Printable View
BILLION, not million. All your millions should be billions (as should the millions in Moira's original post).Quote:
As far as our scientists can deduce, the universe is only 14 million light years old but it is 28 million light years around, if we assume it is round
WHUPS :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by raisor
well, the thought that occurs to me is that if we can indeed see 14bn LY all around and the universe is indeed 14bn years old, that would seem to imply that we are in fact the centre of the universe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Moira
More likely is that the 14bn LY we can see is nowhere near the edge of the universe and something else is at work. Most likely the universe has no edge the same way the world has no edge. If you go off one "side" of the earth, you come back on the opposite side.
<edit>
I do find it ironic that in a primarily technical forum the most posted in thread is based on a religious discussion :P
sorry guys but i already answered the chicken and egg question. Unfortunatley i had to post it in the tech humor forum as it would have fried the minds of a lot of people here if they were forced to take it seriously.
Having said that I was wondering how long it would take for someone to notice the starting argument was wrong by 10^3. Also anyone who is trying to put religion in with science really doesn't understand the meaning of FAITH. The whole idea of faith is that it doesnt need scienctific proof.
No not mysterious at all. The reality is a little different than the glass/pan thought experiment but it's really that simple.Quote:
That's a good point, not something that had occurred to me. In fact it's so simple I can't believe it didn't occur to the authors of the article - surely there must be some stumbling point, something more mysterious to it than that?
That would be a logical assumption. However the term "See" doesn't equate to our position nor how far we can acually measure. You have to understand that eveything we see NOW appeared in the past. When you look at a galaxy that is 100 million light years away. That light was created before we were created or before we evolved into a rational creature. We cannot see the present and we don't have a measuring stick. So the size of the universe it determined by many other factors. Like the speed and driection of objects versus the time frame from which they were created. (which causes this paradox or age versus size).Quote:
well, the thought that occurs to me is that if we can indeed see 14bn LY all around and the universe is indeed 14bn years old, that would seem to imply that we are in fact the centre of the universe.
No real paradox there Road. we calculated how old the universe is but i never seen anyone show me how big it was before it started expanding. If the universe had Zero physical size there may be a paradox but it may also have been 30 billion light years across before it started expanding.
Those are good points. I don't think it's a paradox at all. But some do, implying that the universe cannot expand faster than light, even while we observe it doing so NOW. It's a logical analysis. But regardless of what transpired during the big bang we see this now when we look at galaxies moving away from us. That's important. They are moving away faster than the speed of light, TODAY. So the answer is simply... the space between us is expanding. If it wasn't we wouldn't have an expanding universe. Galaxies would simply be moving apart. That is not the case. They are not only moving apart but the space between them expanding. It's hard to picture but that is what is happening. They are physically moving through space near the speed of light and as they move the space expands behind them. Making a larger gap between us that outpaces the constant measurement of light.
//EDIT and another thing. The paradox invloves (like you mentioned Muracu) starting the clock at time = 0. And stars weren't even formed until 100 - 200 million years after the big bang. Galaxies much later and it's Galaxies we base this paradox from. There are many things never considered when this argument is put forth.
I apologize for that inconsistency but I just went from the information from the original post. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Negative
Me too .... I started what I thought would be a brief discussion on a seemingly interesting paradox and instead it's turned into a fiercely heated 14 page thread! :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Aardpsymon
I don't think it's heated... it's fun! And logically it is a paradox.