Sun Twice As Old As The Universe, Maybe?

Here's the calculation.

I did it by hand to derive it, but the wiki article has a close enough estimate.

"Since fusing hydrogen into helium releases around 0.7% of the fused mass as energy,[48] the Sun releases energy at the mass-energy conversion rate of 4.26 million metric tons per second, 384.6 yotta watts (3.846×1026 W)."

I did a more precise calculation using the average distance to the earth as r and finding area of a sphere, and multiply by solar constant.



If you divide the Sun's mass by the rate of mass loss, or more correctly, rate of mass converted from Hydrogen to Helium, you get:

103,446,165,101 years for the maximum length of the P-P chain in the sun's life cycle.

If you subtract the sun's existing hydrogen portion of 0.7346 from 1, to get the time it took to get to it's present condition, and multiply the above number, you get:

103,446,165,101 years lifetime * (1-0.7346 = 27,454,612,217.8 years past.



It turns out this is exactly twice the alleged radius of the observable universe in light years.

27, 454,612,217.8 yr / 2 = 13,727,306,108.9 yr

Alleged age of the universe, as per wiki:

13.75 plus or minus 0.17 billion years.

The remainder of the difference can be explained by margins of error in instrumentation plus the solar wind, other ejecta and comet collisions the Sun has had in it's lifetime, etc, which would have slightly modified it's hydrogen composition.

In fact, this "age" falls within the upper and lower limits of the margin of error in the universe's age.

Therefore, the Sun is exactly twice as old as the Universe!

or ELSE it is somehow releasing roughly half of it's energy in a form we have not yet been able to detect, and which somehow doesn't interact with our physical realm, thus the "divide by two equals the universe's age".

It could be some combination of neutrinos or gravitational waves.


In any case, this suggests the Sun and the Universe were probably created simultaneously, or so close to it that we can't tell the difference.


Occam's razor, right?

Sun's "missing hydrogen" equals twice the age of the universe, suggesting half the energy escapes in a "weakly interacting" form which we do not observe., in order to get a logical age limit with the sun being exactly the same age as the universe.


vs

"main sequence stars are all second or third generations stars which have formed from the heavy metal ejected remains of other stars in a complex combination of explosions and reformations collapsing "old" hydrogen nebulae which we are to believe "somehow" survived the entire lifetime of first generation stars without collapsing on their own,...and we've just never seen a verifiably second generation star being formed....for some reason..."



Essentially, this is mathematical proof that the Sun and Universe were created at virtually the exact same moment in time, if we allow for the excess energy to be represented as neutrinos and other weak interacting particles.


this overturns the mainstream theory of star formation, since the Sun is exactly as old as the universe itself.

This post has been edited by Quantum_Conundrum on Feb 24 2012, 08:21 PM

No, it suggest you've fucked up.

Try the math yourself and see.

Easy enough, really.

You don't think getting an "age" exactly equal to the diameter of the universe in light years is a coincidence do you?


If that's a coincidence caused by a mistake, then it's a 1/27 billion chance of happening...

You are confusing the age of the universe with its size. We don't know its true size. We only know the diameter of the observable universe, which is 93 billion light-years, and its age, which is 13.75 billion years. There's also a lot of assumptions made without providing the work you did to get them.

Oh look, calculator masturbator is back.

Not so much "coincidence" ..... a tad more;- STFU you delusional ignoramus.

Any retard (you're clear proof of that) can generate this type of profound drivel.

What next?

"If you divide Avogadro's number 6.02 x 10^23 by the size of my willy in femtometers, it equals the exact number of brain-cells I've lost through repeated head bludgeoning of the sledge-hammer variety".

This post has been edited by Lady Elizabeth on Feb 25 2012, 01:30 AM

On a more serious note why does Lady Elizabeth have a willy measured in femtometers?

Because she's a lady, duh!

What is a "willy" then if Lady E is a lady? In my neck of the woods a willy is a slang term for a penis which implies maleness not femaleness.

That explains it! ....... RoBillyBob1.

Idiot.

You're looking in the wrong thread for that.

http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtop...ndpost&p=516942

Speaking about yourself in the third person is a definite sign of mental illness.

But we already knew that.

I personally would be in favor of tracking down every post you've ever made here and deleting them. It's simply taking out the garbage.

interesting metaphor

is that poetry ? Looks like poetry .

The OP didn't include enough information to figure out what they mean, but they also seem to be applying linear relationships to things that are latently exponential.