hi Rob<br /><font color="yellow">Shuttle guy is correct. The problem is that we have no idea what the initial singularity of the big bang was. If was the size of a quark or an atom, the visible universe could be all of the universe. That, however, is extremely unlikely. Conversely, if the initial singuarity was the size of the MW, the visible universe is only a trillionth (* many many trillionths) of the entire universe.</font><br /><br />There goes my brain again - it gets spread a little thin trying to wrap around this. <img src="/images/icons/crazy.gif" /><br /><br />When Hubble was launched, one of the spokespeople said it could reach the limits of the visible universe. Where I run into trouble is when they say "here's a galaxy 13 Billion ly away, only <i>xxx</i> million years after the big bang."<br /><br />If we know when the big bang occurred, don't we know pretty well how big the universe is? <br /><br />or, the other way around:<br /><br />If we didn't know how big the universe is, how can we say that an object 13 Billion ly away is showing us how things were just after the big bang? <br /><br />btw, I really enjoy being perplexed about stuff like this, especially when I end up getting my brain around it after all! <img src="/images/icons/cool.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="2" color="#ff0000"><em><strong>I'm a recovering optimist - things could be better.</strong></em></font> </p> </div>