Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1*jBPIuNC5NBwDgknlQ6VXZw.jpeg
Stars in the dwarf galaxy Pictor II, which is more than 10 billion years old. The right panel shows a close-up of the star PicII-503, with the lowest iron content ever measured outside of the Milky-Way disk of stars. (Image credit: CTIO/NOIRLab/DOE/NSF/AURA)

One of the remarkable insights in the biblical story of genesis is that the observable Universe had a beginning in time, akin to the modern notion of a Big Bang. This idea was not philosophically appealing to scientists like Albert Einstein, who in 1917 added a cosmological constant to his equations of General Relativity, in order to counteract the gravitational attraction of matter and radiation and allow for a static eternal Universe. He later realized that such a delicate balance is unstable and leads to a clumpy Universe. Indeed, today cosmologists explain the emergence of galaxies like the Milky-Way as a natural consequence of gravitational instability in an expanding Universe which contains a cosmological constant.

How can we infer the current age of the Universe?

Locally, we find that the Universe is expanding with the recession speed of distant galaxies being proportional to their distance. The proportionality factor, called the Hubble constant after the astronomer Edwin Hubble, is the ratio between the recession velocity and distance. The time that elapsed since these galaxies overlapped equals to their distance divided by their velocity. Crudely speaking, this would imply that the age of the Universe is simply the inverse of the Hubble constant. For the current value of Hubble constant, about 70 kilometers per second per megaparsec, its inverse is 14 billion years.

The value of the Hubble constant is still uncertain, as different techniques for distances measurements provide values that are discrepant by +/-5%, as summarized here. This ambiguity amounts to an age uncertainty of 0.7 billion years.

A more refined approach is to trace the distance that light travelled since the beginning by studying the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB), the relic radiation from the Big Bang. The Universe became transparent to the CMB as soon as the cosmic temperature cooled under 4000 degrees Kelvin, allowing electrons to join protons in making hydrogen atoms. This removed the fog associated with electron scattering of the CMB at about 400,000 years after the beginning. The distance that sound waves propagated during that time defines a yardstick for the characteristic CMB brightness patterns. The angle that it occupies in the sky depends on the distance travelled by the CMB since that time which — given the speed of light — reflects the age of the Universe. The acoustic patterns can also be found in the large-scale distribution of matter, as traced by galaxies at recent cosmic times. This approach yields a cosmic age of about 13.8 billion years.

The Sun formed in the last third of cosmic history, 4.6 billion years ago, and our modern technological era is only a century old. We arrived late to the cosmic party.

Most stars formed before the Sun. This offers a second path for measuring the age of the Universe. No star can be older than the Universe for a simple reason. As we go back in time before the first minute after the Big Bang, the cosmic density of matter and radiation was much higher than that found in the interior of stars. No star could have not survived these extreme conditions in the infant Universe. Cosmic archaeology can therefore set a lower limit on the age of the Universe by finding ancient stars that formed in the first hundreds of millions of years after the Big Bang.

Recent data from the Dark Energy Camera (DECam) mounted atop the Víctor M. Blanco 4-meter Telescope in Chile, revealed stars inside the nearby dwarf galaxy Pictor II at a distance of 150,000 light years. This satellite galaxy of the Milky-Way is more than 10 billion years old. One of the oldest of these stars is PicII-503, with only a part in 43,000 of the iron mass-fraction of the Sun, as reported last week here.

Another path for cosmic archaeology involves studies of the materials carried by interstellar objects, born out of the debris of distant stars. They also cannot be older than the Universe. The age of interstellar objects can be inferred by isotope dating. Remarkably, the measurement of deuterium to hydrogen and 12C/13C ratios, as reported here and here last week, implies that the age of the interstellar object 3I/ATLAS is 10–12 billion years, suggesting that it may have formed in the early Universe. As I discussed here, this raises a puzzle regarding the mass reservoir of its parent star population.

