Abordnet

years old. However Geologists have also determined that the Earth itself (and therefore our solar system) is about 5 billion years old. Now I have understood that the heavier elements that makeup Earth were created by fusion within stars and then dispersed when those starts exploded, and later coalesced into our Solar system. Now 9 billion years seems a very short time to me for suns to have been created, exploded, and the resulting matter for the disc that would become our solar system.  To me there seems to be a discrepancy and I want to find out how it is accounted for. Ideas(not theories with proof) that have popped into my mind include: The universe is actually older than we think; the big bank produced a large quantity of heavier elements as well as the well known hydrogen; or the life cycle of early suns in the universe was measured in millions of years rather than billions (so they could produce and disperse the heavier elements. What is the current scientific explanation for this.  I'm interested in actual science and not any creation mythologies. Thank You The original super massive black hole(SMBH) must have been an impressive sucker, surrounded by not so much as one atom per ly2. Supposedly, at the speed of light it’ll take one year to migrate through a full light year expanse of mostly dark matter space (a given physical point-A to point-B doesn’t hardly count because everything is in continual flux or 3D motion). Supposedly our universe has grown to nearly 100 billion light years across.  “at least 93 billion light years across”  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe Even if the initial expanding God-fart of whatever the mother of this SMBH going postal was capable of creating and sustaining as a physical average rate of expansion at 'c', whereas we are talking of a 50 billion year old universe that’s only getting bigger as time goes by. At the more likely radial expansion average velocity of 0.5'c' we're up to roughly 100BY, and otherwise at the cosmic slug rate of merely poking along at .25'c' it's looking as though our universe could be worth 200BY, not counting if this is the first, second or third creation cycle. . – Brad Guth

The age of the universe has been determined to be between 13 and 14 billion years old. However Geologists have also determined that the Earth itself (and therefore our solar system) is about 5 billion years old. Now I have understood that the heavier elements that makeup Earth were created by fusion within stars and then dispersed when those starts exploded, and later coalesced into our Solar system. Now 9 billion years seems a very short time to me for suns to have been created, exploded, and the resulting matter for the disc that would become our solar system.  To me there seems to be a discrepancy and I want to find out how it is accounted for.  ... What, numerically, is the discrepancy, in your view?

The age of the universe has been determined to be between 13 and 14 billion years old. However Geologists have also determined that the Earth itself (and therefore our solar system) is about 5 billion years old. Now I have understood that the heavier elements that makeup Earth were created by fusion within stars and then dispersed when those starts exploded, and later coalesced into our Solar system. Now 9 billion years seems a very short time to me for suns to have been created, exploded, and the resulting matter for the disc that would become our solar system.  To me there seems to be a discrepancy and I want to find out how it is accounted for.  ... What, numerically, is the discrepancy, in your view? I didn't think 9 billion years was long enough for suns to develop, use all their fuel, go nova, and then for new solar systems to develop with all of the heavy elements.  That was on the basis that the early suns would last as long as ours. But as others have pointed out the early suns only lastes 100-200 million years which means there would have been enough time. - Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -

Gilgamesh < This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it wrote in message The age of the universe has been determined to be between 13 and 14 billion years old. However Geologists have also determined that the Earth itself (and therefore our solar system) is about 5 billion years old. Now I have understood that the heavier elements that makeup Earth were created by fusion within stars and then dispersed when those starts exploded, and later coalesced into our Solar system. Now 9 billion years seems a very short time to me for suns to have been created, exploded, and the resulting matter for the disc that would become our solar system.  To me there seems to be a discrepancy and I want to find out how it is accounted for.  ... What, numerically, is the discrepancy, in your view? I didn't think 9 billion years was long enough for suns to develop, use all their fuel, go nova, and then for new solar systems to develop with all of the heavy elements.  That was on the basis that the early suns would last as long as ours. But as others have pointed out the early suns only lastes 100-200 million years which means there would have been enough time. Brown dwarfs and perhaps a few older BH looking black dwarf stars do exist, and no matters what, it takes quite a bit of continuous expansion time in order that our universe reach an all-inclusive cosmic diameter of nearly 100 billion light years. What's the matter;  can't you do the math? . - Brad Guth

years old. However Geologists have also determined that the Earth itself (and therefore our solar system) is about 5 billion years old. Now I have understood that the heavier elements that makeup Earth were created by fusion within stars and then dispersed when those starts exploded, and later coalesced into our Solar system. Now 9 billion years seems a very short time to me for suns to have been created, exploded, and the resulting matter for the disc that would become our solar system.  To me there seems to be a discrepancy and I want to find out how it is accounted for. Ideas(not theories with proof) that have popped into my mind include: The universe is actually older than we think; the big bank produced a large quantity of heavier elements as well as the well known hydrogen; or the life cycle of early suns in the universe was measured in millions of years rather than billions (so they could produce and disperse the heavier elements. What is the current scientific explanation for this.  I'm interested in actual science and not any creation mythologies. Thank You Before the supposed singular BB, there was supposedly just our one and only SMBH (aka God fart) surrounded in all possible directions by less than one atom per cubic light year, and without any other photon or graviton anywhere in sight. (aka ideal faith-_base_d mindset) OOPS!, talk about cosmic shrinkage and having another one of those bad God days. Images of galactic encounters, of the worse possible kind. (a series of God fart resets, as recorded by team Hubble) The best of 59 examples of cosmic hell busting lose, not that many other than these relatively old Hubble images of the anti-big-bang exist.  Each of these galaxies has a fairly horrific gravity/tidal radius of several thousand light years (perhaps at least as great as 64r, if not 128r), not to mention the mutual attraction of whatever a pair or more of these bad boys has to work with, whereas you might like to further reconsider the mutual gravity/tidal binding grasp of two or more such encounters is perhaps worth 4X the individual tidal radius. (hard to avoid gravity, especially when it’s the only game in town) http://www.sciam.com/gallery_directory.cfm?photo_id=8153DC82-A24D-3D0... http://www6.comcast.net/news/science/galaxies/slideshow/view/1/ What is the cosmic gravity/tidal binding reach of our Milky Way? (1024r?) Try to remember that our moon and Earth represents a mutual tidal grasp of better than 60r, and our Sun/Pluto tidal reach is obviously worth 10,060r, not to mention whatever Sedna might suggest.  Obviously if the mutual tidal radius wasn’t there to behold, we’d be losing our grip on such wussy little items as Pluto and Sedna.  . – Brad Guth