Image of the day

Captured by
Terry Wood

Jupiter (clearer) Nov 5th 2023 w/Mewlon 180c

My Account

New to Astromart?

Register an account...

Need Help?

Gravitational Lensing Used to Measure the Age and Size of the Universe

03/04/2010 05:09AM

Gravitational Lensing Used to Measure the Age and Size of the Universe

By using entire galaxies as lenses to look at other more distant galaxies, a team of researchers at Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology, located on the Stanford University campus, have come up with a new way to measure the size and age of the universe. The team used a technique called gravitational lensing to measure the distance that light traveled from a bright, active galaxy to the earth along different paths. By understanding the time it took to travel along each path and the effective speeds involved, the researchers were able to infer not just how far away the galaxies are, but also the overall scale of the universe and some details of its expansion. The results confirm that the age of the universe is 13.75 billion years old, plus or minus 170 million years.


Comments:

  • newtgem [Ronald Abraham]
  • 03/06/2010 04:53AM
Perhaps the greatest thing about not being an astrophysicist or quantum physicist is that regular working stiffs like me still consider theories to be theories. This article was a rude awakenning. Funny how we know so much about gravitational lensing; especially considering we don't have much of a clue what it is or how it works. <br><br>http://www.suppressedscience.net/physics.html
<br>Ronald:<br><br>One thing is very clear to me: As a scientific community, we "know" a lot less than we think we know.<br><br>But over the millennia, that is how mankind has progressed -- By always finding new and different ways of looking at the world and by challenging the status quo.<br><br>Clearly, even Albert Einstein was a rebel in his own time. His famous quote that “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler” is very appropriate. <br><br>Evidentally, Newton's model for Gravity was just a little too simple and Einstein modified it. Over time, it is not inconceivable to think that Einstein's General Relativity may one day be found to be too simple and will need to be modified too. <br><br>Just for fun, here are some additional scientific anomalies to think about that could ultimately lead us to rethink some of the things we think we "know."<br><br>http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18524911.600-13-things-that-do-not-make-sense.html<br><br>http://www.astromart.com/news/news.asp?news_id=859<br><br>http://www.astromart.com/news/news.asp?news_id=947<br><br>http://www.astromart.com/news/news.asp?news_id=560<br><br><br>Thanks,<br><br>Guy Pirro<br><br><br><blockquote class="blockquote"><div class="italic"><i>Ronald Abraham said:</i><br><br>Perhaps the greatest thing about not being an astrophysicist or quantum physicist is that regular working stiffs like me still consider theories to be theories. This article was a rude awakenning. Funny how we know so much about gravitational lensing; especially considering we don't have much of a clue what it is or how it works. <br><br>http://www.suppressedscience.net/physics.html</div></blockquote>

  • mslancas [Mark Lancaster]
  • 03/08/2010 05:02AM
I don't understand your statement, "Funny how we know so much about gravitational lensing; especially considering we don't have much of a clue what it is or how it works."<br><br>I thought Einstein himself explained what gravitational lensing is and how it works...?


  • newtgem [Ronald Abraham]
  • 03/08/2010 08:47PM
In a perfect world, the competitive spirit would solicit and encourage challenge rather than attempting to squash it. Mother Teresa was reported to have said that 'the cure for cancer died along with an aborted fetus'. <br><br>Needless to say, when Russian scientists were seriously investigating the basics of orbital flight, life support in vaccuum of space, and related issues in the 1920s & 1930s, they did not expect to be murdered enmasse by Stalin.<br><br>We can only fairly assume that some of the greates scientific genius of the 20th century ended up as taxi drivers, warehousemen, electrical engineers, etc. The scientific community has simply never been able to avoid the foibles that silence innovative genius which may lack astute political and social skill to promote itself successfully.<br><br>The question thus becomes: Have the resolutions of unified theory, understanding and control of gravity, and a well established understanding of physics beyond C fallen victum to those who zealously protect their pride and prestige at the expense of others.<br><br>We all know that Einstein(among coutless others)allowed his religious, personal, and professional mores to color his work. Who hasn't? Who doesn't? <br><br>Scientific progress' greatest impediment is likely not in the brains of men, but in their hearts. <br><br>Again - this is but one of many pieces of evidence: <br><br>http://www.suppressedscience.net/physics.html<br><br>
  • mpb [Mark Brada]
  • 03/09/2010 07:48PM
Really?