***

Jeanne Calment of France is the oldest verified person to have ever lived. She died in 1997 at an age of 122.45 years. This is a hundred million times shorter than the age of the Universe. One would expect the fact that we live for less than 0.00000001 of cosmic history to sink in and make us humble. But not so. We prefer to ignore it.

Even though our life is brief, we choose to invest most of it in conflicts with each other. Out there in the sky, there is a giant cosmic message telling us how insignificant we are. And yet, even mainstream astronomers who adopt the job of looking up, maintain the arrogant view that we might be at the top of the cosmic food chain and that the quest for extraterrestrial technological civilizations is an extraordinary claim that should be sidelined in favor of the search for microbes. How else can one interpret the top priority of the Astronomy & Astrophysics Decadal Survey to invest more than 10 billion dollars in the search for microbes and no federal funding in the search for extraterrestrial intelligent beings?

Given the dismal brevity of our cosmic existence, we get comfort from the assumption that the we must be surrounded by lower life forms.

I reject this popular view within present-day academia. Out of a sense of cosmic modesty, I define my goal throughout the remainder of my scientific career to seek evidence for a more accomplished sibling of our family of intelligent civilizations. If such evidence will be found, the next Copernican revolution would be that we are not at the intellectual center of the Universe.

***

Before my morning jog at sunrise, I had received the following uplifting email from the Finnish artist, Antti Railio:

“Hello Mr. Loeb.

My name is Antti Railio, I am a Finnish singer/artist. I have been following your work for few years now and I am really happy to see a scientist who practices real science with the correct attitude towards it.

I also have had an interest on the UAP/UFO phenomenon since the 1990’s since I have witnessed along with other people the phenomenon of bright orbs up upon the ocean here in Finland in my home town of Kristiinankaupunki.

Also, I had an experience when I was a child which left me with 7 Stiches on my left palm…

Well, that is beside my letter to you…

I wanted to write to you, since I am not a scientist, but I have a curious mind, and it seems I tend to have Ideas or theories that time and time again seems to be after sometimes decades validated by scientists.

For example, I had a theory that our universe might be inside a black hole and possibly the multiverse is like a bunch of soup bubbles. I had this idea 20 years ago… And since few years ago I read that this is now a well thought theory…

I also have had a theory that life on earth had its origins somewhere else possibly the same life source that has been spread through the universe by panspermia. And I somehow am almost certain that this is the case.

Anyway, my main reason for contacting you is this new theory I have… I just had an idea a few days ago popped to my brain!

What would you think of this? You know the theory of white holes being the theorized flip sides of a black whole, but that we have not yet been able to seen or proven their existence ones…

My theory is this: We are all made of the same material that exists inside the Sun as they say and Sun gives us life and illuminates the whole solar system…

What if stars are the other side of a black holes, a reverse singularity! If I am not wrong a black hole appears in 3-dimensional space as a sphere?

So my theory is that one of the reasons the Sun’s temperature is far more greater farther from its surface, is also driven by the forces pushing through the matter from a far distant black whole that is at the same time at the other side of the sun, so that it is occupying basically the same space as the Sun and at the same time it is connecting our solar system with another one somewhere where the black hole resides… Also the black hole’s immense gravitation would keep the sun at its form, but since it is constantly feeding in from the other side it has to disperse the energy gradually away thus the heat and photons would then be the Sun’s source of light and energy…

The immense gravitation would still bleed through its presence over to this side keeping the planets locked in their places…

Also, that would make sense in another theory connecting to UAP…

It would make sense that higher beings would be aware of this and could use stars as a map of “jump points” to travel vast distances by using portals created by the universe…

You know, sometimes the obvious is hiding right in front of our eyes… ;)

That is my newest theory but I lack the scientific knowhow to even start to calculate the mathematics or the more technical sides of this theory, so I leave it to you as a fun theory or perhaps something to be thinking about … :)

With the most respect and admiration

Thank you so much for your time!

