Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: UCANSEE2

The mainstream size estimates haven’t grown for many years. These aren’t based upon how far the best telescope can see, but upon other things.


10 posted on 12/18/2009 12:55:37 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (I am in America but not of America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: HiTech RedNeck
The mainstream size estimates haven’t grown for many years. These aren’t based upon how far the best telescope can see, but upon other things.

This is true. You are speaking of a mathematical estimate based on a ton of presumptions about the 'beginning' of the Universe, and the 'weight' (amount of mass).

It is also well-known that this 'model' doesn't fit the facts (kinda like the GW issue), and scientists had to make up a fudge factor called dark-matter.

Still, it is a 'guess', and I was talking about the 'observed' (whether visually or via other parts of the EM spectrum).

So, mainstream size 'estimates' may be correct, or may not. We have no proof yet.

If and when we are able to 'observe' the 'extent' of the Universe, what will we see just beyond that?

32 posted on 12/18/2009 5:11:07 PM PST by UCANSEE2 (<I>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson