Quote:
Originally Posted by CraigS
Well, I can't support it, but I'd like to think that the 13.5 B yrs will bite the dust in the not-too-distant future, as newer detection technologies come into existence.
I don't know that they'd 'throw all their theories right out the window, though'.
 
Cheers |
Problem is they've hung their hats on the age of the universe being 13.7 billion years (give or take a bit) and having something turn up considerably older would throw a rather large wrench into the works, especially if it's coming from an object which clearly must be part of this universe. That's why they had to do all the jiggery pokery with adjusting the ages of stars (in globs) and the Hubble constant to get the ages of those stars to match their observation of the universe's age. You can't have stars older than the object in which they reside!!!!.