Don't forget...I am not a Young-Earth creationist.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
“Star older than universe” —What?
- Thread starter Hockeycowboy
- Start date
Audie
Veteran Member
So just change it to "any possible date for the flood".
This is a maybe . . . but even the possibility. I may post more, because I read where it is possible that his star may be close to the age of our universe. The issue of the age of Dark Matter being older than the universe is possible, but inconclusive..
Strange 'Methuselah' Star Looks Older Than the Universe
The oldest known star appears to be older than the universe itself, but a new study is helping to clear up this seeming paradox.
Previous research had estimated that the Milky Way galaxy's so-called "Methuselah star" is up to 16 billion years old. That's a problem, since most researchers agree that the Big Bang that created the universe occurred about 13.8 billion years ago.
Now a team of astronomers has derived a new, less nonsensical age for the Methuselah star, incorporating information about its distance, brightness, composition and structure.
"Put all of those ingredients together, and you get an age of 14.5 billion years, with a residual uncertainty that makes the star's age compatible with the age of the universe," study lead author Howard Bond, of Pennsylvania State University and the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore, said in a statement.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
The wikipedia entry doesn't seem to make much fuzz over it
HD 140283 - Wikipedia
Also note that the measurement of the age of the star has an error margin of ~0.8 billion years.
So it's not like it's "definatly" older then the universe. There is an overlap in the error margin, which can put it in a realistic timeframe of a second generation star within he context of the age of the univesre as measured by the Planck Satelite - which itself also has an error margin of several 100 million years.
So I'm thinking that this article is overdoing it a bit.
Audie
Veteran Member
Kinda like creointerpretation, that way.
TagliatelliMonster
Veteran Member
Yeah, older than 6,000 years. Science is a complete BS.
There is no star in the universe other than Priyanka Chopra, the former Indian Miss Universe.
