resurch is the massive number of gravitationally lensed galaxies and their redshift and the micro lensing (sun micro gravitational lenseing) this can be thought of as a large lens with smaller lenses inside, this amplifyes the effect of the micro lense and can obscure objects that are being lensed.
or increase their magnifycation.

the fact that the numbers confirmed atm and the numbers of lenses suspected is masive
up to 20% of light sources we can observe with hubble are currently thought to be lensed
and that figuar is predicted to increase by a factor of ten
which means most of what we can see is magnifyed and destorted by the lenses around,
the stars (gravitational lense)
the heliosphere (optical lense)
our galaxy (optical and gravatational)
most large objects or gas clouds (gravatational and or optical)

just to look outside our galaxy we look throught our medium density (heliosphere optical)
through an optical lense from the medium density of the galaxies internal gasses (optical)
throught the gravatational lense of the galaxy (gravitational)
through the medium density between galaxies (optical)

then throught the gravitaional lens of the galaxy we are observing (gravatational)
through the medium density of the observed galaxy (optical)
then through the helio sphere of the sun we are observing (optical)

each lens disrtorts the image and changes certain properties of the image we are looking at

its like looking through a pair of binaculars backwards, at a magnifying glass with a picture behind it
lol it looks large and far away if not blurry


posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 03:50 PM
Gotta go on that internal instinct.

S&F good info. Wouldnt be suprised if its shrinking/closing????

I think the best way to track distance includes a powerful energy laser that is tweeked by the energy input and distance the energy laser traveled. So if you cut it on you would have a powerful beam emitted and the beam will go in 1 direction using certain amount of energy/per distance beam is traveling. So test it with near objects on ground place object 1 mile away aim beam at object shoot beam high energy at object beam comes in contact with object -data of energy input and time of beam interception to object while running should help the scientist build a better distance reader. More accurate if they can get it aim it at the moon get better distances.

Good luckz

more energy input further distance till intercepting object...
edit on 1/17/11 by Ophiuchus 13 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 04:07 PM
reply to post by Ophiuchus 13

at this stage
the changes make it possable for
a static universe
a shrinking universe
an expanding universe is a lot less probable

here is a nasa video that uses bubbles in zero gravity to visualize what i suspect is happening in our universe

each bubble represents a galaxy and the combining process
also the idea our galaxy is fulled with lens shaped bubbles (gravity lens)

here is my original thread describing the lens theory
universe full of bubble shaped lenses ats


edit on 17-1-2011 by XPLodER because: add video and link to ats thread

posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 04:19 PM
reply to post by Ophiuchus 13

the interesting thing aboutgravatational lenses is they will act like a telescope without a barrel
that is to say that light is,
bent at angles

so using light may be problematic
but i like the idea and will pass it on

here is a good visualization of the effects of glass spheres on light

here is a warped view of the earth
kinda like how we see the universe


posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 04:24 PM
Basically these new knowledge kinda makes the hubble constant obsolete ?

So this can eliminate some of the ridiculous assumptions , like inflation ?

Wow. That would mean i was right all along,,,

Thanks for posting S&F

posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 05:29 PM

Originally posted by kalenga
Very good research and heads up on finding this out. Keep us updated on any other news??

well yes there is another feild i follow

Scientists have apparently broken the universe’s speed limit. For generations, physicists believed there is nothing faster than light moving through a vacuum – a speed of 186,000 miles per second. But in an experiment in Princeton, N.J., physicists sent a pulse of laser light through cesium vapor so quickly that it left the chamber before it had even finished entering. The pulse traveled 310 times the distance it would have covered if the chamber had contained a vacuum.


there are some big findings recently
this one holds true to einsteins theorys but kinda breaks the speed limit imposed for light
the current speed limit has been broken by an interaction with cesium with a pulse of light

As a general rule, light travels more slowly in any medium more dense than a vacuum (which, by definition, has no density at all). For example, in water, light travels at about three-fourths its vacuum speed; in glass, it’s around two-thirds. The ratio between the speed of light in a vacuum and its speed in a material is called the refractive index. The index can be changed slightly by altering the chemical or physical structure of the medium. Ordinary glass has a refractive index around 1.5. But by adding a bit of lead, it rises to 1.6. The slower speed, and greater bending, of light waves accounts for the more sprightly sparkle of lead crystal glass.

same source

interesting findings indeed

if at some stage we recognise a naturally occouring effect of this nature in intergalactic space we could indeed comunicate between vast distences (but that is miles off and unlikely) at this stage anyway.

so we can add some changes to the terminal speed of light in cesium and posably other gas clouds in the universe
at this stage there is no use for the tech

but its interesting non the less


posted on Jan, 17 2011 @ 07:37 PM
this video explains the problem of a whole galaxy moving away from us at the speed of light

cant embed youtube

askes a few good questions


edit on 17-1-2011 by XPLodER because: fix bad link to utube

edit on 17-1-2011 by XPLodER because: fix link

edit on 17-1-2011 by XPLodER because: add a new video

posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 05:08 PM
Hello xploder, before i had joined ATS i was a lurker and have read quite a bit of your threads, i am happy to finally be able to input some info into your discussions
. I have recently started reading Endless Universe by Paul J. Steinhardt and Neil Turok. I have learned a lot and am glad i found a topic similar to what i was reading.

