Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

We’ve found the oldest star in the known universe – and it’s right on our galactic doorstep

page: 1
29
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+9 more 
posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 12:04 PM
link   


Astronomers have discovered the oldest living star in the (known) universe — and, remarkably, it’s situated right on our galactic doorstep, just 6,000 light years away, well within the Milky Way. The star, which has the abbreviated name of SM0313, was born 13.6 billion years ago — just 100 or 200 million years after the Big Bang (and a whopping 400 million years before the previous record breaker). It is believed that SM0313 is an elusive Population II star — a star that was formed from the remnants of one of the universe’s very first supernovae. By using SM0313′s spectrographic fingerprint as a baseline, we will hopefully be able to find more ancient stars.

We’ve found the oldest star in the known universe – and it’s right on our galactic doorstep




Thought this article may be of some interest to my fellow ATS members. Anything that advances our knowledge of the early moments of our universe has got to be good in my book. As to whether or not there actually was a big bang, well hopefully this type of discovery may also shine some light on that particular debate.




posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by andy06shake
 


VERY cool. But I personally want that star to have an equally cool name. SM0313 just doesn't cut it. Maybe someone should have a "naming contest" for this star - it's too astounding to just move on and dismiss. Needs a public marketing plan, imho.


F&S



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 01:01 PM
link   
reply to post by soficrow
 


I agree SM0313 doesn't exactly role of the tongue. The Old Git seems an appropriate designation.

edit on 13-2-2014 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by andy06shake
 


NOOOOOO! Not "Ol Git" !



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 01:11 PM
link   
I have posted about this on other topic. How can this be oldest star, if Methuselah star (HD 140283) is older??

This one even has a name and confused scientist for some time,because earlier models placed this star that is only 190 light years from us to be older then universe.
edit on 13-2-2014 by SuperFrog because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by andy06shake
 


Great article. I love reading about this kind of thing. Provides a nice break from the doom and gloom and political threads.



Star and flag.

-SAP-



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by soficrow
 


What would you suggest then?

I thought "Old Git" because its Old and most lightly hard to Git to!
LoL



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 02:32 PM
link   

SloAnPainful
reply to post by andy06shake
 


Great article. I love reading about this kind of thing. Provides a nice break from the doom and gloom and political threads.



Star and flag.

-SAP-


Yes! Agreed.



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 02:46 PM
link   
So they think they know the age of every star in the "known universe"...... right..... ok.....

Out of all the stars (in the known universe), that one is the oldest..... I think their age detecting method is not accurate.



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 02:48 PM
link   

soficrow
reply to post by andy06shake
 


VERY cool. But I personally want that star to have an equally cool name. SM0313 just doesn't cut it. Maybe someone should have a "naming contest" for this star - it's too astounding to just move on and dismiss. Needs a public marketing plan, imho.


F&S



Being a Babylon 5 fan from decades ago I say we name it 'Lorien', or just 'the First One'... kinda melodramatic, but fitting.
edit on 13-2-2014 by BigfootNZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 02:51 PM
link   

WeAre0ne
So they think they know the age of every star in the "known universe"...... right..... ok.....

Out of all the stars (in the known universe), that one is the oldest..... I think their age detecting method is not accurate.


I think you just count the growth rings like on a tree, right?



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by BigfootNZ
 


Good choice since he was indeed the First One. I loved Babylon 5, got all 5 seasons on my drive!


The follow up, Crusade was a let down through!


edit on 13-2-2014 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by andy06shake
 


Old news, good thread.



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by andy06shake
 

reply to post by BigfootNZ
 


Still a definite NO on "Old Git." I vote no on Lorien and First One too. Methuselah is taken - but maybe something from an older-than-Western culture is most appropriate. Will think about it.




edit on 13/2/14 by soficrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 06:18 PM
link   

BigfootNZ

soficrow
reply to post by andy06shake
 


VERY cool. But I personally want that star to have an equally cool name. SM0313 just doesn't cut it. Maybe someone should have a "naming contest" for this star - it's too astounding to just move on and dismiss. Needs a public marketing plan, imho.


F&S



Being a Babylon 5 fan from decades ago I say we name it 'Lorien', or just 'the First One'... kinda melodramatic, but fitting.
edit on 13-2-2014 by BigfootNZ because: (no reason given)


I will 2nd that!

Babylon 5 is like the 2nd or 3rd best sci fi series of all time! (I rank Firefly, Battlestar Galactica (2nd one) with Fringe as, perhaps, the best of the best)



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by andy06shake
 





spectrographic fingerprint


Can some one help me in laymans terms
I went to 2 sites and none of them say anything about Spectroscopy being able to age items

hubblesite.org...
www.bbc.co.uk...

I thought the further out you look thats where the oldest items were. Isnt that how they supposedly calculated the age of the Universe?
Now whats the Oldest Star in the Universe doing in our backyard?
I thought the milky way was a relatively young galaxy.

Help Please...it does not compute!



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by TheConstruKctionofLight
 


Oh, the science we hold so dear to heart doesn't make any sense?

Hah, go figure.

Ill stick to my spirituality and this world is a dream, but so is the other world so who knows.



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 11:33 PM
link   
The Ancient One.

Don't know 'bout y'all but I like the word ancient so this name does it for me.

If anything I'll just refer to it as such even if it isn't the recognized nomenclature. lol

S&F!



posted on Feb, 14 2014 @ 02:33 AM
link   
As in tradition of naming planets/stars,
I hereby officially named SM0313 a new name - SM0313 Tom
(Bob already taken by that new planet), if anyone disagree, SMOBIB is the alternative.

How can a star become so old and yet still there ? If its there since the beginning, should it become the center of the galaxy ? Afterall it should already have gravity when everyone is still hydrogen/dust/baby galaxy.
edit on 14-2-2014 by NullVoid because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2014 @ 03:03 AM
link   
The oldest star in our own young galaxy? Meaning it has survived without going supernovae up until at least 6000 years ago when the light it produced is now reaching us? For 13.6 billion years, in a galaxy supposedly dated to 13.2 billion years old? This star predates the milky way, and has survived the formation of it, a stone throw away from our own sun? In a universe that is 13.8 billion years old?

Something is not adding up for me here.






top topics



 
29
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join