Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

How old do you think the universe is?

Posted Nov 4, '12 at 10:47pm

Devoidless

Devoidless

3,553 posts

The universe is only infinitely old so far as it boggles the mind to even consider how old it must be. But it is not ageless. I'm a firm believer of the theory that the universe is constantly expanding, until it reaches critical mass and collapses back in on itself. Then starts to expand again.

 

Posted Nov 4, '12 at 11:50pm

pangtongshu

pangtongshu

8,241 posts

Nothing is infinite, everything is finite.

Numbers...but that is beside the point

The universe is only infinitely old so far as it boggles the mind to even consider how old it must be.

So, simply, to try and specify the exact "beginning" of the universe (which would thus find the age) is so difficult that it is a waste of time to try and do so?

 

Posted Nov 5, '12 at 10:10am

partydevil

partydevil

5,091 posts

So, simply, to try and specify the exact "beginning" of the universe (which would thus find the age) is so difficult that it is a waste of time to try and do so?

im whit deviodless here, what we do when we know the age?
its just a number fact. like the speed of light.
i know speed of light is usefull. but how is the age usefull?

 

Posted Nov 5, '12 at 11:53am

HahiHa

HahiHa

4,964 posts

Knight

I don't think so. "Facts" change all the time. Every 100 years or so scientific facts are proven to be false, and another "fact" takes it's place. Do you know what I'm talking about. Soooo... having trouble accepting the common scientific answers is certainly not unreasonable.

It is always god to be critic towards deductions from facts, but you picture it as if all of our knowledge just periodically overthrows itself. The cold hard numbers are based on our instruments build with our technological knowledge. The instruments don't suddenly spew out completely different numbers each 100 years, they just get more and more precise and may thus reveal new aspects, which in turn may indeed change some theories. But we can be quite certain of the results we get from the instruments, as we built them and know what sort of data they assess. The interpretation of those results is where it gets interesting.

 

Posted Nov 5, '12 at 3:33pm

MageGrayWolf

MageGrayWolf

9,667 posts

Knight

I don't think so. "Facts" change all the time.

No facts don't change. Our interpretation and understand of them can.
For instance let's say the theory of gravity is shown to be wrong. The fact that things on Earth fall towards it wouldn't change.

The universe is only infinitely old so far as it boggles the mind to even consider how old it must be. But it is not ageless. I'm a firm believer of the theory that the universe is constantly expanding, until it reaches critical mass and collapses back in on itself. Then starts to expand again.

Already been over how this isn't likely given the shape of the universe.

 

Posted Nov 7, '12 at 12:46pm

indianajones1

indianajones1

68 posts

I would say about 50 trilion years.But,science says it's old about 50 bilion years.
I agree,it seems too short.

 

Posted Nov 7, '12 at 7:28pm

MageGrayWolf

MageGrayWolf

9,667 posts

Knight

I would say about 50 trilion years.But,science says it's old about 50 bilion years.

Scientific estimates have it around 13.75 billion years.

 

Posted Nov 11, '12 at 11:15am

sourwhatup2

sourwhatup2

3,255 posts

13.75 Billion seems fine to me seeing as how I believe in the Multiverse. The main reason I believe in this is because I believe that our Universe had to come from another to actually be created, this has been studied by various scientists already and a lot of them say it's possible but to try and get the hard evidence for it isn't exactly a walk in the park.

Taken from Wiki: A generic prediction of chaotic inflation is an infinite ergodic universe, which, being infinite, must contain Hubble volumes realizing all initial conditions.

So basically this is saying that the first Universe of the 7 they talk about would of been a chaotic creation saying it is infinite and such. But then again this is just a prediction.

See the Big Bang couldn't have started everything in my opinion. The Big Bang itself in my opinion should or could have been created by another Universe or a Super Universe, basically what I am saying is that the M-Theory is on the right track, that's all.

Also, I think it's great to be open minded about these types of things, cause this way there are more people who are looking at different things and studying them, this is how it has always worked..

I'm not going to lie though the M-Theory is not a full proof theory, it's still being worked at.

 

Posted Nov 11, '12 at 6:36pm

Coq

Coq

30 posts

Lol it's not a matter of beliefs but proofs, it's around 13-14 billion years

 

Posted Nov 11, '12 at 10:58pm

TheGenovesan

TheGenovesan

66 posts

@Coq, right now there is no "proof" but theories.I'm gonna take a wild shot at 50 billion years. Just because 17 billion doesn't feel big enough.

 
Reply to How old do you think the universe is?

You must be logged in to post a reply!