Also, I am super excited about your Galileo Project! And secretly wish to grow up and start my scientific career. But maybe I am better at singing and performing…

Yours truly!

-Antti Railio”

My response was as follows:

“Dear Antti,

Thank you for reaching out to me and for your kind words.

Your idea about panspermia might very well be correct. For the latest update, see my essay from last week:

https://avi-loeb.medium.com/impact-survival-of-microbes-highlights-the-feasibility-of-panspermia-45b7c6bc78dd

It is possible that our Universe is embedded inside a black hole but we have no evidence for that. A black hole is characterized by a singularity at its venter (a place where the curvature of spacetime diverges), very different from the nearly uniform conditions in the observable volume of the Universe.

Regarding the Sun and other stars: we can explain their properties, including their internal structure — which is probed by sound waves, as a result of nuclear fusion being their source of energy. Once they consume their nuclear fuel, they die and we see their remnants in the forms of white dwarfs (for Sun-like stars), neutron stars and black holes (for stars more massive than 8 solar masses). A white hole was conjectured as the source of energy for quasars or gamma-ray bursts, but these sources of light are well explained by a model involving the infall of matter into a black hole.

Keep up with your creative work.

Avi”

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

1*LE3Xlzc3hNG5VDAGlDP8KQ.jpeg
(Image Credit: Chris Michel, National Academy of Sciences, 2023)

Avi Loeb is the head of the Galileo Project, founding director of Harvard University’s — Black Hole Initiative, director of the Institute for Theory and Computation at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, and the former chair of the astronomy department at Harvard University (2011–2020). He is a former member of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology and a former chair of the Board on Physics and Astronomy of the National Academies. He is the bestselling author of “Extraterrestrial: The First Sign of Intelligent Life Beyond Earth” and a co-author of the textbook “Life in the Cosmos”, both published in 2021. The paperback edition of his new book, titled “Interstellar”, was published in August 2024.

Professional website:

https://lweb.cfa.harvard.edu/~loeb/

Social media:

https://avi-loeb.medium.com/
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfessorAviLoeb

