Q&A: Age of the Universe
Age of the Universe
Question
I saw that you argue that one of the ways to challenge the estimate of the age of the universe is the fact that the time span during which we have studied the subject is significantly smaller than the period for which the universe is claimed to have existed, so in effect this is an extrapolation from a very small interval to a vast and distant range.
But, from what I understand, the estimates regarding the age of the universe are confirmed by experiments and predictions. Which means that the strength of the theory is not only a result of estimates, but it has also been put to the test. In other words, the length of time the universe has existed relative to the theory is less relevant in terms of its reliability, and the challenges to it are the same challenges that exist for any scientific theory.
Answer
In principle, confirmations like these also do not settle the matter. The question is whether all the processes occur at a different rate altogether (the rate at which time flows. For example, according to general relativity, mass density determines the rate at which time flows, and the density certainly decreases over time), and then the confirmation would not mean much. In any case, as far as I know there is no really good fit between the different aspects, and certain adjustments are made rather forcibly.
But as I have written and said more than once, this is an uninteresting and unimportant question beyond the scientific-philosophical aspect.