4 ms·
Whoa, that's crazy precise. They got it down to the tens of thousands? If so, seems like they should write "13.700 billion" for the first part. I'm a little su
by lkbm 6y ago
Whoa, that's crazy precise. They got it down to the tens of thousands?
If so, seems like they should write "13.700 billion" for the first part. I'm a little suspicious of this number as-is.
Looking for a source for those numbers, I found this[0]:
> While previous estimates were 13.7 billion years old, give or take 130,000 years, new predictions hone in with more precision- at around 13.77 billion years, plus or minus 40 million years.
Which is much less precise and feels a lot more believable.
[0] https://www.labroots.com/trending/space/18295/light-bang-reveals-age-universe https://www.labroots.com/trending/space/18295/light-bang-rev...
- bhk 6y agoSo NASA said "plus or minus 130,000 years" when they were actually off by about 70 million years?
- johncolanduoni 6y agoThat’s a misprint, the WMAP measurement was plus or minus 130 million years.