Universe Might be Bigger and Older than Expected

Current estimates are it is 13.7B yo, and 156B ly in diameter. New
estimates would make it 15.8B yo, and 180B ly in diameter.

This is probably the first steps to totally dismantling existing
theories and admit that we know nothing because we can only see a
fraction of the universe as it is.

Yousuf Khan

SPACE.com -- Universe Might be Bigger and Older than Expected
http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...le_revise.html

Yousuf Khan wrote:
Current estimates are it is 13.7B yo, and 156B ly in diameter. New
estimates would make it 15.8B yo, and 180B ly in diameter.

This is probably the first steps to totally dismantling existing
theories and admit that we know nothing because we can only see a
fraction of the universe as it is.

Yousuf Khan

SPACE.com -- Universe Might be Bigger and Older than Expected
http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...le_revise.html


I wouldn't count your chickens just yet Yousuf, as there are many
Cepheid variable in a whole lot of galaxies studied by the Hubble
ST that say otherwise.

"Yousuf Khan" wrote in message
...
Current estimates are it is 13.7B yo, and 156B ly in diameter. New
estimates would make it 15.8B yo, and 180B ly in diameter.

This is probably the first steps to totally dismantling existing theories
and admit that we know nothing because we can only see a fraction of the
universe as it is.

Which theories need to be dismantled by changing the age of the universe by
2x10^10 years and making it 2x10^11 light years bigger?

"Yousuf Khan" wrote in message
...
| Current estimates are it is 13.7B yo, and 156B ly in diameter. New
| estimates would make it 15.8B yo, and 180B ly in diameter.
|
| This is probably the first steps to totally dismantling existing
| theories and admit that we know nothing because we can only see a
| fraction of the universe as it is.
|
| Yousuf Khan

Nah... Ptolemy's theory of the Earth being at the universe's centre lasted
for 1400 years, We'll have to wait another 1300 years before we can start
dismantling anything.
Androcles

|
| SPACE.com -- Universe Might be Bigger and Older than Expected
| http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...le_revise.html

In article , Yousuf Khan
wrote:

Current estimates are it is 13.7B yo, and 156B ly in diameter. New
estimates would make it 15.8B yo, and 180B ly in diameter.

This is probably the first steps to totally dismantling existing
theories and admit that we know nothing because we can only see a
fraction of the universe as it is.

Welcome to science, where we welcome corrections and admit we only use models.
The only person I can see knowing nothing in this case is you.

--
Relf's Law = "Bull**** repeated to the limit of infinity
asymptotically approaches the odour of roses."




--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Yousuf Khan wrote:
Current estimates are it is 13.7B yo, and 156B ly in diameter. New
estimates would make it 15.8B yo, and 180B ly in diameter.

This is probably the first steps to totally dismantling existing
theories and admit that we know nothing because we can only see a
fraction of the universe as it is.

Yousuf Khan

SPACE.com -- Universe Might be Bigger and Older than Expected
http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...le_revise.html

Totally dismantling? Don't be so sure of yourself. If you're lucky,
it might provide a slight modification of the right hand side of the
Einstein equations for Cosmology, but that's about it. And that's
assuming it even holds up.

In article ,
Yousuf Khan writes:
SPACE.com -- Universe Might be Bigger and Older than Expected
http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...le_revise.html

The preprint is at http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0606279

I haven't read the paper yet, but the stated uncertainty on the new
distance is 6%. M33 isn't a major calibrator of the distance scale,
so increasing its distance would not translate directly into an
increase of all other distances.

--
Steve Willner Phone 617-495-7123
Cambridge, MA 02138 USA
(Please email your reply if you want to be sure I see it; include a
valid Reply-To address to receive an acknowledgement. Commercial
email may be sent to your ISP.)

Phineas T PuddleDuck wrote in
:

In article , Yousuf Khan
wrote:

Current estimates are it is 13.7B yo, and 156B ly in diameter. New
estimates would make it 15.8B yo, and 180B ly in diameter.

This is probably the first steps to totally dismantling existing
theories and admit that we know nothing because we can only see a
fraction of the universe as it is.

Welcome to science, where we welcome corrections and admit we only use
models. The only person I can see knowing nothing in this case is you.


It is utter ******** and should be rejected by the referees. M33 is a bound
member of the local group. If they applied the same measurements to M31 you
would get a negative Hubble constant.

Klazmon.

(Steve Willner) wrote in news:44d8cc64$1
@cfanews.cfa.harvard.edu:

In article ,
Yousuf Khan writes:
SPACE.com -- Universe Might be Bigger and Older than Expected
http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...le_revise.html

The preprint is at http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0606279

I haven't read the paper yet, but the stated uncertainty on the new
distance is 6%. M33 isn't a major calibrator of the distance scale,
so increasing its distance would not translate directly into an
increase of all other distances.


Especially as M33 is a bound member of the local group. For their next
trick will they try to recallibrate the Hubble constant using M31. ROFL.

Klazmon.

Llanzlan Klazmon wrote:
It is utter ******** and should be rejected by the referees. M33 is a bound
member of the local group. If they applied the same measurements to M31 you
would get a negative Hubble constant.

So? Spatial expansion doesn't apply to the local group? The article
clearly stated that the with this M33 is actually further away than
previously thought.

Yousuf Khan