View Single Post
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 09-12-2017, 02:13 AM
waltky waltky is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Okolona
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,575
Thanks: 1,181
Thanked 446 Times in 378 Posts
Lightbulb Re: Space and Astronomy News Headlines


Astronomers Find Stars That Appear Older Than The Universe...

The Greatest Cosmic Puzzle: Astronomers Find Stars That Appear Older Than The Universe
Sep 7, 2017 - Starts With A Bang: The Universe is out there, waiting for you to discover it
If you understand how stars work, you can observe the physical properties of one of them and extrapolate its age, and know when it had to have been born. Stars undergo a lot of changes as they age: their radius, luminosity, and temperature all evolve as they burn through their fuel. But a star's lifespan, in general, is dependent on only two properties that it's born with: its mass and its metallicity, which is the amount of elements heavier than hydrogen and helium present within. The oldest stars we've found in the Universe are nearly pristine, where almost 100% of what makes them up is the hydrogen and helium left over from the Big Bang. They come in at over 13 billion years old, with the oldest at 14.5 billion. And this is a big problem, because the Universe itself is only 13.8 billion years old.

In the Andromeda galaxy, the oldest individual stars are found in the galaxy's halo. However, globular clusters and random field stars may prove to contain the oldest stars of all in the entire Universe.

You can't very well have a star that's older than the Universe itself; that would imply that the star existed before the Big Bang ever happened! Yet the Big Bang was the origin of the Universe as-we-know-it, where all the matter, energy, neutrinos, photons, antimatter, dark matter and even dark energy originated. Everything contained in our observable Universe came from that event, and everything we perceive today can be traced back to that origin in time. So the simplest explanation, that there are stars predating the Universe, must be ruled out.

It's also possible that we've got the age of the Universe wrong! The way we arrive at that figure is from precision measurements of the Universe on the largest scales. By looking at a whole slew of features, including:

* The density and temperature imperfections in the cosmic microwave background, left over from the Big Bang,
* The clustering of stars and galaxies at present and going back billions of light years,
* The Hubble expansion rate of the fabric of the Universe,
* The history of star formation and galactic evolution,

and many other sources, we've arrived at a very consistent picture of the Universe. It's made up of 68% dark energy, 27% dark matter, 4.9% normal matter, about 0.1% neutrinos and 0.01% radiation, and is right around 13.8 billion years old. The uncertainty on the age figure is less than 100 million years, so even though it might be plausible that the Universe is slightly older-or-younger, it's extraordinarily improbable to get up to 14.5 billion years.

The water's always turbulent where two great rivers meet.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to waltky For This Useful Post: