+ Post New Thread
Results 1 to 15 of 15
General Chat Thread, Oldest Known Star In The Universe Discovered - Science - News - The Independent in General; ...
  1. #1

    DaveP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Can't talk now: The mother-ship is calling!
    Posts
    8,986
    Thank Post
    352
    Thanked 1,300 Times in 890 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4
    Rep Power
    1131

    Oldest Known Star In The Universe Discovered - Science - News - The Independent

    Link: Oldest known star in the Universe discovered - Science - News - The Independent

    ...The team from Australian National University (ANU) say that the star, located around 6,000 light years away from Earth, is roughly 13.6 billion years old. This means it was formed just a few million years after the Big Bang, thought to have occurred some 13.8 billion years ago.

    The discovery of the star, which is located within our own Galaxy, was described by lead researcher Dr Stefan Keller as a “one in a 60 million chance.”...

  2. Thanks to DaveP from:

    Greenbeast (11th February 2014)

  3. #2


    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    6,647
    Thank Post
    229
    Thanked 865 Times in 743 Posts
    Rep Power
    297
    so not bruce forsyth then?

  4. 4 Thanks to sted:

    ButterflyMoon (11th February 2014), Ephelyon (11th February 2014), Greenbeast (11th February 2014), hardtailstar (11th February 2014)

  5. #3

    sonofsanta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Lincolnshire, UK
    Posts
    5,003
    Thank Post
    874
    Thanked 1,458 Times in 1,002 Posts
    Blog Entries
    47
    Rep Power
    644
    Right, so, my understanding of astrophysics barely even qualifies as amateur. Enthusiastic might be the best word.

    But... I'm surprised a star that old is that close. If it was 13.6 billion years old and 13 billion light years away, you'd be seeing an early star. Lovely. But that old and only 6,000 light years away? It's been alive for 13.6 billion years, almost the lifespan of the Universe? I didn't think stars could survive so long and all the first generation stars had long since exploded.

    Am I being really thick or is this something our models don't predict?

  6. #4


    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    6,647
    Thank Post
    229
    Thanked 865 Times in 743 Posts
    Rep Power
    297
    Quote Originally Posted by sonofsanta View Post
    Right, so, my understanding of astrophysics barely even qualifies as amateur. Enthusiastic might be the best word.

    But... I'm surprised a star that old is that close. If it was 13.6 billion years old and 13 billion light years away, you'd be seeing an early star. Lovely. But that old and only 6,000 light years away? It's been alive for 13.6 billion years, almost the lifespan of the Universe? I didn't think stars could survive so long and all the first generation stars had long since exploded.

    Am I being really thick or is this something our models don't predict?
    actually a fair point my GUESS is that while most 1st generation stars were huge and shortlived this one was created in a less dense area so was smaller colder and will burn for longer

  7. #5

    DaveP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Can't talk now: The mother-ship is calling!
    Posts
    8,986
    Thank Post
    352
    Thanked 1,300 Times in 890 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4
    Rep Power
    1131
    Quote Originally Posted by sonofsanta View Post
    ... I'm surprised a star that old is that close...
    I was surprised by this when I read it too. But from this page:

    Link: Oldest Star Found

    ...First generation stars are predominantly tens or hundreds of times more massive than the Sun. They live fast, die young and have not survived to the present day. The second generation star we have discovered is, on the other hand, a little smaller than the Sun providing it with an enormous lifespan of over 13 billion years...
    The other thing to consider is that currently many [most?] astronomers accept The Big Bang as the method of creating The Universe: Space and time came into existence in that event and began to expand from there. Objects that are shown to be very distant are know to be very old as it has taken a long time for the light from that object to reach us. This does not mean that very old objects cannot exist closer to us.

    Not sure I have explained this very clearly [Have to go now: Been called to a classroom]

    HTH.

  8. Thanks to DaveP from:

    sonofsanta (11th February 2014)

  9. #6

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    639
    Thank Post
    282
    Thanked 52 Times in 44 Posts
    Rep Power
    40
    well noticed SOS, I did think it sound a ridiculously small distance away but couldn't put my finger on why that bothered me.

  10. #7

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    639
    Thank Post
    282
    Thanked 52 Times in 44 Posts
    Rep Power
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveP View Post
    I was surprised by this when I read it too. But from this page:

    Link: Oldest Star Found



    The other thing to consider is that currently many [most?] astronomers accept The Big Bang as the method of creating The Universe: Space and time came into existence in that event and began to expand from there. Objects that are shown to be very distant are know to be very old as it has taken a long time for the light from that object to reach us. This does not mean that very old objects cannot exist closer to us.

    Not sure I have explained this very clearly [Have to go now: Been called to a classroom]

    HTH.
    Yes, that does make sense

  11. #8

    sonofsanta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Lincolnshire, UK
    Posts
    5,003
    Thank Post
    874
    Thanked 1,458 Times in 1,002 Posts
    Blog Entries
    47
    Rep Power
    644
    Quote Originally Posted by DaveP View Post
    I was surprised by this when I read it too. But from this page:

    Link: Oldest Star Found



    The other thing to consider is that currently many [most?] astronomers accept The Big Bang as the method of creating The Universe: Space and time came into existence in that event and began to expand from there. Objects that are shown to be very distant are know to be very old as it has taken a long time for the light from that object to reach us. This does not mean that very old objects cannot exist closer to us.

    Not sure I have explained this very clearly [Have to go now: Been called to a classroom]

    HTH.
    Works for me so it isn't a first generation star - because they are all dead - just a really long lived second generation star.

    I knew the relation between far-away-so-really-old-and-probably-not-there-now-not-that-now-has-any-meaning-in-a-relativistic-Universe, but I didn't realise stars were expected to have such long life spans, which was why the proximity surprised me. These reports are more normally "we've seen a star formed not long after the Big Bang, because we saw it really bloody far away" so this is something out of the ordinary in that regard.

  12. #9

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    5,713
    Thank Post
    858
    Thanked 904 Times in 749 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    330
    Here's El Reg's version of the story (I read yesterday): SkyMapper turns up oldest star ever found

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveP View Post
    The other thing to consider is that currently many [most?] astronomers accept The Big Bang as the method of creating The Universe: Space and time came into existence in that event and began to expand from there.
    Think it was a TV program I tried watching on the subject once, most likely Horizon, they tried to explain that the Big Bang didn't happen in one location at specific point in space-time. Rather it happened everywhere all at the same time?!?

    Needless to say my head exploded and my neck's experienced a pleasent breeze ever since (thank's to Weird Al for the imagery).

  13. #10

    sonofsanta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Lincolnshire, UK
    Posts
    5,003
    Thank Post
    874
    Thanked 1,458 Times in 1,002 Posts
    Blog Entries
    47
    Rep Power
    644
    Quote Originally Posted by tmcd35 View Post
    Think it was a TV program I tried watching on the subject once, most likely Horizon, they tried to explain that the Big Bang didn't happen in one location at specific point in space-time. Rather it happened everywhere all at the same time?!?

    Needless to say my head exploded and my neck's experienced a pleasent breeze ever since (thank's to Weird Al for the imagery).
    Matter can't be destroyed - only converted to energy - so everything that ever existed and will ever exist was there at the beginning of the Universe.

    The Universe isn't growing, it's inflating (that's the term they use, IIRC) - the usual analogy is that all the points on the surface of a balloon exist before you blow it up, but when it's filled with air they're just further apart. The balloon itself doesn't consist of any extra matter (ignoring the air), that matter just goes further.

  14. #11

    DaveP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Can't talk now: The mother-ship is calling!
    Posts
    8,986
    Thank Post
    352
    Thanked 1,300 Times in 890 Posts
    Blog Entries
    4
    Rep Power
    1131
    Quote Originally Posted by tmcd35 View Post
    ...they tried to explain that the Big Bang didn't happen in one location at specific point in space-time. Rather it happened everywhere all at the same time?!?...
    That's it! And space-time has been 'expanding' ever since.

  15. #12

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    639
    Thank Post
    282
    Thanked 52 Times in 44 Posts
    Rep Power
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by tmcd35 View Post
    Here's El Reg's version of the story (I read yesterday): SkyMapper turns up oldest star ever found



    Think it was a TV program I tried watching on the subject once, most likely Horizon, they tried to explain that the Big Bang didn't happen in one location at specific point in space-time. Rather it happened everywhere all at the same time?!?

    Needless to say my head exploded and my neck's experienced a pleasent breeze ever since (thank's to Weird Al for the imagery).
    and of course until the big bang happened there was no 'where' and 'when'

  16. #13
    themightymrp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Leeds, West Yorkshire
    Posts
    1,220
    Thank Post
    216
    Thanked 226 Times in 195 Posts
    Rep Power
    73
    To quote a Terry Pratchett line - "In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded."


    EDIT - got it wrong, WHICH exploded is correct
    Last edited by themightymrp; 11th February 2014 at 12:16 PM.

  17. Thanks to themightymrp from:

    Greenbeast (11th February 2014)

  18. #14

    sonofsanta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Lincolnshire, UK
    Posts
    5,003
    Thank Post
    874
    Thanked 1,458 Times in 1,002 Posts
    Blog Entries
    47
    Rep Power
    644
    Quote Originally Posted by themightymrp View Post
    To quote a Terry Pratchett line - "In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded."

    EDIT - got it wrong, WHICH exploded is correct
    It seems only right to follow that with the relevant Douglas Adams quote as well
    Oldest Known Star In The Universe Discovered - Science - News - The Independent-1en12pc.jpg

  19. Thanks to sonofsanta from:

    themightymrp (11th February 2014)

  20. #15
    ButterflyMoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Inside my own head
    Posts
    721
    Thank Post
    1,009
    Thanked 178 Times in 157 Posts
    Rep Power
    62
    @sted
    so not bruce forsyth then?
    this actually made me splatter tea all over the keyboard!!

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 18th November 2012, 11:17 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 26th April 2011, 06:14 PM
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 26th June 2008, 10:48 AM
  4. Information Systems Manager @ The University of Northampton
    By wagnerk in forum Educational IT Jobs
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 29th May 2008, 10:09 PM
  5. Did Smoothwall Tom star in "The Colour of Magic"? =)
    By ZeroHour in forum General Chat
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 28th March 2008, 07:18 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •