@divegeester They do it analyzing the light intensity of 'standard candles', stars that have very similar light intensity outputs so using the inverse square law, they see star A has X intensity, and star B has half the intensity so they can use that fact to calculate how far away the dimmer star is and how red the light gets as it is further away in space and of course in time. So they notice the stars further away also are redder, which is what doppler shift does so they know that star is further away both from the intensity reading and the doppler shift. Between the two, they figure out how far away stuff is and it turns out Hubble figured out the further away they are the redder the light but the kind of star it is shows it is the same physics as nearer ones so they can get the distance and age. I hope that helps.
@sonhousesaid @divegeester They do it analyzing the light intensity of 'standard candles', stars that have very similar light intensity outputs so using the inverse square law, they see star A has X intensity, and star B has half the intensity so they can use that fact to calculate how far away the dimmer star is and how red the light gets as it is further away in space and of course in ...[text shortened]... shows it is the same physics as nearer ones so they can get the distance and age. I hope that helps.
Thanks sonhouse, but I admit that I already knew this.
My point is that time is relative to a mass’ velocity and it’s proximity to other mass. These have been changing hugely since the Big Bang so measurements of times using observable bodies is not consistent and has never been consistent. We are measuring time from out own standpoint in an ever changing universe where tome itself is variable.
@divegeester Cosmologists have just figure out time ran about 5 times slower in the early universe so there is that. Well, not THAT early, 1 billion years on.
30 Jun '23 05:30
The age of the universe
Back to Top