https://open.spotify.com/show/1zhndXkvSY2b8FdjspFpCd
https://x.com/ProfAviLoeb

stat?event=post.clientViewed&referrerSou

View the full article

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Topics

    • By DeepSkyExplorer
      In a recent talk with NewsNation, investigative journalist Ross Coulthart shared some alarming thoughts regarding the Pentagon's decision to launch defensive weapons into orbit. He noted that this move has drawn sharp criticism from foreign adversaries, raising questions about the implications for U.S. security and international relations. This discussion took place against the backdrop of ongoing developments surrounding government files on UAPs, which Coulthart has been closely following.
      What's particularly striking about Coulthart's comments is his assertion that these actions should make us 'really worried.' It seems he's pointing to a growing concern not just about the weapons themselves but about what this means for transparency and accountability in how the U.S. handles its space initiatives. The discussion hints at a potential shift in public perception regarding military operations in space, especially as more UAP-related documents are being released.
      Coulthart emphasizes the critical nature of this topic by linking it to the broader narrative of UAP disclosures. The U.S. government has been gradually opening up about its investigations into unidentified aerial phenomena, but the introduction of weapons into space complicates this narrative. It suggests a dual focus on both defense and secrecy, which could fuel further skepticism and concern among the public and international community.
      It's also worth noting that while the conversation centers around the military aspect of space, it ties back to longstanding questions about the government's stance on UAPs. Official records have been trickling out, but the relationship between military readiness and transparency remains a contentious issue. As Coulthart discusses this, it raises the question of how much the public should know about military capabilities and their implications for national and global security.
      One thing that remains unclear from this conversation is the extent of the U.S. military's capabilities in space and how they align with international law and agreements. There's a gap in details about the specific types of weapons being deployed and how they might be used against potential airborne threats, including UAPs. This lack of clarity could lead to misunderstandings or even escalate tensions with other nations.
      Given Coulthart's insights and the ongoing discussions around UAPs, it seems we need to critically assess how military developments in space could impact the broader narrative of transparency and accountability concerning unidentified aerial phenomena. As more information comes to light, the conversation around this issue will likely evolve, but for now, it feels like we’re at a crossroads in understanding the implications of such military actions.
      As we consider the broader implications, how do you think the deployment of defensive weapons in orbit could affect the future of UAP disclosure and military transparency?
    • By MysteryFiles
      The recent footage discussed in the YouTube video, 'What is this mysterious object captured over Greenland?', presents a striking example of unidentified aerial phenomena. The video features lights in the sky over Greenland that have sparked intrigue and speculation about their origin. In the discussion, Ross Coulthart interviews UFO researcher Martin Kleist, who explores this footage in detail, emphasizing his ongoing investigation into UAP reports in the region.
      Kleist's analysis is particularly interesting given the historical context of UAP sightings in southern Greenland. The area is not known for extensive UFO activity, making this footage stand out. It raises questions about whether this is an isolated incident or part of a broader pattern of sightings that have yet to be fully understood. The lights' behavior and appearance are central to the conversation, as they seemingly defy conventional explanations.
      The video also delves into the broader mystery surrounding unexplained sightings in Greenland, which adds a layer of complexity to the situation. What makes this case even more compelling is the suggestion that there might be more documented sightings that are not widely reported. As viewers, we are left to ponder what else might be occurring in the skies above regions that don't often receive attention.
      While the video does not make definitive claims about the nature of the lights, it does encourage viewers to consider various hypotheses. This open-ended approach is beneficial, as it invites a range of perspectives while maintaining a healthy skepticism towards sensational conclusions. As always, the challenge is determining whether these phenomena can be attributed to natural events, human activity, or something else entirely.
      The absence of concrete data on the objects captured in the video leaves room for speculation, but it also highlights the limits of our current understanding. The phenomenon of UAPs remains shrouded in uncertainty, and this case exemplifies that ambiguity. Without additional evidence or corroboration, it’s difficult to draw any firm conclusions.
      As we discuss this footage, one question that stands out is: What might this mean for our understanding of UAPs in lesser-known regions like Greenland? Are there patterns in these sightings that could suggest a more extensive phenomenon at play? Or are they simply isolated events that will remain unexplained? This footage might not provide all the answers, but it certainly opens the door for deeper inquiry into the mysterious activities above our planet.
    • By DisclosureWatch
      The recent release of over 400 declassified UFO incidents by the Pentagon highlights a significant increase in documented encounters. This collection, made public as part of ongoing transparency efforts, raises questions about the nature of these incidents and the government's approach to UAP investigations.
      Among the notable aspects of this release is the acknowledgment that many of these sightings remain unresolved. The files include reports from military personnel and radar operators detailing encounters that often lack clear explanations. This raises the question: what criteria does the Pentagon use to classify these incidents as unexplained?
