just found galaxy casts doubt on the age of the universe

page: 2
28
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 26 2012 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Balkan
Uh, perhaps the universe can't be dated because there is no beginning (or end) of time?


Everything has a beginning and ending. Now with the universe it too had a beginning and will end some day but time on that scale may very well be beyond our comprehension. How do you measure "just short of forever"?
The Big Bang is a joke. The age set at 13.7 billion years is a joke. As far as seeing out into space I think that we can only see a very small part of it. There could be a billion billion billion more galaxies out there than we can ever see. We are like ants where the edge of our universe is a mere few hundred yards away. Just because we can not see anything beyond does not mean it is not there. We may never know just how old or how big it really is.




posted on Jun, 26 2012 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by fixer1967
Everything has a beginning and ending.

Says who?? Maybe an end to carbon, but the gulf itself? Hmmmm..
edit on 26-6-2012 by Balkan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2012 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Balkan

Originally posted by fixer1967
Everything has a beginning and ending.

Says who?? Maybe an end to carbon, but the gulf itself? Hmmmm..
edit on 26-6-2012 by Balkan because: (no reason given)


I give you "forever" minus a few sconds and you want them as well? I call that just a bit greedy.

Given enough time everything has an end even time its self. We are talking about time on a scale that we can not even guess at.
We are talking just short of forever but if you want last few seconds then take them I have no use for them.



posted on Jun, 26 2012 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by fixer1967

Originally posted by Balkan

Originally posted by fixer1967
Everything has a beginning and ending.

Says who?? Maybe an end to carbon, but the gulf itself? Hmmmm..
edit on 26-6-2012 by Balkan because: (no reason given)


I give you "forever" minus a few sconds and you want them as well? I call that just a bit greedy.

Given enough time everything has an end even time its self. We are talking about time on a scale that we can not even guess at.
We are talking just short of forever but if you want last few seconds then take them I have no use for them.


I reckon, and this is a wild guess is that if ever the Higgs Boson is ever discovered then it could be used to create an artificial universe and at the end of everything we will just move into that one. Or create a time bubble like in the book The Resturant At the End Of The Universe - Douglas Adams. Anything uncertain is possible.



posted on Jun, 26 2012 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by fixer1967
 




Why? Why does everything have to have a beginning and an end?

The Mysteries of the ancients would tell us otherwise. That "nothing" can not exist (in its very act of existence, it is something), and that one cannot exist without the other (otherwise, how would one know that it truly exists, and isn't a figment of its own imagination?). There is no 0 or 1. There is, and there are multiple.

As above so below. It really does have real world, modern applications.
edit on 26-6-2012 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2012 @ 09:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by crankyoldman

Originally posted by Tindalos2013

This unique system constitutes the most distant cluster known to "host" a giant gravitationally lensed arc. Finding this ancient gravitational arc may yield insight into how, during the first moments after the Big Bang, conditions were set up for the growth of hefty clusters in the early universe.


I still maintain in my opinion that the standard theory of creation accepted and known as The Big Bang Theory is quite flawed and will remain an unknown quantity until more sophisticated technology allows the value of it to be realized. For instance, since our entire universe maintains status within a mega-black hole how can any measurement be taken at face value when the results only present a distorted variable.




I agree, the "theory" and that is all it is, is based on the idea that all of reality exits "out there" and we can measure things by the constant of the speed of light, as if that is the only baseline. But, I have read that that speed isn't constant at all, at least when measured on earth. Even more curious, who said the speed of light measured on earth, in earth based controlled arena's is the constant in all of matter? If walking on the moon is different then walking on the earth, it would seem to me that the speed of the constant might change too, and if so, then how far away are things really?

sitting here and guessing what happened, from this tiny moment of all of creation is the height of hubris. We assume and wow is it an assumption, that there was a beginning, a middle - where we are, and an end. And because we are so sure that is how everything, everywhere is, we assume that the begging was a pop and the end was a pop, and we're super smart because we know all of life is a beginning, middle and end. What if there was no beginning, only a middle? what if nothing is expanding, but collapsing but our eyes simply can't figure that out?

The theories are not the problem really, it is the hubris with which the theories are emphatically stated as absolute fact and case closed is what is funny to me.


You're the sharp tool in the shed. Can I have your babies?



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 05:43 AM
link   
reply to post by ZakOlongapo
 


thanks for that, what an awesome documentary



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 06:42 AM
link   
reply to post by WiseThinker
 


Well, I completely agree with your analysis of the multiverse. However, I have never heard of anything like your theory on the big bang before. The theory I was using recently is as follows:

Nothing can include two different things, for example five negative and five positively charged particles. There are anti-universes filled with anti-matter where time runs backwards. What happens if in the beginning, there was nothing, meaning the two universes co-existed, and then when the big bang happened they split apart and time started flowling?



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 07:25 AM
link   
Wow!


This might come across as a boring presentation by Ian Xel Lungold, but relevant is the part from 47:00 - 1:15:00. According to this guy the Mayan calendar indicates the age of the universe to be 16.4 bn years ... is it possible the mayans got it right with at least the birth of time...?




posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 08:07 AM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 


I don't know how old the universe is, but I imagine that someone is looking at our pathetic attempt to explain everything about something we really know nothing about.

