Most distant object = Age of the universe?

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

lukman

Guest
Anyone can help me out of this question in my head?<br />If the universe age is 13.7billions years, then why our telescope claimed to see the most distant objects at 13.6bililions light years away?<br />Given the current speed of how universe is expanding, thus during the big bang matters and space must have been expanded significantly faster than the speed of light? Against the Einstein theory that nothing can speed above the speed of light? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
5

5stone10

Guest
This post - Universe expansion rate question - on the next page might answer some of your questions.
 
S

search

Guest
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_mm/mr_limits.html<br />From WMAP first year results:<br /><br />We use our new detailed picture to ask:"What happened earlier to make this picture happen?" We can now begin to probe the earliest moments of the universe: Inflation (the rapid expansion of the universe a fraction of a second after its birth.). We have ruled out a textbook example of a particular inflation model. But others will be supported with this new evidence.<br /><br />Starting from the time of our picture we can ask: "What must have happened later?"<br />We have compared and combined the new WMAP data with other diverse cosmic measurements (galaxy clustering, Lyman-alpha cloud clustering, supernovae, etc.), and we have found a new unified understanding of the universe:<br /><br />Universe is 13.7 billion years old, with a margin of error of close to 1%.<br />When the First stars ignited after the Big Bang.<br />Light in the WMAP picture is from 379,000 years after the Big Bang.<br />Content of the Universe:<br />4% Atoms, 23% Cold Dark Matter, 73% Dark Energy.<br />The data places new constraints on the Dark Energy. It seems more like a "cosmological constant" than a negative-pressure energy field called "quintessence". But quintessence is not ruled out.<br />Fast moving neutrinos do not play any major role in the evolution of structure in the universe. They would have prevented the early clumping of gas in the universe, delaying the emergence of the first stars, in conflict with the new WMAP data.<br />Expansion rate (Hubble constant) value: Ho= 71 (km/sec)/Mpc (with a margin of error of about 5%)<br />New evidence for Inflation (in polarized signal)<br />For the theory that fits our data, the Universe will expand forever. (The nature of the dark energy is still a mystery. If it changes with time, or if other unknown and unexpected things happen in the universe, this conclusion could change.)<br />Last updated: Th
 
L

lukman

Guest
Thanks, i understand now. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
K

Kalstang

Guest
What I would like to know is how in the world we can determine the "center" of the universe? I mean we are still discovering new galaxies. Plus wouldnt we have to beable to see the at least two opposite "edges" in order to figure out the center? We have such a very small view of the universe. Plus how can we even tell if theres not tons more suns out there but thier light hasnt reached this far yet? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#ffff00"><p><font color="#3366ff">I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer.</font> <br /><font color="#ff0000">"Imagination is more important then Knowledge" ~Albert Einstien~</font> <br /><font color="#cc99ff">Guns dont kill people. People kill people</font>.</p></font><p><font color="#ff6600">Solar System</font></p> </div>
 
N

newtonian

Guest
Kalstang - Me too.<br /><br />Our universe is indeed expanding like a stretching fine gauze with its threads and filaments.<br /><br />Let us assume first that our universe is finite in mass and energy - which many scientists believe, as do I.<br /><br />In that case the gauze is finite, whether we simplify and limit our analysis to 3 dimensions, with time simply passing as cause and effect processes occur (newtonian) - or whethtr we analyze with 4-dimensional space-time and relativistic phenomena factored in (Einsstein).<br /><br />What 3-d shape is this? What 4-d shape is this? Would it be described mathematically as flat or curved, and if so, how curved - enough to curve back on itself?<br /><br />Many scientists subscribe to a flat model alternate to the classic balloon model - in part because of acceleration of expansion - the latter bearing on thread theme since past FTL (faster than light) expansion leaves much of our universe beyond our visibility horizon.<br /><br />But how much, as a ball park estimate in percentage, of our universe lies beyond our visibility horizon?<br /><br />Could it be as high as 90% or even 99%? In the latter case, it would appear that there is no center or edge simply because we are viewing only a very small percentage of the gauze.<br /><br />Here comes another question, which I will immediately post as a new thread (relatively immediately).<br /><br />Ignoring that tangent question for the time being, I will address first edges and then center:<br /><br />EDGES:<br /><br />First, one must define what is meant by edge. Here are a few types of edges:<br /><br />1. The edge of light from our light cone section of our universe from after the inflationary stage when we (due to expansion of space) expanded faster than light. <br /><br />Consider this edge to date from when our section slowed in expansion to ever so slilghtly slower than light speed.<br /><br />How far beyond our visiblity horizon would that edge of lilght reach?<br /><br />2. The edge of gr
 
S

SpeedFreek

Guest
There is also the question of when.<br /><br />Everywhere we look in the observable universe, we are looking back in time, and due to the comoving factor (expansion rate of the universe and time since the photons we see left the thing we are looking at) whatever we are looking at is not actually at that position anymore.<br /><br />If the whole universe is not uniform in shape, then the centre of the universe will move as the universe expands. And then you have to decide where the centre is at any given point in time.<br /><br />This is all assuming the universe has an edge, which may not be the case. Not everything has an edge. The surface of a sphere has no edge, when viewed as a 2 dimensional surface. Where is the centre of the surface? Of course if you travel far enough on a sphere, you return to where you started, which may not be the case for the universe! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff0000">_______________________________________________<br /></font><font size="2"><em>SpeedFreek</em></font> </p> </div>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts