this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2023
436 points (93.8% liked)

Technology

61170 readers
5342 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s
enu
technopagan
L4s
436
New research puts age of universe at 26.7 billion years, nearly twice as old as previously believed (phys.org)
submitted 2 years ago by L4s to c/technology
48 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

New research puts age of universe at 26.7 billion years, nearly twice as old as previously believed::Our universe could be twice as old as current estimates, according to a new study that challenges the dominant cosmological model and sheds new light on the so-called "impossible early galaxy problem."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] query 19 points 2 years ago (2 children)

It used to be 13.7 billion years+- a big margin that got narrowed down to 13.8+- a smaller margin. Not seeing that changing unless there's something seriously wrong with the previous research.

[–] Clent 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Narrowing it based on what we can measure doesn't mean it's correct.

The deeper we have stared into the universe the more our base understandings have challenged.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

Hence the "unless there's something seriously wrong with the previous research" part. That is always a possibility, of course, but it's much less likely that is the case then that this single study is the thing that is wrong.

[–] Foggyfroggy 4 points 2 years ago

More likely it’s this guy’s research.