      The AARO (All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office) has been at the forefront of these disclosures, emphasizing the importance of understanding UAP for national security. However, despite the wealth of information, many remain skeptical about the thoroughness of the investigations. Are these files merely a glimpse into deeper issues, or is the government still holding back vital information?
      Additionally, the lack of consistent terminology and classification in these reports complicates efforts to analyze the data comprehensively. For instance, different branches of the military may use varying definitions for what constitutes a UAP, leading to inconsistencies in reporting and investigation. How can we trust the findings if there's no standardization across agencies?
      Viewer reactions to the NBC News coverage of this release indicate a mix of intrigue and skepticism. Some viewers express a desire for more information about the nature of these incidents, while others question whether the release is merely a public relations effort. This discourse reflects a broader concern about transparency and accountability in UAP investigations.
      As the conversation continues, one has to wonder: what further steps should be taken to ensure comprehensive investigations into these UAP incidents? Is it possible that there’s more to uncover that the public is still unaware of?
    • By UAPResearcher
      Sandra Bullock recently shared an intriguing account of witnessing five lights merging and then vanishing in the sky over St. Martin. In a podcast appearance, she expressed how this experience left her feeling vindicated, especially with the recent release of similar sightings reported by military pilots. This revelation raises questions about the credibility of such sightings and how they relate to official reports.
      Bullock's sighting is particularly notable not just because of her celebrity status, but also because it aligns with a growing number of reports from credible witnesses, including pilots and military personnel. Ross Coulthart's reaction to Bullock's account highlights how public acknowledgment from well-known figures can shift the conversation around UFOs and UAPs, potentially leading to greater acceptance of these phenomena. The merging lights she described could suggest a range of explanations, from celestial events to classified military exercises.
      The government has increasingly acknowledged the existence of UAPs, and the release of pilot accounts has fueled public curiosity. However, the details of Bullock's sighting remain vague, and without more concrete evidence, it’s challenging to categorize it within the broader narrative of UAP encounters. Celebrities sharing their experiences can help normalize discussions around such sightings, but it also raises the question of whether subjective accounts can hold the same weight as documented military encounters.
      In assessing the validity of Bullock's sighting, it’s essential to consider the context of her experience. While eyewitness accounts can be compelling, they are often influenced by perception and interpretation. The lights Bullock witnessed could be misidentified aircraft, drones, or other atmospheric phenomena. This raises an important conversation about how personal experiences are evaluated in the wider scope of UAP research.
      As the government continues to investigate UAP sightings and releases more data, the public's interest in individual accounts will likely persist. Bullock's account is just one of many that could contribute to a larger understanding of UAPs. However, balancing anecdotal evidence with scientific scrutiny remains crucial. As more people come forward with their experiences, the challenge will be to differentiate between genuine UAP encounters and explanations that lie within the realm of ordinary occurrences.
      Given the complexities surrounding UAP discussions, it’s worth considering how celebrity endorsements impact public perception. Does Bullock's account carry more weight due to her fame, or does it potentially dilute the seriousness of UAP investigations? How do we balance personal accounts with the need for empirical evidence?
    • By CosmicSignals
      Just came across the latest government report on unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP) released by the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO) and, honestly, I find myself both intrigued and skeptical about some of its findings. The document outlines several military encounters with UAP, yet it seems to lack substantial details regarding their origins or the technology involved. It's frustrating to see a continuation of vague descriptions without definitive conclusions.
      The report, while acknowledging the reality of these phenomena, does not appear to provide the clarity many of us have been hoping for regarding their nature. There's mention of some UAP being potentially linked to foreign technologies, yet the lack of concrete evidence leads me to wonder: are we simply looking at advanced military drones or something entirely different? This ambiguity makes it hard to gauge the true significance of these encounters.
      Moreover, the report touches on whistleblower claims, highlighting the ongoing struggle for transparency within government circles. While it's exciting to think that insiders are stepping forward with information, it also raises the question: how much of what is disclosed is truly reflective of the reality, as opposed to speculation or misinterpretation? The potential for biases in reporting is a concern that cannot be overlooked.
      Interestingly, the document reinforces a call for further investigation into UAP incidents, which might lead us closer to understanding their implications for extraterrestrial life. If some of these phenomena are indeed originating from non-human intelligence, it could revolutionize our understanding of life beyond Earth. However, should we treat each encounter with skepticism until more concrete evidence is presented? It feels like we are in a liminal space where the potential for discovery is exciting, but the reality is still shrouded in uncertainty.
      What do you all think about the implications of these government reports? Are we edging closer to a breakthrough in identifying extraterrestrial technology, or are we merely witnessing the unveiling of more advanced human-made crafts? I’d love to hear your thoughts and interpretations based on the findings of this latest AARO report. You can check it out for yourself at [war.gov/UFO](https://www.war.gov/UFO/search/uap/).
×
×
  • Create New...