The possibility of evidence of an earlier universe

[shunyadragon]

There have been possible evidence of an earlier universe, but it was not confirmed. But this evidence of an exploding Red Super Giant 2 billion years after the beginning of our universe is possibly may confirm the existence of an earlier universe, but yes, I believe it it's a maybe . . .

Source: https://scitechdaily.com/secrets-of-an-earlier-universe-revealed-by-red-supergiant-supernova/

Secrets of an Earlier Universe Revealed by Red-Supergiant Supernova

Detailed telescope images help scientists learn more about the Universe two billion years after the Big Bang.

An international research team has measured the size of a star dating back 2 billion years after the Big Bang, or more than 11 billion years ago. Detailed images show the exploding star cooling and could help scientists learn more about the stars and galaxies that existed in the early Universe.

Led by researchers at the University of Minnesota Twin Cities, the study was published recently in Nature, the world’s leading peer-reviewed, multidisciplinary science journal.

“This is the first detailed look at a supernova at a much earlier epoch of the Universe’s evolution,” said Patrick Kelly, a lead author of the paper and an associate professor in the University of Minnesota School of Physics and Astronomy. “It’s very exciting because we can learn in detail about an individual star when the Universe was less than a fifth of its current age, and begin to understand if the stars that existed many billions of years ago are different from the ones nearby.”

The red supergiant in question was about 500 times larger than the sun, and it’s located at redshift three, which is about 60 times farther away than any other supernova observed in this detail.

An international research team led by the University of Minnesota Twin Cities has measured the size of a star dating back more than 11 billion years ago using images that show the evolution of the star exploding and cooling. The above image shows the light from the supernova behind the galaxy cluster Abell 370. Credit: Wenlei Chen, NASA

Using data from the Hubble Space Telescope with follow-up spectroscopy using the University of Minnesota’s access to the Large Binocular Telescope, the researchers were able to identify multiple detailed images of the red supergiant because of a phenomenon called gravitational lensing, where mass, such as that in a galaxy, bends light. This magnifies the light emitted from the star.

“The gravitational lens acts as a natural magnifying glass and multiplies Hubble’s power by a factor of eight,” Kelly said. “Here, we see three images. Even though they can be seen at the same time, they show the supernova as it was at different ages separated by several days. We see the supernova rapidly cooling, which allows us to basically reconstruct what happened and study how the supernova cooled in its first few days with just one set of images. It enables us to see a rerun of a supernova.”

The researchers combined this discovery with another one of Kelly’s supernova discoveries from 2014 to estimate how many stars were exploding when the Universe was a small fraction of its current age. They found that there were likely many more supernovae than previously thought.

© Copyright Original Source

[TheLurch]

There's absolutely nothing in the body of that article that has anything to do with the headline, which seems to have just been completely made up. Did you actually read the whole thing before posting this?

[tabibito]

There's absolutely nothing in the body of that article that has anything to do with the headline, which seems to have just been completely made up. Did you actually read the whole thing before posting this?

"an earlier universe" appears to refer to "the universe as it was earlier," not "a universe that existed before this one."

[shunyadragon]

There's absolutely nothing in the body of that article that has anything to do with the headline, which seems to have just been completely made up. Did you actually read the whole thing before posting this?

Yes

[shunyadragon]

"an earlier universe" appears to refer to "the universe as it was earlier," not "a universe that existed before this one."

Appears to?!?!? Nothing in the article refers to "the universe as it was earlier." You appear to be putting something in quotes that is not in the article.

The existence of a supernova red giant that is older than the possible 2 billion age of the universe. I believe the possibility of a multiverse is if we find objects like the Red Giant that is older than our universe. In part, it depends on what we consider 'the universe.' Yes, at the time there may be more to our universe than the present observed expansion of the universe described as originating from a possible singularity.

[tabibito]

Appears to?!?!? Nothing in the article refers to "the universe as it was earlier." You appear to be putting something in quotes that is not in the article.

The existence of a supernova red giant that is older than the possible 2 billion age of the universe. I believe the possibility of a multiverse is if we find objects like the Red Giant that is older than our universe. In part, it depends on what we consider 'the universe.' Yes, at the time there may be more to our universe than the present observed expansion of the universe described as originating from a possible singularity.

the first line from the article you cited:
An international research team has measured the size of a star dating back 2 billion years after the Big Bang, or more than 11 billion years ago.

Where does this 2 billion year age for the universe come from?
AFAIK, this universe is estimated to be 13.7 billion years old.

[Sparko]

Appears to?!?!? Nothing in the article refers to "the universe as it was earlier." You appear to be putting something in quotes that is not in the article.

The existence of a supernova red giant that is older than the possible 2 billion age of the universe. I believe the possibility of a multiverse is if we find objects like the Red Giant that is older than our universe. In part, it depends on what we consider 'the universe.' Yes, at the time there may be more to our universe than the present observed expansion of the universe described as originating from a possible singularity.

Shuny, the universe is 14 Billion years old, not 2 Billion. The article is talking about an earlier period of the universe dating to 2 billion years AFTER THE BIG BANG.

An international research team has measured the size of a star dating back 2 billion years after the Big Bang, or more than 11 billion years ago.

[rogue06]

Appears to?!?!? Nothing in the article refers to "the universe as it was earlier." You appear to be putting something in quotes that is not in the article.

“This is the first detailed look at a supernova at a much earlier epoch of the Universe’s evolution,”

You appear to have misread the article.

It isn't talking about an earlier universe but the universe at a much earlier point in its history.

[TheLurch]

"an earlier universe" appears to refer to "the universe as it was earlier," not "a universe that existed before this one."

Ah, my misinterpretation then. Terrible phrasing, though.

[tabibito]

Ah, my misinterpretation then. Terrible phrasing, though.

It is.