The Age of the Universe

[jamest]

If we take on board what Einstein tells us about the value of time being relative, then what does it really mean to say that the universe is, say, 13 billion years old? Can that value have any universal meaning? And if not, then how old could the universe itself actually be? Rather, is it even possible to attribute an age to the universe itself?

[colubridae]

If we take on board what Einstein tells us about the value of time being relative, then what does it really mean to say that the universe is, say, 13 billion years old? Can that value have any universal meaning? And if not, then how old could the universe itself actually be?

errr... 6000 years give or take an idiot or two...
It's your bible, why don't you say?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I suspect the "age" would be relative to what you're using the information for. A "floating" number, unrelated to anything else, is just a single datum point. So we have to say, "in relation to our own solar system, the Universe is X years old."

[cowiz]

13 billion relative to us (we measured it after all)

6,000 relative to stupidity

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Six days old, counting from Last Thursday.

[Mysturji]

Old enough to be a step-granduncle to a little baby universe.

[jamest]

I suspect the "age" would be relative to what you're using the information for. A "floating" number, unrelated to anything else, is just a single datum point. So we have to say, "in relation to our own solar system, the Universe is X years old."

Yes, I know. But the point is, does that value have any inherent significance to the universe as a whole, itself (as opposed to just having a value to somebody placed on the Earth, at this moment)? And if not, then how can we be sure that the universe itself has a finite age, if any age at all?

I'm not even sure that these are scientific questions, since there doesn't appear to be any reasonable answers.

Btw, I don't think that the world is 6000 years old.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I suspect the "age" would be relative to what you're using the information for. A "floating" number, unrelated to anything else, is just a single datum point. So we have to say, "in relation to our own solar system, the Universe is X years old."

Yes, I know. But the point is, does that value have any inherent significance to the universe as a whole, itself (as opposed to just having a value to somebody placed on the Earth, at this moment)? And if not, then how can we be sure that the universe itself has a finite age, if any age at all?

I'm not even sure that these are scientific questions, since there doesn't appear to be any reasonable answers.

Btw, I don't think that the world is 6000 years old.

You have to have something to measure it against for your results to be relevant. Known rates of radioactive decay make good clocks when you're in the billion year range.

[Pappa]

If we take on board what Einstein tells us about the value of time being relative, then what does it really mean to say that the universe is, say, 13 billion years old? Can that value have any universal meaning? And if not, then how old could the universe itself actually be? Rather, is it even possible to attribute an age to the universe itself?

The relative values wouldn't be arbitrary, they would differ for specific reasons; like the speed of motion of the traveler, the effect of gravity on the traveler, etc. I've read that relativity implies statements like the following may be true, "The age of the universe and how and if it will ever end may depend on when and where you are standing in the Universe". That's fine to a degree... but I'd guess that the more extreme differences could only occur in the more extreme corners of the universe. My hunch would be that in the visible universe (which may be a very tiny part of the whole) the answer of when/if it will end will be similar through our local area (and by local I mean everything we've ever seen with a telescope). The exceptions would be black holes etc, which may cause such an extreme breakdown of space and time that they don't apply... but that doesn't matter as all the black holes will evaporate long before we face an end of universe scenario.

[Coito ergo sum]

If we take on board what Einstein tells us about the value of time being relative, then what does it really mean to say that the universe is, say, 13 billion years old? Can that value have any universal meaning? And if not, then how old could the universe itself actually be? Rather, is it even possible to attribute an age to the universe itself?

Relative to us, it's estimated to be 14.5 billion years old.

[newolder]

If we take on board what Einstein tells us ...

When we understand General Relativity theory, we calculate the first row (Age of universe) - and all the other rows in the linked table - from real world observations of electromagnetic radiation: http://lambda.gsfc.nasa.gov/product/map ... ummary.cfm

Note: This places a lower bound on the Age of the Universe.

[jamest]

If we take on board what Einstein tells us ...

When we understand General Relativity theory, we calculate the first row (Age of universe) - and all the other rows in the linked table - from real world observations of electromagnetic radiation: http://lambda.gsfc.nasa.gov/product/map ... ummary.cfm

Note: This places a lower bound on the Age of the Universe.

Are you saying that the age of the universe, as valued by ourselves, is pretty close to being absolutely correct?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

If we take on board what Einstein tells us ...

When we understand General Relativity theory, we calculate the first row (Age of universe) - and all the other rows in the linked table - from real world observations of electromagnetic radiation: http://lambda.gsfc.nasa.gov/product/map ... ummary.cfm

Note: This places a lower bound on the Age of the Universe.

Are you saying that the age of the universe, as valued by ourselves, is pretty close to being absolutely correct?

Want to tell us what you're actually fishing for here. It would save time.

[newolder]

Are you saying that the age of the universe, as valued by ourselves, is pretty close to being absolutely correct?

No. Science does not deal in absolutes. The figures include error bars to cover the uncertainty in the experimental method. Of course, General Relativity theory may not be correct but it is supported (remains unfalsified) by all observations hitherto.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Are you saying that the age of the universe, as valued by ourselves, is pretty close to being absolutely correct?

No. Science does not deal in absolutes. The figures include error bars to cover the uncertainty in the experimental method. Of course, General Relativity theory may not be correct but it is supported (remains unfalsified) by all observations hitherto.

Oh, come on. We should be able to tell the age of the Universe right down to the nanosecond. We just have to consult some holy book or other.