On 17 December 2020, it was proposed that this article be moved from Timeline of epochs in cosmology to Timeline of the early universe. The result of the discussion was moved. |
This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
−13 — – −12 — – −11 — – −10 — – −9 — – −8 — – −7 — – −6 — – −5 — – −4 — – −3 — – −2 — – −1 — – 0 — |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
You have an error in the acceleration time. That acceleration started 6.2 billion years ago, that is, 7.6 billion years after the Big Bang. [Note: Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.215.80.188 ( talk) 12:32, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
Copied from " User talk:I9Q79oL78KiL0QTFHgyc#HELP: Clarify Time Expanding Universe Accelerated?":
HELP: Clarify Time Expanding Universe Accelerated?
Hello Josh:
IF POSSIBLE => may need help to clarify the best known Time the expanding universe began accelerating - this refers to several Wikipedia pages including " Accelerating expansion of the universe", " Timeline of the formation of the Universe" and " Talk:Timeline of the formation of the Universe#Error in Acceleration time?" - Times presented on these pages (and related ones) seem to vary and include "7.8 billion years old"/astrophysicist ESiegel [1]; "10 Gyr" (z ~ 0.4)/astronomer JAFrieman [2]; "9.4 Gyr" (determined from z = 0.4 per Fermilab calculator) [3]; perhaps other values as well - any help to clarify the Time the expanding universe began accelerating would be appreciated - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 12:44, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Done - corrected timing of " Accelerating universe" on the " Timeline of the formation of the Universe" article in the " Acceleration section" - to "7.8 billion years (6.0 Gya)" [ie, universe was 7.8 billion years old; 6.0 billion years ago from the present time] - should now be ok - please discuss if otherwise of course - in any regards - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 17:04, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
References
Is the {{Nature timeline}} (the new graphic next to The first second) really appropriate? In this article, time is view more logarithmically and extends long past the present. The graphic presents time linearly, backwards from present, which doesn't seem directly comparable to the text in question. Tarl.Neustaedter ( talk) 22:56, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
This page has two problems:
-- dab (𒁳) 20:14, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:CMB Timeline300 no WMAP.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on October 26, 2016. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2016-10-26. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich ( talk) 13:18, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
The diagram at the beginning (today's picture of the day) says that "Big Bang Expansion" is 13.7 billion years. Wouldn't this just be the age of the universe, which, per information elsewhere in the article, would be about 13.8 billion years? John M Baker ( talk) 02:01, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
I'm confused why it matters that the early universe was of the right temperature for liquid water at some point. There wasn't enough oxygen for water to exist, nor enough silicon or other heavy elements to form rocks, nor enough carbon or nitrogen for any CNOH-water life to evolve. It isn't made clear why a habitable temperature would matter, or make that span of time Habitable. Today when we find gas giants in the habitable zones of their stars, we don't call them habitable because they don't have rocky surfaces and are mostly made of hydrogen -- just like the early universe. 2601:441:4102:9010:6C02:87A4:248A:9E70 ( talk) 20:50, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
13.733 billion years (66 Mya): first mammals. - Is this line corect. I thought that it was 160 million years ago -- Daduxing ( talk) 07:21, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
It seems that the age of many stars mentioned in the timeline is wrong by orders of magnitude. Massive stars - like Mu Cephei, Beta Orionis, etc. - cannot be up to 10 GYr old. -- Geheimrat Viper ( talk • contribs) 22:14, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
This article claims the Dark-Energy Dominated Era began at 7.8 Gy of cosmic time, without a citation. Elsewhere on the Wiki, the time is given as 9.8 Gy cosmic time, with a citation from 2006. I'm correcting this article by moving the Acceleration sub-headline to 9.8 Gy time. Until a source for the 7.8 Gy figure can be found that is more recent than 2006. 2601:441:467F:E7D2:D041:8BC2:333D:F4B0 ( talk) 04:03, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Given that the article of events in the future is called "timeline of the far future", wouldnt it make more sense for this article to be called "timeline of the past"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.227.192.150 ( talk) 21:41, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Megan B.... It’s all coming to me till the end of time 14:10, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Timeline of epochs in cosmology →
Timeline of the early universe – I'm not sure if this is the best title for this article, but I definitely need it needs to change. If you have any ideas on what it should be, then please let me know.
Interstellarity (
talk)
00:44, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Should we remove this? It's probabbly an error in conversion of scientific notation. Also Capella is 590–650 Million years old and is listed here as 8.08-8.58 billion years (5.718-5.218 Gya) Celestialobjects ( talk) 03:30, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
I stumbled on this page completely by chance, but I love it. What I kept thinking, though, was "how big was the universe when this or that thing was happening?" Could this be added, or would it mess up the structure of the article, or is it just impossible given current knowledge? This isn't my area of expertise, so I'm reluctant to add anything myself, but if another editor could make suitable changes that would be much appreciated. Thanks in advance. RomanSpa ( talk) 18:38, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
While yes, I know the current agreed-upon answer is 13.8 Billion yrs, but the JWST took pics of really young galaxies, that were basically fully formed really close to the big bang. Should we try changing the big bang time to 26.7 billion? or do we not have enough evidence for it? I guess you would need to recalculate the rest of the events to correspond with it Periodicpro18 ( talk) 19:44, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
On 17 December 2020, it was proposed that this article be moved from Timeline of epochs in cosmology to Timeline of the early universe. The result of the discussion was moved. |
This
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
−13 — – −12 — – −11 — – −10 — – −9 — – −8 — – −7 — – −6 — – −5 — – −4 — – −3 — – −2 — – −1 — – 0 — |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
You have an error in the acceleration time. That acceleration started 6.2 billion years ago, that is, 7.6 billion years after the Big Bang. [Note: Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.215.80.188 ( talk) 12:32, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
Copied from " User talk:I9Q79oL78KiL0QTFHgyc#HELP: Clarify Time Expanding Universe Accelerated?":
HELP: Clarify Time Expanding Universe Accelerated?
