Chances are the big bang if happened, a lot older

Say the Andromeda is crashing with Earth. These are two nearby
galaxies.
In a billion years they will collide and the collision may last 3
billion years.

We have seen many collided galaxies in space. But yoyu take this
miniascule event taking place in a close proximity, and wonder how
could
the Universe be only 13.2 billion years old. Something doesn't nake
sense.

What if scientists were to pick a dark spot in the deep field picture
and
gather the faintest signals from that spot, then zoom up the picture.

The deep field picture was of 400-800 million years after the big bang.

Chances are that if zooming further, then one would arrive to a time
that was before the big bang according to calculations, and what would
they find? A picture of galaxies upon galaxies.

Say the Andromeda is crashing with Earth. These are two nearby
galaxies.
In a billion years they will collide and the collision may last 3
billion years.

We have seen many collided galaxies in space. But yoyu take this
miniascule event taking place in a close proximity, and wonder how
could
the Universe be only 13.2 billion years old. Something doesn't nake
sense.

What if scientists were to pick a dark spot in the deep field picture
and
gather the faintest signals from that spot, then zoom up the picture.

The deep field picture was of 400-800 million years after the big bang.

Chances are that if zooming further, then one would arrive to a time
that was before the big bang according to calculations, and what would
they find? A picture of galaxies upon galaxies.

Yoyu, what are the chances that I am right, faintest?

Nake any?

wrote:
Say the Andromeda is crashing with Earth. These are two nearby
galaxies.
In a billion years they will collide and the collision may last 3
billion years.

We have seen many collided galaxies in space. But yoyu take this
miniascule event taking place in a close proximity, and wonder how
could
the Universe be only 13.2 billion years old. Something doesn't nake
sense.

Allways a mistake to generalize about a large system from one event

Say the Andromeda is crashing with Earth. These are two nearby
galaxies.
In a billion years they will collide and the collision may last 3
billion years.

We have seen many collided galaxies in space. But yoyu take this
miniascule event taking place in a close proximity, and wonder how
could
the Universe be only 13.2 billion years old. Something doesn't nake
sense.

Allways a mistake to generalize about a large system from one event

Yeah but its always the flat Earth and I am always right.

wrote:
Say the Andromeda is crashing with Earth. These are two nearby
galaxies.
In a billion years they will collide and the collision may last 3
billion years.

We have seen many collided galaxies in space. But yoyu take this
miniascule event taking place in a close proximity, and wonder how
could
the Universe be only 13.2 billion years old. Something doesn't nake
sense.

Allways a mistake to generalize about a large system from one event

Yeah but its always the flat Earth and I am always right.

The proof lays in pointing Hubble into a dark area in deep space,
and gathering information. the Deep Space photo represents a
region 400-800 million years after the big bang. I propose that
gathering faint signals from a dark region in the deep space
would reach space that is past the big bang. And what would
we see? I am pretty certain: Just a similar galaxies upon galaxies
picture. And the galaxies in the deep space picture look like
ordinary galaxies, that quietly do what galaxies do. Shouldn't
it take a long time for galaxies to form, for space to clear up?
By the way, its been already found that in deep space regions
scientists found no traces of gasses that they prediced that
those gasses should be there after the Big Bang. The Universe
is a lot older.

In article om,
wrote:

he proof lays in pointing Hubble into a dark area in deep space,
and gathering information. the Deep Space photo represents a
region 400-800 million years after the big bang. I propose that
gathering faint signals from a dark region in the deep space
would reach space that is past the big bang. And what would
we see? I am pretty certain: Just a similar galaxies upon galaxies
picture. And the galaxies in the deep space picture look like
ordinary galaxies, that quietly do what galaxies do. Shouldn't
it take a long time for galaxies to form, for space to clear up?
By the way, its been already found that in deep space regions
scientists found no traces of gasses that they prediced that
those gasses should be there after the Big Bang. The Universe
is a lot older.

Talking to yourself again, kook?

--
Saucerhead lingo #137

"(we) whupped yer incredible arse bigtime" = "we were asked a lot of
unanswerable questions we decided to avoid answering and kept repeating the
same old discredited nonsense".

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

d region 400-800 million years after the big bang. I propose that
gathering faint signals from a dark region in the deep space
would reach space that is past the big bang. And what would
we see? I am pretty certain: Just a similar galaxies upon galaxies
picture.

You can not see time, before there was light! You may be able to push it
back to the first stars. if you had a REALLY big scope on orbit.

he proof lays in pointing Hubble into a dark area in deep space,
and gathering information. the Deep Space photo represents a
region 400-800 million years after the big bang. I propose that
gathering faint signals from a dark region in the deep space
would reach space that is past the big bang. And what would
we see? I am pretty certain: Just a similar galaxies upon galaxies
picture. And the galaxies in the deep space picture look like
ordinary galaxies, that quietly do what galaxies do. Shouldn't
it take a long time for galaxies to form, for space to clear up?
By the way, its been already found that in deep space regions
scientists found no traces of gasses that they prediced that
those gasses should be there after the Big Bang. The Universe
is a lot older.

Talking to yourself again, kook?

hat the FOCKA skinhead?

he proof lays in pointing Hubble into a dark area in deep space,
and gathering information. the Deep Space photo represents a
region 400-800 million years after the big bang. I propose that
gathering faint signals from a dark region in the deep space
would reach space that is past the big bang. And what would
we see? I am pretty certain: Just a similar galaxies upon galaxies
picture. And the galaxies in the deep space picture look like
ordinary galaxies, that quietly do what galaxies do. Shouldn't
it take a long time for galaxies to form, for space to clear up?
By the way, its been already found that in deep space regions
scientists found no traces of gasses that they prediced that
those gasses should be there after the Big Bang. The Universe
is a lot older.

Talking to yourself again, kook?

hat the FOCKA skinhead?

Hat the FOCKA skaw.

d region 400-800 million years after the big bang. I propose that
gathering faint signals from a dark region in the deep space
would reach space that is past the big bang. And what would
we see? I am pretty certain: Just a similar galaxies upon galaxies
picture.

You can not see time, before there was light! You may be able to push it
back to the first stars. if you had a REALLY big scope on orbit.

I am more ahead, I think, my eyes are not Hubble but I can see that
there was no big bang 13.2 billion years ago, if there was it happened
a lot more time ago.