.....and they are laughing at us.




posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 09:38 AM
link   
Actually I think the aliens are keeping their distance. After all we dissect them and possess nukes.

This headline should read: Scientists struggle with concept of forever.

Constant attempts to define limits and make the infinite finite. Every time our world gets bigger and the further gets even further, they stubbornly move the traffic cones back a bit more and say, "Don't sail past this point for here there be dragons."



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 09:51 AM
link   
you can't tell the age of the universe.

a year is one earth orbit around the sun.

how can you measure something if the unit of measurement you are using existed after what you are trying to measure.

it's like saying its 11 am before the clock was invented.

putting age to something timeless and without end that doesn't have an age is inapplicable.



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 09:52 AM
link   
reply to post by WiseThinker
 


Your reply made me think....and think.......think again.
I hit a theory that could be quite 'out there' , but still seem to have a place in 'our' known model.

Time ( as Einstien dictated) is somewhat of a constant.
We , in the year 2012, are commited to time in OUR physicle existance.
Could the true theory of all that exist ever be that of - Size=Speed ?

What i mean is ..... the bigger a collective atom is, the slower the speed (time) it moves.
Equal to, the smaller the collective atom is, the faster the speed ( time ) it moves.

We ( not me ... earths scientist ) have always measured distance accourding to the speed of light, the speed inwhich WE see distance objects.
If astromomers see an object 13 billion light years away , the assume that had taken the light from that object 13 billion years to reach there instruments.
Time........ seconds , minutes, hours , days etc...............
Is this the 'rock' of which we should measure the age and dictance of things.
Our solar system can be measured, so can our local part of the galaxy. but why do earths astronamers feel that time/ exitance moves in the same why across the universe?
Time/speed might move faster in our part of the universe, equal to the point that in may move slower!
The age of the universe will always be unknown- the more it is observed , the older it will get
The universe is MASSIVE, we are SMALL.
Lets try putting them equations in to calculations!



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 10:00 AM
link   
Even the great Ammon Ra was not in existence at the time of creation.

You will never truly be able to look 'back' at the beginning of time.

Humanity should give up its quest to find out where it came from.

Humanity needs to view itself as 'the beginning' and then craft a future for its descendants.

You were given the gift of intelligence and so far you have not used it to progress as a species.

Your technology has advanced, But you have not.

You are still in the same place, In the same form.

Escape and improve.



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZakOlongapo
reply to post by XPLodER
 

..maybe this is answer
The Big Bang Never Happened

www.youtube.com...

Very interesting documentary... thanks for sharing.



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZakOlongapo
reply to post by XPLodER
 

..maybe this is answer
The Big Bang Never Happened

www.youtube.com...


Thanks for the vid

Im on par with this one. It seems that if we can see so far out, we should be able to see some remnant of the big bang. I understand the light from it has passed 4.5 billion years plus (where do we sit in all this exactly?), so we should be able to see it both ways. Something so massive that supposedly gave birth to such a universe of size would leave a trail other than the observers. Some point of origin should exist, so why does it look like everything is moving away from us?



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 12:17 PM
link   



so what happens if we find a fully developed galaxy older than the universe?


Simple. We either choose to agree for arguments sake that the Universe is older than many people thought or re-examine our theories on how the Universe formed and how to determine it's age.

None of these scientists know anything at all. They are all guessing. That's why it's called a theory. This proves Nothing one way or the other - it just shows we don't have and never will have any real answers, truths or facts to support these so called guesses ( theories)



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 12:42 PM
link   
Many years ago, I came up with a hypothesis that there have been - and continue to be - many big bangs. What we see is the result of just one of these big bangs that created the matter in our little corner of the universe. Sooner or later we will encounter a very distant galaxy that came from an earlier big bang in another part of the universe. And maybe one day we'll even see a big bang taking place - trillions of light years away in a part of the universe previously swept clean by 'hyper' black holes .....

This discovery might support that hypothesis.



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder

Originally posted by ZakOlongapo
reply to post by XPLodER
 

..maybe this is answer
The Big Bang Never Happened

www.youtube.com...

Very interesting documentary... thanks for sharing.

I was just reading the comments of this article and someone states this casts doubt on the Big Bang theory... of course that comment has a ridiculously low rating because no one wants to accept the obvious conclusion of this discovery.

Another of the comments says "this shouldn't be a real surprise" and "Some adjustments will have to be made to our understanding of the BB."... and that comment has a high rating, just goes to show how stupid these commenters actually are, especially after watching the documentary linked above.

Of course this should be a huge surprise... the amount of time it took the light from this galaxy to reach us is almost equal to the time since science claims the Big Bang actually happened. This is a completely mind-blowing discovery because there simply shouldn't have been galaxies like this so long ago.

Remember that we are looking at this galaxy as it was 10 to 13 billion years ago, and that the predicted age of the Universe is only 13.7 billion years. That should really send up a red flag for anyone who understands the Big Bang theory... as it suggests the Universe is certainly much older than what we are led to believe.
edit on 27/6/2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2012 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Also interesting is the weird galaxy called NGC 7603, mentioned in that documentary. Very relevant to this discussion. Here's a good article about it:

NGC 7603





top topics
 
28
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join