2 ms·
We have also seen very old objects closer by. The Methuselah star is estimated to be 13.7 billion years, in fact by some estimates older than the universe (whi
by rich_sasha 5y ago
We have also seen very old objects closer by.
The Methuselah star is estimated to be 13.7 billion years, in fact by some estimates older than the universe (which is clearly somewhat problematic).
It is a mere 190 light years away.
- all2 5y agoSo the calculated age of the star is wrong (ie, our observations are correct and our underlying theories about how stars age is wrong), OR our observations are incorrect. The former is a far more interesting case, IMO.
- rich_sasha 5y agoOne thing that is unusual about the star relative to our regular experience is how little “metals” it contains (in astrophysics metals are any elements heavier than helium). Metals heavier than iron are only created in supernovae, lighter metals still only get created in stars. Either way, if it was created a few 1e8 years after Big Bang, there weren’t many of those going around. Now, most of our models for stellar evolution are calibrated to stars we see, which have plenty of metals in them. Whereas this one doesn’t so our models could be off.
- karmakaze 5y agoThis is a different sense of 'old' as in "What is its age?" That's a vague question unless there's no change. e.g. Ship of Theseus or stepping in the same river twice. The image (information) of Methuselah we see is 190 years old. Saying farthest vs oldest disambiguates. Unrelated observation: everything travels through spacetime at the speed of light. It's not a speed limit, it's the only speed. If you're not travelling through space then you're travelling through a purely time-line at c. Really makes one wonder how much time we casually waste.