Re: Big Bang
Posted by Southern Man on May 25, 2002 at 08:47
Re: Big Bang (Dogrock)
You are correct. But there is a big difference between infinity and 99.99% of infinity. In fact the difference is infinite. All of the specific lights that we see should be less than the age of the universe. The problem is that we canít get a good measurement of their age. The Hubble constant should give us the age of the universe. The Hubble constant age is much less than the age we get for some globular clusters. The cosmic background radiation, however, is from the time of the big bang. We have already seen from that radiation that we are moving away from the center of the expansion of the universe at a significant percentage of the speed of light. This allows us to adjust what we see in various directions for what we would see if we were at the location of the center of the bang. Then we adjust for the distortions we know local stars (our galaxy) produce. Then we look at the differences that are left and these will tell us the distribution of mass and rate of expansion of the universe. From this we can determine the real age. Once we know the real age we can go back and try to fit all the pieces that we see in place. We will never be able to see the bang itself but the background radiation is the smoke if you will that tells us there was an explosion. It is the farthest that we can see and it is almost the same in all directions because 99.99% of the speed of light is very different from the speed of light.
For an elementary (not always correct) description of the big bang try http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bb1.html