The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Incomplete collapse oscillating Universe?  (Read 1291 times)

Offline Martin J Sallberg

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 86
    • View Profile
Incomplete collapse oscillating Universe?
« on: 11/05/2013 09:22:15 »
A star, HD 140283, is obviously older than Big Bang. Is it possible that the star may have survived from a time before Big Bang? Maybe an oscillating Universe that does not completely collapse into a singularity, but some space remains at its smallest point. It is possible that entropy and Oberth's paradox is solved by shifts in the laws of physics that sets contraction periods apart from expansion periods.


 

Offline Ethos_

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1277
  • Thanked: 14 times
    • View Profile
Re: Incomplete collapse oscillating Universe?
« Reply #1 on: 11/05/2013 14:57:32 »
A star, HD 140283, is obviously older than Big Bang. Is it possible that the star may have survived from a time before Big Bang? Maybe an oscillating Universe that does not completely collapse into a singularity, but some space remains at its smallest point. It is possible that entropy and Oberth's paradox is solved by shifts in the laws of physics that sets contraction periods apart from expansion periods.
I have believed for a long time that our present expansion is only a local event as viewed on the universal scale. There may exist a limit to the maximum size a black hole can attain. When this limit is reached, a "Little Bang", to coin a new term, will emerge. Given the vastness of space, this event would appear to us as universal when it may only be local on the grand scale of things. Just my thoughts.......................
« Last Edit: 11/05/2013 17:40:00 by Ethos_ »
 

Offline Bill S

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1802
  • Thanked: 11 times
    • View Profile
Re: Incomplete collapse oscillating Universe?
« Reply #2 on: 11/05/2013 15:30:53 »
Quote from: Wiki
The team was able to determine that the star was 14.46 0.8 billion years old.[2] Due to the uncertainty in the value, the age of the star does not conflict with the age of the universe determined by the Planck satellite, 13.798 0.037 billion years old.[2] The star "must have formed soon after the Big Bang",[2] and is believed to be the oldest known star in the universe.

Assuming that it "is obviously older than Big Bang." does seem to be a step too far, but it raises some interesting questions as to the time at which star formation started, and the life expectancy of a star of that size.
 

Offline CliffordK

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6321
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Site Moderator
    • View Profile
Re: Incomplete collapse oscillating Universe?
« Reply #3 on: 11/05/2013 18:58:55 »
All the articles seem to indicate that the age range is  0.8 billion years old, or if you take the minus side, you end up with 13.66 billion years old.  And the Big Bang is listed as 13.798 0.037 billion years ago.  Anyway, the two ranges including error bars do overlap somewhat.  However, it is suspicious.

If this is just one star out of the 300 billion stars in the Milky Way, will we find an "older" one?

What about Andromeda?

I do have to question the accuracy of all these calculations for the age of everything in the universe, but I don't have anything better to offer, and haven't looked at the details of the calculations to determine why the Earth, for example is supposed to be about 4.54 billion years old.  I will say that the age calculations of everything has varied significantly over the last few centuries.

The Big Bang theory seems to indicate that all matter and the universe itself begins as a small hyper-dense matter/energy source.  It wouldn't seem to leave room for a few stars to just be hanging out beforehand (and what about all those that were around, and already went supernova?)

I think the biggest problem is explaining where all the hydrogen comes from.  I also like the idea of mini-bangs rather than a single big-bang event, and some provisions for new hydrogen to be created.  Probably a rare event, but astronomers have already apparently seen jets of gasses being emitted from black holes, something that defies logic.
 

Offline dlorde

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1441
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • ex human-biologist & software developer
    • View Profile
Re: Incomplete collapse oscillating Universe?
« Reply #4 on: 11/05/2013 22:17:42 »
The star is deficient in heavy elements, which suggests it formed very early, and its age estimate of 14.5 billion years has "a residual uncertainty that makes the star's age compatible with the age of the universe" according to Howard Bond, who used Hubble to narrow the earlier estimates.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: Incomplete collapse oscillating Universe?
« Reply #5 on: 12/05/2013 21:20:36 »
very cool information.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: Incomplete collapse oscillating Universe?
« Reply #5 on: 12/05/2013 21:20:36 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums