Age of universe

How can Universe is just 12-15 billion years old?
Hubble can see objects 12 billion light years away from us. Now, we can see
light from those objects emited 12 billion years ago. So in that exact time
those objects were at place where we can see them now. But where is the
time needed to expand from time of Big Bang to that distance? If objects
traveled with maximum speed they needed another 12 billion years.

--
For reply to e-mail remove "hehe" from e-mail address.

Currently Winamp is not active ;-)

"SpaceWalker" wrote in message
...
How can Universe is just 12-15 billion years old?
Hubble can see objects 12 billion light years away from us. Now, we can
see
light from those objects emited 12 billion years ago. So in that exact
time
those objects were at place where we can see them now. But where is the
time needed to expand from time of Big Bang to that distance? If objects
traveled with maximum speed they needed another 12 billion years.

Space has been expanding, and in the early days, expanding at
a rate much, much greater than that of the speed of light.

Light that has been traveling 12 billion years to reach us
may have been emitted, relatively speaking, right next door.
It's just that the expansion of space carried the light away
from us even as it was traveling in our direction.

On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 21:01:43 +0100, SpaceWalker
wrote:

How can Universe is just 12-15 billion years old?
Hubble can see objects 12 billion light years away from us. Now, we can see
light from those objects emited 12 billion years ago. So in that exact time
those objects were at place where we can see them now. But where is the
time needed to expand from time of Big Bang to that distance? If objects
traveled with maximum speed they needed another 12 billion years.

AFAIK Hubble hasn't seen the objects edge of the universe yet. That
job will be left to the next space telescope, that according to the
spin makes Hubble look like a pair of oprah glasses for power.

AFAIK Hubble hasn't seen the objects
edge of the universe yet.

The Hubble is pretty close to the limit of seeing already. See-
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/960628.html

That job will be left to the next space
telescope, that according to the spin
makes Hubble look like a pair of oprah
glasses for power.

Oprah glasses?
oc

OOPs. Make that
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap960628.html

"Greg Neill" wrote in message
...
"SpaceWalker" wrote in message
...
How can Universe is just 12-15 billion years old?
Hubble can see objects 12 billion light years away from us. Now, we can
see
light from those objects emited 12 billion years ago. So in that exact
time
those objects were at place where we can see them now. But where is the
time needed to expand from time of Big Bang to that distance? If objects
traveled with maximum speed they needed another 12 billion years.

Space has been expanding, and in the early days, expanding at
a rate much, much greater than that of the speed of light.

Light that has been traveling 12 billion years to reach us
may have been emitted, relatively speaking, right next door.
It's just that the expansion of space carried the light away
from us even as it was traveling in our direction.



Prove it......

"Christopher" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 6 Jan 2004 21:01:43 +0100, SpaceWalker
wrote:

How can Universe is just 12-15 billion years old?
Hubble can see objects 12 billion light years away from us. Now, we can
see
light from those objects emited 12 billion years ago. So in that exact
time
those objects were at place where we can see them now. But where is the
time needed to expand from time of Big Bang to that distance? If objects
traveled with maximum speed they needed another 12 billion years.

AFAIK Hubble hasn't seen the objects edge of the universe yet. That
job will be left to the next space telescope, that according to the
spin makes Hubble look like a pair of oprah glasses for power.



There is no 'edge' to the universe....

Are you for real?

SpaceWalker wrote:
How can Universe is just 12-15 billion years old?
Hubble can see objects 12 billion light years away from us. Now, we can see
light from those objects emited 12 billion years ago. So in that exact time
those objects were at place where we can see them now. But where is the
time needed to expand from time of Big Bang to that distance? If objects
traveled with maximum speed they needed another 12 billion years.


Your interpretation of current theory is woefully incorrect. You might visit
the following site for a correct interpretation of current theory:

http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm

The FAQ associated with the tutorial is good as well and I believe specifically
addresses you misconception.

"Whisper" wrote in message ...

"Greg Neill" wrote in message
...
"SpaceWalker" wrote in message
...
How can Universe is just 12-15 billion years old?
Hubble can see objects 12 billion light years away from us. Now, we can
see
light from those objects emited 12 billion years ago. So in that exact
time
those objects were at place where we can see them now. But where is the
time needed to expand from time of Big Bang to that distance? If objects
traveled with maximum speed they needed another 12 billion years.

Space has been expanding, and in the early days, expanding at
a rate much, much greater than that of the speed of light.

Light that has been traveling 12 billion years to reach us
may have been emitted, relatively speaking, right next door.
It's just that the expansion of space carried the light away
from us even as it was traveling in our direction.



Prove it......

The conclusion follows directly from the premise of the
Big Bang theory. You are familiar with the basic
fundamentals of the Big Bang theory, right?

During a perfect moment of peace at Wed, 7 Jan 2004 11:38:46 +1100,
"Whisper" interrupted with:

There is no 'edge' to the universe....

Care to prove that. Using real mathematics and not weak arguments.
----------------------------------------------
Bring me my Broadsword and clear understanding.