Re: Question about Size of Universe

Front Office <armistead_rap@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:LJudncrUoYAkdB7anZ2dnUVZ_jOdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx:

The topic of the 'Special Section' of the latest issue
of Science (4 January) is entitled 'Cosmic Web.'

The following is from page 48 (column 1):

"Researchers found that the universe is precisely
13.7 billion years old."

Two paragraphs further on:

"The oldest light, the cosmic microwave background,
appears to emanate from near the periphery of the
observable universe 46.5 billion light-years away."

QUESTION: I had been under the impression that the
distance to the edge (or periphery) of the observable
universe was numerically equal to the age of the
universe. How does this 46.5 billion light-years
correspond to the age of the universe, if at all?

thanks for any help,

The apparent relative motion between two points, due to expansion of the
universe, is allowed to exceed the speed of light, because the expansion
of space is not motion, as we know it. Tamara Davis had a good article
in Sci-Am a few years back. This is one of the big breakthroughs in
modern cosmology, which is why we can't see the entire universe, but
just the bubble at the center of, as limited by product ot the speed of
light with the time since the big bang.

Otherwise, since seeing into deep space is the same as seeing back in
time, the limit of the distance we could see would be the same as seeing
back to the big bang. No matter which direction we looked in the sky,
we would see all the way back to the big bang, and since the big bang
was very bright, there would be an energy divergence. The complete
radiation energy of the big bang would be focused back onto us, and
indeed every point in space, since none is spatially distinguishable
from another.

The night sky would be bright enough to sterilize all life on earth, and
everywhere else, meaning that astronomers wouldn't be here to comment on
how cool cosmology is. By "cool," I mean that the radiation doesn't
sterilize all ife in the universe. :)
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Science Disproves Evolution
    ... D, 3He, and 4He and 7Li provide strong evidence for Big Bang ... al., "The Extragalactic Universe: ... Cosmology has progressed somewhat rapidly in the last several years, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Did the big bang really happen? [New Scientist July 02]
    ... WHAT if the big bang never happened? ... Take the way galaxies are scattered across the ... There they argued that cosmologists' most cherished ... theory of the universe fails to explain certain crucial observations. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • The Top 30 Problems with the Big Bang
    ... Here's a list of 30 problems with the Big Bang theory. ... Static universe models fit observational data better than expanding ... The expression ?the temperature of space? ... the microwave radiation, including its blackbody-shaped spectrum. ...
    (soc.culture.malaysia)
  • Re: OT Welcome to the New Middle Ages
    ... What was happening 10 seconds before the Big Bang (or whatever you ... It's hard to believe that the billions of stars in the universe ... possibility of religion exists. ... fallacious" are atheists like yourself. ...
    (alt.sports.basketball.nba.la-lakers)
  • Refuting the Big Bang Theory
    ... the big bang of some 17.6 billion years ago started it ... drawing together by increasing gravity and ignited to become stars. ... resulting layout of the universe has to be completely accidental as well. ... galaxy to solar system to planet were perfectly fine-tuned. ...
    (talk.origins)
Quantcast