Age, size of the universe... Why dont scientists admit you cant measure this?

Question

im no brainiac, but if an estimated 96% of our universe is dark, or unaccounted for, why would anyone think they could account for it?

How can science say, on one hand, "density or gravity can be so intense that it can bend light, and bend time" and on the other hand legitimately agree on and publish a size and age of the universe?

thats like me saying "it might rain in new jersey january 24, the year 5000" and then i prove it. i dont get it

can someone tell me why trying to measure the size and age of the universe is NOT a complete waste of good brainpower and effort?

it's more pointless than voting; at least with voting, you know you did or didnt vote.

i meant visible universe, and i realize light takes time to travel, therefore we cant see the whole universe.

but i dont mean the actual wmap, i just mean how do they take into account the warped light and time? i think labeling anything 1 billion light years is a stretch, and i realize you can measure billions of light years, but how do you rule out that the waves youre depending on are not wrapped around a black hole or something?

Answer 1

If they are true "scientists" they're actually publishing theories.

Basically just Ideas that NEED to be proved, or even disproved with open arms to be able to come up with a NEW theories.

Some of the media likes to join in and cloud things by stating these theories as facts (or whispering quietly that its just an idea) some times the organizations discussing these ideas over look the "theory" term because it usually goes without saying.

right now. we can only see 46.5 billion light years in each direction. beyond that, the size of the universe is ONLY speculation for now. We have to SEE the area before we can accept it.

Age is debatable, but once again, you can't physically go back in time, watch the big bang and prove it to the second.

That is really the only way to prove any theory. Being able to predict it's state, then seeing IT 'or' objects it directly effects, in the predicted state.

Ultimately. If we understand the universe as a whole, then we understand more of the "WHY", "WHEN", "WHERE" and "HOW LONG" of our existence.

Knowing these things can really help you say..... if you where on vacation in a different country..... space is just like a different country even after 13 billion years

It also helps us understand what KIND of roles the earth plays in the universe (when we understand the universe. esp if we find other life forms out there.)

I think most of astronomy is really just to prove whether or not god exists. or more like to disprove the church, to allow us to see things as they are instead of using "blind faith"

which is exactly what the people are using when they don't state the ideas of the size of the universe AS theory

YUP, if you think about how people thought the moon was actually a spirit or god, and how far we've come today, just imagine what we could do in ANOTHER 3000 years.

Answer 2

well the tell-tale giveaway here is "96% of the 'stuff' in the universe is unaccounted for" thats a dead giveaway. if you only KNOW 4% of thing how do you propose you even know that your 4% is even accurate?
This is thus a 'theory' not a fact. which means we have a guesstimate of what it looks like based on what we can test/observe. So you are very accurate on your analysis. We really don't know. but each year we make a little progress. each year we gain more insight and knowledge. when you consider in the 1400's view of the cosmos vs the 1500's etc etc to the present. You see astronomy as a growing and rapidly changing landscape. Where as we collect new data we must then look back at all our assumptions and revise and try to interpret as best we can. Most theories stand for a while. few get revised. some get scrapped. Some get revived from the scrap heap. but for each step we take. brings new knowledge and ultimately closer to real understanding

Answer 3

96 percent of the universe isn't dark.96 percent of matter (the tangible things that make the universe) is dark matter. That's what you must have heard.
And they got to this conclusion by measuring the influence of gravity (an intrinsic aspect of matter) the expansion of the universe, which is measured by watching how galaxies get away from us, which is measured by their colour: the faster they get away, the more red they are.
And gravity can indeed bend time and light, but, with the exception of local phenomenoms (like black holes), their influence in light and time is very little, and although it prevents scientists from measuring the age of the universe with years, days, hours, minutes and seconds, it allows them to give an estimated age in billions of years: 13.6. Give or take 100.000.000 years.
And measuring the size an age of the universe allows scientists to understand better some phenomenoms, which would prove to be useful in the long run: One of the purposes of science, specially astronomy, is the survival of the human race in the long run.
Good to see that you have a critical mind. If you don't know the procedures, demand an explanation!

Answer 4

I can tell by your attitude that you don't understand how science works....

When they make announcements, do this for yourself - think of , and add the phrase, "ACCORDING TO THE EVIDENCE THUS GATHERED...." and THEN read what they are announcing, predicting, etc. Give them the benefit of doubt that they can, IF AND WHEN EVIDENCE PROVIDES CONTRARY INDICATIONS, that they can change their announcements, predictions, - whatever. That's the way science works.

Scientists won't say, if they are truthful to themselves and to others, that they "know something or have proved something else", only that with the "evidence that they have gathered" and after over TWO THOUSAND-PLUS years of gathering evidence they can reliably predict a hell of a lot.

For example, the properties of H20, water, has been studied ad infinitum and so much can be said to be "proven" - well, okay... But all scientists know that it's only really, by consensus that anything is proven and can be challenged at any time IF EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY is found.

So, in a sense you're right, but people unfortunately have this idea that science is some big monolithic, church-like (because they might have only church and government to compare it to) authority source. Well, it's not.

It's a very democratic process comprising historically of tens of millions of people from all countries over thousands of years....and that says a lot.

Answer 5

Science is a work-in-progress. It's not about 'right answers'; it's about our best understanding.

There's nothing wrong with publishing our best stabs at things, even when the actual measurements are pretty vague. The only other option is to have different scientists in different labs struggling with the same problem independently and with no idea of what other people are doing or finding. Science is a group effort and we can't pull together without communication.

A physicist isn't a man with a tweed jacket and a pipe, who knows everything. He's a man with a tweed jacket and a pipe who is trying to expand the sum of human knowledge.

Answer 6

This is in a simple term but hiding a lot of mathematics. We know that there is matter and anti-matter, for every atom in the universe there is an anti-matter atom, and we also know that they balance each other out in mass and time. We know the rate of speed that the universe is expanding through the light spectrum. So calculating the atomic mass of the known universe gives us the mass of the anti-matter universe, right? So taking a calculated sample, and it behaves the same way as the remaining matter! Have a great day.

Answer 7

Do you even understand how the age of the Universe is calculated? Maybe you should google it. The age is measured by looking at old star clusters. The fact that 96% of our universe is consisting of dark matter (22%) and dark energy (74%) has got nothing to do with the calculation. Also, all matter create curvature in spacetime (ie bend it). This also has nothing to do with the calculation.

Answer 8

The numbers of people actually doing this kind of measurement at any time can probably be counted on the fingers and toes so I don't see what you are getting fired up about. Some of these measurements also come about as a by-product of other research.

Measurement of the age might not be contingent on the amount of dark matter present.

Parspant, do you have leather patches on the elbows of your tweed jacket?

Answer 9

The age of our universe has been approximately by various convergent sources: the background microwave energy (Wilkinson Microwave Anisortopy Probe, or WMAP, referred to in a previous post), red shift in distant stars, etc. All convergent sources of information suggest that our universe is 13.7 billion years old.

What is in our universe, which includes some matter of unknown constitution, or dark matter, or what forces are responsible for galactic motions, which include energy of unknown source or dark energy, are completely different questions from the age or size of our universe.

Scientists know what they know (age and size of the universe) and also know what they don't know (sources of all mass and energy in the universe).

Answer 10

Well, I am not an astronomer, but there is a difference between dark matter and dark energy. They both constitute the 96%, but I am not sure if dark energy can not be accounted for. We have detected it!

As far as dating the universe - we know that by the light that reaches us from outer space. Those are from collapsed stars from hundreds of thousands to millions of years ago and beyond that.

As for the size - we don't know the size...