Hello Josh:
IF POSSIBLE => may need help to clarify the best known Time the expanding universe began accelerating - this refers to several Wikipedia pages including " Accelerating expansion of the universe", " Timeline of the formation of the Universe" and " Talk:Timeline of the formation of the Universe#Error in Acceleration time?" - Times presented on these pages (and related ones) seem to vary and include "7.8 billion years old"/astrophysicist ESiegel [1]; "10 Gyr" (z ~ 0.4)/astronomer JAFrieman [2]; "9.4 Gyr" (determined from z = 0.4 per Fermilab calculator) [3]; perhaps other values as well - any help to clarify the Time the expanding universe began accelerating would be appreciated - in any case - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 12:44, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Done - corrected timing of " Accelerating universe" on the " Timeline of the formation of the Universe" article in the " Acceleration section" - to "7.8 billion years (6.0 Gya)" [ie, universe was 7.8 billion years old; 6.0 billion years ago from the present time] - should now be ok - please discuss if otherwise of course - in any regards - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan ( talk) 17:04, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
References
Is the {{Nature timeline}} (the new graphic next to The first second) really appropriate? In this article, time is view more logarithmically and extends long past the present. The graphic presents time linearly, backwards from present, which doesn't seem directly comparable to the text in question. Tarl.Neustaedter ( talk) 22:56, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
This page has two problems:
-- dab (𒁳) 20:14, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:CMB Timeline300 no WMAP.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on October 26, 2016. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2016-10-26. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich ( talk) 13:18, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
The diagram at the beginning (today's picture of the day) says that "Big Bang Expansion" is 13.7 billion years. Wouldn't this just be the age of the universe, which, per information elsewhere in the article, would be about 13.8 billion years? John M Baker ( talk) 02:01, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
I'm confused why it matters that the early universe was of the right temperature for liquid water at some point. There wasn't enough oxygen for water to exist, nor enough silicon or other heavy elements to form rocks, nor enough carbon or nitrogen for any CNOH-water life to evolve. It isn't made clear why a habitable temperature would matter, or make that span of time Habitable. Today when we find gas giants in the habitable zones of their stars, we don't call them habitable because they don't have rocky surfaces and are mostly made of hydrogen -- just like the early universe. 2601:441:4102:9010:6C02:87A4:248A:9E70 ( talk) 20:50, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
13.733 billion years (66 Mya): first mammals. - Is this line corect. I thought that it was 160 million years ago -- Daduxing ( talk) 07:21, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
It seems that the age of many stars mentioned in the timeline is wrong by orders of magnitude. Massive stars - like Mu Cephei, Beta Orionis, etc. - cannot be up to 10 GYr old. -- Geheimrat Viper ( talk • contribs) 22:14, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
This article claims the Dark-Energy Dominated Era began at 7.8 Gy of cosmic time, without a citation. Elsewhere on the Wiki, the time is given as 9.8 Gy cosmic time, with a citation from 2006. I'm correcting this article by moving the Acceleration sub-headline to 9.8 Gy time. Until a source for the 7.8 Gy figure can be found that is more recent than 2006. 2601:441:467F:E7D2:D041:8BC2:333D:F4B0 ( talk) 04:03, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Given that the article of events in the future is called "timeline of the far future", wouldnt it make more sense for this article to be called "timeline of the past"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.227.192.150 ( talk) 21:41, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Megan B.... It’s all coming to me till the end of time 14:10, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Timeline of epochs in cosmology →
Timeline of the early universe – I'm not sure if this is the best title for this article, but I definitely need it needs to change. If you have any ideas on what it should be, then please let me know.
Interstellarity (
talk)
00:44, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Should we remove this? It's probabbly an error in conversion of scientific notation. Also Capella is 590–650 Million years old and is listed here as 8.08-8.58 billion years (5.718-5.218 Gya) Celestialobjects ( talk) 03:30, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
I stumbled on this page completely by chance, but I love it. What I kept thinking, though, was "how big was the universe when this or that thing was happening?" Could this be added, or would it mess up the structure of the article, or is it just impossible given current knowledge? This isn't my area of expertise, so I'm reluctant to add anything myself, but if another editor could make suitable changes that would be much appreciated. Thanks in advance. RomanSpa ( talk) 18:38, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
While yes, I know the current agreed-upon answer is 13.8 Billion yrs, but the JWST took pics of really young galaxies, that were basically fully formed really close to the big bang. Should we try changing the big bang time to 26.7 billion? or do we not have enough evidence for it? I guess you would need to recalculate the rest of the events to correspond with it Periodicpro18 ( talk) 19:44, 26 July 2023 (UTC)