If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.
Duplicate of another approved link: 7657358


(Washington Post)   The afterglow from the Big Bang shows that she's older than previously thought. And the universe is pretty old too   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 13
    More: Interesting, Big Bang theory, universe, Planck, cosmic microwave background, absolute zero, dark matter, European Space Agency, telescopes  
•       •       •

398 clicks; Favorite

13 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread
 
2013-03-22 08:00:07 AM  
theallureofbooks.com
 
2013-03-22 08:27:41 AM  
A gentleman never tries to guess a universe's age.
 
2013-03-22 08:50:54 AM  
100 million years doesn't sound like a hell of a lot on a cosmic scale.
 
2013-03-22 08:54:23 AM  
There's a 'your mother' joke somewhere in that headline.
 
2013-03-22 10:04:46 AM  
The big bang is a hoax!
 
2013-03-22 10:07:09 AM  

nekom: 100 million years doesn't sound like a hell of a lot on a cosmic scale.


It's not overly significant, but it is close to 1% of the previously-thought age of the universe.
 
2013-03-22 10:10:28 AM  

Mr. Fuzzypaws: The big bang is a hoax!


I know. EVERYONE knows it's really the Great Green Arkleseizure.
 
2013-03-22 10:19:30 AM  
Good.  It's usually more trouble when she turns out to be younger than previously thought.
 
2013-03-22 10:20:07 AM  
I'd show her an after glow..


img585.imageshack.us
img822.imageshack.us
img163.imageshack.us
 
2013-03-22 10:20:33 AM  

unyon: There's a 'your mother' joke somewhere in that headline.


The Big Bang is what I call your mother.

/Best I could do.
 
2013-03-22 10:22:39 AM  

exick: nekom: 100 million years doesn't sound like a hell of a lot on a cosmic scale.

It's not overly significant, but it is close to 1% of the previously-thought age of the universe.


Yeah, and SCIENCE! yay and all that. It's just not exactly huge. I mean if they found out it were 30 billion years older than expected, that would be big. This feels more like a small 'tweak' to the model. Still cool, the more data we have the better.
 
2013-03-22 10:26:22 AM  

nekom: Still cool, the more data we have the better.


I'd let Kaley Cuoco look over my data, if ya know what I mean, and I think you do.
 
2013-03-22 10:49:41 AM  

nekom: exick: nekom: 100 million years doesn't sound like a hell of a lot on a cosmic scale.

It's not overly significant, but it is close to 1% of the previously-thought age of the universe.

Yeah, and SCIENCE! yay and all that. It's just not exactly huge. I mean if they found out it were 30 billion years older than expected, that would be big. This feels more like a small 'tweak' to the model. Still cool, the more data we have the better.



I agree. It's good that they've got a better estimate, but it's not the kind of 1% difference that produces an entire paradigm shift like the <1% difference in the average curvature between a flat Earth and a round one.
http://chem.tufts.edu/answersinscience/relativityofwrong.htm
 
Displayed 13 of 13 comments



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


Report