"Methuselah Star Is Older Than The Universe – How Is..." Topic

…It Possible?.

"Nicknamed Methuselah Star, the star HD 140283 is located only 190 light years from Earth. There are many reasons why the Methuselah Star is very interesting, but the greatest problem of all is that the star gives scientists a serious problem that cannot be solved easily.

Methuselah Star is older than the Universe. How is it possible?

The truth is, it's hardly possible at all. Stars older than the Universe cannot exist in our Universe. So, either something is wrong with the age estimation of these stars, or something wrong with the estimated age of the Universe. Another option is that scientists have encountered "something" they simply don't understand well enough…"
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

Maybe it's "Sha Ka Ree" and we'll be telepathically asked to go there and release "God".

Dan

A more recent study of the Methuselah Star shows the star may not be so old after all.

I'll bet more observations will show there is no paradox at all. I said the same thing the last time this topic popped up on this board.

Maybe it came through a black hole. :)

Lol. A time-traveling solar system would make for a cool movie!

Dan

Tekumel's bubble universe has been discovered!

(smile)

Amicalement
Armand

Maybe it came through a black hole.

But then you'd have to explain the age of a sizeable giant star evolving into a neutron star. Then that evolves into a black hole. They would need to fuse many others to make a super massive black hole. How many billion years would that take before the Methuselah star?

By the way, things don't come out of black holes. Perhaps you need this:

link

Wasn't it Hawking who hypothesized that matter disappearing from here "through" black holes, might be reappearing in other universes? That would fit the observation (again appealing to my anecdotal Hawking and fuzzy memory) of matter appearing in our universe, i.e. stuff not in sync with the BB. The black hole is only observable one way, from the "disappearing" side. On the "appearing" side, the stuff just "appears", like turning on the lights. "Where did that come from?"

"It is impossible to use the bridge to cross from one universe to the other, however, because it is impossible to enter a white hole event horizon from the outside, and anyone entering a black hole horizon from either universe will inevitably hit the black hole singularity."

Well, crap, there go all those cool wormhole CGIs in all those Scifi movies. The wormholes can't either be entered in the first place, or they go nowhere for eternity. Eh?

I did not understand even a tenth of the verbiage in that link.

Do you understand it? Or do you just like posting links to see if I/anyone is really engaging in dialogue?

Maybe it just that our scientists just do not have a clue of what is really happening in the universe.

They believe that the fastest that you can travel is just the speed of light.

But maybe that is not the fastest way to travel.

By the way, things don't come out of black holes. Perhaps you need this:

How do know that things do not come out?

We really do not know what the hell happens.

Maybe it just that our scientists just do not have a clue of what is really happening in the universe.

That's clearly overstating the case. While we do know quite a bit, there is clearly a massive more we are ignorant about.

They believe that the fastest that you can travel is just the speed of light.

You mean like the tachyon? Which scientists first surmised about 55 years ago?

How do know that things do not come out?

We really do not know what the hell happens.

They know enough that a giant star that is incredibly old will not come out of an even older super massive black hole. Not in only 13.8 billion years. I'd be interested in your take on how physical matter will get past the event horizon.

Now Hawking–Zel'dovich radiation is another matter. And that was determined over 40 years ago.

link

Wasn't it Hawking who hypothesized that matter disappearing from here "through" black holes, might be reappearing in other universes?

That was the "white hole" portion in the link you probably didn't read.

link

I read it, carefully. That is what my comment was about, which you probably didn't read. The reason why I know that I didn't understand even a tenth of the verbiage is because I waded in ignorance through jargon that I have no idea what it means.

You mean like the tachyon? Which scientists first surmised about 55 years ago?

I won't pretend to even begin to understand the math here, but all of the physicists I've talked to say that this particle makes a hash of the current standard model, and mostly relegate it to scifi handwavium.

Lol. A time-traveling solar system would make for a cool movie!

Dan

Alien beings from our distant future colonize one of the few remaining, viable "young" stars & hatch a plot to transport it & the entire solar system backwards in time to save their civilization from extinction. Now they land a mere 190LY away from Earth, and begin to eye it hungrily…

Damon.

I would lean towards the age of the universe being off. Lots of handwaving has to go on to explain the expansion at many many times the speed of light. Any theory worth its salt undergoes testing and modification as we learn more.

…….and mostly relegate it to scifi handwavium

Sure, but my point is that as they were discussed in 1962 and 1967:

Bilaniuk, O.-M. P.; Deshpande, V. K.; Sudarshan, E. C. G. (1962). "'Meta' Relativity". American Journal of Physics. 30 (10): 718.

Feinberg, G. (1967). "Possibility of Faster-Than-Light Particles". Physical Review. 159 (5): 1089–1105

it belies Mithmee's comment that scientists, "….believe that the fastest that you can travel is just the speed of light." Clearly some thought otherwise, even that long ago.

I would lean towards the age of the universe being off.

Yep, that's certainly possible.

Lots of handwaving has to go on to explain the expansion at many many times the speed of light.

Not quite.

link

Any theory worth its salt undergoes testing and modification as we learn more.

Yep, that's how it works.

I did not understand even a tenth of the verbiage in that link.

Do you understand it? Or do you just like posting links to see if I/anyone is really engaging in dialogue?

The first two sentences are pretty clear and address the comment you made on 24 Sep 2017 7:06 a.m. PST. That's all.