I dont think that the universe is currently shrinking. From what i know most of the energy currently in the universe is that of dark energy. Dark energy has its own anti-gravity repulsion and wouldn't it therefore be continuously expanding forever?

Astronomers have done surveys of very distant supernovae, and compared them to ones that are closer to us. The very distant supernovae emitted there light billions of years ago, so if you measured the recessional speeds you could get the expansion rate of the universe in the past. They did the same thing to the near by supernovae and concluded that the closer ones were indeed accelerating faster. This also kind of shows how dark energy is quite dominant in our universe today.

If the universe was static, wouldn't there have to be something against the gravitational attraction of matter? If so, i'd think it would have to be perfectly equal to the gravitational pull, or else it would either collapse or expand.

I hope to have further conversations with you, good luck and take care.

posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 05:20 PM
reply to post by Misanthropy

first of all thank you
i really do like to hear people are enjoying my threads
there is an ongoing thread of mine where we are doing a thought experiment on the alternate explination of dark matter
link to meta field theory of relativity HERE

as to the question of expansion
i agree there is expansion going on but not the amount hubble calculated
the idea that expansion is because of dark matter is valid but what is dark matter?
HDM hot dark matter
CDM cold dark matter
DE dark energy

recently i have questioned how and why expansion would occour
and the thread i have linked tryes to find a reason for expansion, using HDM and DE i think we have a thesis that makes sence.
we still have alot to cover so please feel free to join the thought experiment and add your ideas as usually the only bad idea is one thats not shared

so welcome to ats
im glad you can now contribute


posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 05:31 PM
reply to post by XPLodER

I have not read anything on cold or hot dark matter, but I thought the expansion was due to dark energy. I thought dark matter was just something that helped create the universe. This matter clumped up after a while and had a gravitational pull, which attracted atomic nuclei, electrons, etc, and began the formation of galaxies.

Dark energy does not clump up, and so physicists naturally think it has to have some form of anti gravity repulsion. I think that dark energy is what is expanding the universe, not dark matter.

Im probably just rambling on but i just wanted to throw out some info, as well as reach my 20 posts so i can start some threads.

posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 06:21 PM
reply to post by XPLodER
OMG what a wonderful find. Reading about the shrinking and static shift in movement of the universe and the gas experiment has blown my mind. If this is true it will turn astrophysics and the theory of everything on it's head???

posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 06:35 PM
This a fantastic find and I myself have allways wondered why galaxies that are supposed to be all accelerating away from each other can somehow crash into each other and merge when they are all supposed to be moving at the same speed,however that is supposedly all to do with the mass of each galaxy or so they state,just like how andromeda will merge with our own galaxy in 150 billion years or whatever.It kinda means in affect everything is connected much like the static ball in science class but warped along lines of force or lightining if for example and not as percieved,I knew it was only a matter of time for beating the speed of light.amazing topic,so everything is lensing like black holes but in fractal forms and only appears holographically where it is.I have just realized that nassim haramein believes we live inside a blackhole and that other blackholes are fractals of dimensions,however he is somewhat way out there and defying all current views on reality but that are parralells with your idea.Infact your narration on your meta link is very interesting Coriolis
It seems to me that einstein would be as confused now as he was with quantum reality.
edit on 18-1-2011 by gringoboy because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 06:49 PM
I've always found it curious that the universe has continued to get older and bigger the longer I live. Which is to say, that the universe itself might not actually change in size or age, but the estimates of it continue to keep expanding.

That led me to my incredibly brilliant theory that the universe actually, physically gets older and bigger, the older and bigger you think it is. The universe responds to the minds of astronomers and ordinary folks, and when somebody decides to think about the universe being bigger, and they set out to prove it, they usually succeed -- because the universe responds to their thoughts.

Watch this. The universe will keep getting bigger. And not only that, one of these days it's going to at least double or quadruple in size and age, because we'll start counting things like inverse time and multiple dimensions. I personally think the universe is at least twice as old as anyone says, because it's also expanding "backward" in time as well as forward, but we just can't see it for obvious reasons.

Maybe my thoughts on the matter will end up expanding the universe, too. Just like some smart dude!

posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 07:12 PM
reply to post by Blue Shift

Exactly like quantum physics matter only seen when looked at and percieved when seen,seems to me all theories can be correct and then this would imply anything imagined is real,another quantum reality,is god playing with us,now you see me ,now you don`t,.

posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 07:13 PM
reply to post by Blue Shift

Hi Blue Shift, your reply in this thread is like a topic I have a thread on currently which is about a empirical study done that hypothesises that we are living in the SIMS and a controller runs it much like a computer programmer:

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in