Sat. Dec 7th, 2019

Host your Website

Read and learn

FatCow Web Hosting $1.00/mo* Trust your web hosting to the #1 web host provider, GoDaddy!

The Oldest Star in the Universe

1 min read

Hank tells the story of the mysterious star known as “Methuseleh,” and why scientists think that it is the oldest known star in the universe.

Like SciShow? Want to help support us, and also get things to put on your walls, cover your torso and hold your liquids?
Tardigrade Poster:
SciShow Mug:
SciShow Shirt:

Looking for SciShow elsewhere on the internet?

Watch Galaxies Collide:
Strange ‘Methuselah’ Star Looks Older Than the Universe:
Hubble Finds Birth Certificate of Oldest Known Star:

25 thoughts on “The Oldest Star in the Universe

  1. My question though is… how could they know how old the universe is? I mean, knowing the age of the universe means they must know what was BEFORE the universe existed. Do they? What's space even MADE of? They know the contens of space like all the minerals and atoms and neutrons and whatnot (Gods, I've always been bad with this stuff) that make up all the planets, galaxies and all the stuff that's floating around there. But space is… empty… in itself, right? Is it? When we on earth say there's an "empty space" between things, then there's still SOMETHING. But is it the same in space? Why's it completely black? Or do we just perceive it like that and in reality it's not? If not then what is it? Just a… void? Is there even something like a complete void?

    Sorry, I guess all my questions about space I always had just had to get out and now I feel like a 5 year old, great

  2. What if, now bear with me on this one, due to relative speed connected with time, that this Star may actually have an age that proceeds the age of the universe, just like the core of the Earth is actually younger than the surface. Same goes with the core of the sun. Speed has a weird way of messing with time.

  3. Wait, what if there exists a form of life that can bear extremely high temperatures and live on stars, a FEEDS ON METALS. This would ruin all our calculations which are based on the amount of metals.

  4. What does 'the universe started EXISTING even mean'? Wtf is existence, how does that even work, how does a Universe even work? What caused the big bang? What caused what caused the big bang? Most importantly, wtf even is life?

  5. Actually if the theory of expanding then contracting universe works, you get the picture of the contractiing mass going critical before the last stars get sucked in, then you could have out of place left over stars hanging out in oddball trajectories. This would also possibly explain the universal presence of indestructible bacteria being seeded into the new universe once the old stars blew up, blasted their planets into oblivion and scattered life across the universe.
    This is not the first time I have read about over aged out of place stars, this one may or may not be, but I bet there are others that are, and mainstream science does not want to hear anything that contradicts their view of the universe. Just saying.

  6. I would have preferred if this video was more about the star itself and less about the impossibly inaccurate age calculation. I feel like the useful information was drowned out.

  7. That star is part of an older universe. Its from a different "Big Bang" from the rest of the Big bangs that happened in past, in the present and in the future.

    Its like that our univerise is just a new State formed in the country called USA.

  8. How clever to have managed to get the estimated age of the star down from 16 billion years to 14.5 billion plus or minus 0.8 billion years. This puts the possible ages of the star from 13.7 billion years to 15.3 billion years with the most likely age being 14.5 billion years. So the conflict with the age of the universe is only partially resolved because the age of the star at the lower end of the range is highly improbable.

    Speaking as one who is totally convinced that the Big Bang theory is wrong and the age of the universe is much greater than 13.8 billion years I am expecting there to be more such observations of stars older than 13.8 billion years and would not be surprised to see observations of stars older than 20 billion years if anyone was prepared to publish their findings.

    I have been working on the formation of spiral galaxies and such processes take longer than 15 billion years to complete. The analysis uses Newtons laws of motion of dust clouds merging under gravitational attraction so it will be curiously apt if the use of Newton's theory causes the Big Bang theory to fail. With all the built up theory around the Big Bang hypothesis, it only takes one clear and unequivocal observation of an object older than 13.8 billion years to destroy the theory.


Comments are closed.

Copyright © All rights reserved. | Newsphere by AF themes.