How old is our galaxy

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by timojin, Aug 19, 2017.

  1. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Yes, it is.
    That is correct.
    Yes. But there was no plasma before about one second.
    Because it was too 'hot' for matter to form.
    True.

    You could clear this all up for yourself with quick Google.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252
    [QUOTE="origin, post: 3472149,

    Yes. But there was no plasma before about one second.

    Because it was too 'hot' for matter to form.
    .[/QUOTE]

    If there is heat there must be a substance to contain or generate the heat, So what is the answer of the scientific wisdom ?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    From your sarcasm I wonder if you even care or are just trolling?
    I put the term hot in quotes because there was no mass. I was trying to keep it simple for you.
    Apparently to do know a little bit about the subject you are claiming ignorance so, you are just trolling.
    Therefore, bye-bye
     
    Last edited: Aug 22, 2017
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    There does not have to be a substance of matter - there is simply energy, radiating from the BB itself. (Note: This is not the actual inflation of the BB. The inflation is the creation of space itself, and it is not constrained by the speed of light. However this radiation still occurred within the inflating volume of the universe)

    That radiation had a flux that was off-the-charts hot. Imagine all the photons of the current universe radiating in a space smaller than a beach ball.

    (Photon flux is the number of photons passing through a square unit of space at a given time.)

    The photon flux from a single supernova is ridiculously large, but peanuts compared to the universe.

    I agree with origin; you're asking for answers, I think it behooves you to not be sarcastic. Otherwise, it looks like you have already decided the answers you're getting are wrong. And nobody will want to play with you.
     
    Last edited: Aug 22, 2017
  8. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252

    I don't know the answer that is why I am asking , but I don't accept the gobbledy eyther. example your 3 paragraphs are nonsense, in the case we are talking of the beginning . Remember the question was how old is our galaxy and it was switched to the beginning at time zero, so we talked at the beginning and hopefully we would get int the age of galaxy
     
  9. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,451
    I didn't see any nonsense. But I think it is worth keeping in mind that this theory of the beginning of the universe arises from extrapolating back from observations: red shifts, CMBR etc. That is why there is a limit beyond which we can't really go with great confidence. But getting to 10⁻⁴³ s or so is not bad going!
     
  10. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    OK, well if science to you is gobbledy nonsense then there's nothing further I can add. Perhaps The God will have answers more to your liking.
     
    origin likes this.
  11. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    LOL, I think you hit the nail on the head.
     
  12. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252

    You come up venting yourself in the 3 paragraphs with your information which was not asked for , but than you bring religion , it is hard to comprehend your rationality.
     
  13. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252
    The point proposed by " ORIGIN " (There was no gas until the universe was about 380,000 years old. From about 1 second to about 380,000 years matter was in the form of plasma. Before 1 second there was no matter at all.) How do you get all that that you posted to fit into the conversation ?
     
  14. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Jesus, timojin, read this:

    Universe timeline.
     
  15. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    No, no. The God.

    Dude, you introduced the Big Bang in your second post.

    And it was your post 22 that directly raised the question that my 3 paragraphs answered:

    How can you lose track of your own thread??
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2017
  16. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252
    It is nice reading, I love those numbers, and will live to see "
    Eventually in around 5.4 billion years from now, the core of the Sun will become hot enough to trigger helium fusion in its surrounding shell.[39] This will cause the outer layers of the star to expand greatly, and the star will enter a phase of its life in which it is called a red giant.[41][42] Within 7.5 billion years, the Sun will have expanded to a radius of 1.2 AU—256 times its current size, and studies announced in 2008 show that due to tidal interaction between Sun and Earth, Earth would actually fall back into a lower orbit, and get engulfed and incorporated inside the Sun before the Sun reaches its largest size, despite the Sun losing about 38% of its mass.[43] "
     
  17. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252
    So the next question who come first solar systems or galaxies ?
     
  18. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    As far as we know, the Milky Way galaxy has been in existence for about 13.21 billion years, IOW, since shortly after the BB.
    During that time, we see three generations of stars: Population III, Population II and Population I. (they were named in order of discovery - backwards to their order of birth )
    Pop III were born earliest and many died out. Their remnants were the materials for Pop II stars, and the remnants of Pop II made Pop I stars.
    Our sun - a Pop I - has only been around about 5Gy, same age as the SS.

    So, the answer is: galaxies came first.

    https://www.universetoday.com/21822/age-of-the-milky-way/
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_population
     
  19. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252

    It seams by your argument Pop 111 > pop 11> pop 1 the volume of a galaxy should decrease.
    I assume you would come up by saying, yes , we have a Black Hole. Than the question arises where does the energy go ?
     
  20. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    "Volume" of a galaxy is an ambiguous measurement.

    The number of atoms in a galaxy remains generally the same, though more and more gas and dust is collected into massive bodies.

    No, I would not say that.

    For starters, a portion of the energy is radiated away as light and other emissions in the EM spectrum.
     
  21. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252
    Black Hole is a massive high density body ? the collection should reduce the volume, then projecting the future the whole galaxy should be swallowed into a Black Hole.

    Than by this argument the Big Bang is an explosion of a Black Hole
     
  22. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    Again, how are you defining volume? The galaxy is not a discrete object; it is a diffuse collection of objects. Likewise: What is the "volume" of the solar system?

    The matter of the galaxy is coalescing into small dense objects such as stars. That might a change in the linear dimensions of the galaxy, but those are different phenomena.

    This does not follow.
    1] Not all gas and dust ends up in stars.
    2] Not all stars collapse into black holes.
    3] Multiple black holes do not have to coalesce into a single black hole.

    This definitely does not follow from anything previous.

    Also, black holes do not explode.
     

Share This Page