Big Breaking! Universe is Now 27 Billion Years Old according Rajendra Gupta?

Spread the love

Have just come to know that our universe is not 13.8 billion but 27 billion years  according to Rajendra Gupta and look I am not saying this. Rather, it has been written in the articles of big astrophysics news agencies like Cosmos magazine, earth com and USA today.    


How we know about Universe


Now I know this must be very shocked because many principle of our astrophysics are based on the assumption that our universe recreated around 14 billion years ago. But James Webb space telescope has sent us some such data this time, which denies this number outright, and now the biggest thing is that such a big claim in front of the world is such an Indian scientist Rajendra Gupta who is working to deny that space science duties that have been going on for years.


So, after all, who is that Indian astrophysics? What is his logic behind making such a big claim, and can it be genuinely accepted based on the research done by them and the papers published that our universe is twice as old as that, as much as we consider it in today’s date.


Universe is Actually 27 Billion Years Old


That figures of 13.8 billion years that we have today has been calculated in basically two ways.


Universe Age According to Rajendra Gupta Method


The first is the Hubble constant, with the help of which we see at what rate a Galaxy is moving away from us and what its initial distance would have been from us and then prior to identify its age at the rate of its departure.


Now the second method obviously puts pressure on observing the redshift of galaxies, and the galaxies that are moving away from us at a greater distance and tend to be older.


The wavelength released by them also start to red shift due to the expansion of the universe, and by looking at its redness in the image of galaxy, we can find out how many years ago it originated from today, and in today’s date, at least how long will he be available to us, using the value of Hubble constant as well as the speed of light and expansion of the universe.


Now, when we had date of decades but not years, and universal principles of centuries were gathered, then we were able to come strictly on the figures which was approved only after the approval of many researchers, but this figure the first challenge was met in the year 2000.



We Know Universe 27 Billion Years from Star


When the oldest star in the universe, Methuselah’s age was discovered about 16 billion years.


Methuselah 16 Billion Years


Now it was being considered a universe breaking discovery, but since it was the only star presenting such a number, that’s why many people kept ignoring it considering it as a calculation fluke.


However the James Webb space telescope launched in 2021 which was built to easily, understand the universe but since its launch it has been giving researchers one headache after another.


JWST discovered Several Galaxies


Now there is a first few images, James Webb space telescope had discovered some such galaxies that originated around 300 to 400 million years after the meaning of the universe, i.e. the Big Bang.


Now this scenario is considered practically impossible because in that time period, the universe was so dense that galaxies with proper stars existence were not even possible.


Now in such a situation, how can galaxies of this kind be captured in images who is existence is impossible. Now due to their impracticality then are also called early impossible galaxies, but here comes the fun part.


Fun Part


In addition to these galaxies there are many other things in our universe that contradict this timeline. But if our model is so accurate then how are it making mistakes upon mistakes year after year, and will pointing it out in simple language. University of Ottawa’s adjunct professor Rajendra Gupta says that our mistakes are proof that we are not using the right principal and the right models to understand our universe.



Age Of Universe according Rajendra Gupta


Actually, according to them (Rajendra Gupta) it seems that the principal that the principles we are using are correct and based on that, we have give a figure, universe is much more complex than that, and citing this complexity Rajendra Gupta has tried to calculate the age of the universe with some different principles and methods after which he cane to the conclusion that our universe is not 13.8 billion but approximately double that 26.7 billion years old.


Now see here the difference of 1 and 2 billion years is understandable but almost doubling such a big figure demands a strong proof, and based on those proof as published in their papers research by Rajendra Gupta , we get a clear idea of their ideology.


Now Rajendra Gupta suggest that the biggest flaw in our physics is in the way we look at redshift. Now look according to them Redshift is created not only because the galaxies keep moving away from us due to visit their wavelength spreads, but according to them when the photon emitted from the light been emitted by a galaxy travel in the universe so due to travelling long distance and different matter coming in the way and while colliding with the particle it start losing energy many times, due to which it is not necessity that a galaxy is showing redshift to us because it is very far away from us.


Rather, it can also appear red  because while travelling to the observer (which is us), it collides with many things losing its energy.


Now this concept is not new but it was proposed in the world of physics in that year 1929 by a Swiss astronomers named Fritz Zwicky under the name “Tired Light Theory”.


Rajendra Gupta citing this theory, says that due to such circumstances, many times we see galaxies and billions of years old appearing so red that we consider them to be billions of year old or a near a big bang, whereas their appearance is only due to losing more energy than necessity.


Although,  this theory is so confusing that it is believed, then it is also possible that the light of many galaxies loses so much energy will reaching us that we cannot even see their true nature and you to search contrary flaws after proposing it in 1929 many scientists refrained from believing in it.


However, in his paper Rajendra Gupta also says that the values of the universe that we consider constants, now, for example, Hubble constant, constant of ‘C’ etc. They are not actually constant, but variables. Now in simple language, the value of these constants does not always remain the same in every time period and every environment, but their figures keeps changing with time, due to which our universe has been functioning differently in every time period and hear the interaction of particle and even light has been changing from time to time.


Now, to give a rough example let’s assume, if today the speed of light is 299,792,458 m/s, that is possible that 1 billion years ago from today, the speed of light might have been just 299,600,000 m/s. Now this is just example but from this, you must have understood that how Rajendra Gupta things of defining the changes in the values of constants in the universe according to the time period.


Rajendra Gupta Calculation


Now with Rajendra Gupta this identity when he the different values calculated by Rajendra Gupta, keeping in mind the tired light theory registered with the astronomical data collected by human till date, so, as a result he found a figure of 26.7 billion years in his calculations, which is according to him the actual age of universe.


Now is it really reliable well this is a bit tricky question.


The first problem is that if the tired light theory which has already been approved by the scientists if it is correct then find out the actual boundary and size of this universe becomes almost impossible. Because who knows, as far as we are seeing, a lot must have excited before that too, just because of the extinction of photons, we are not able to observe them.


Rajendra Gupta, Now what is the shape of our universe, we have also found out from the data collected somewhere and found it from the details of observed cosmic entity, but we are not seeing its actual boundary, then how can we say that the values used in the calculation we are doing will be correct according to this time period or not, and the biggest thing is that when we don’t have complete data, then how will we reach any conclusion from their available data.


Now understand it like this suppose that if you are locked in an oval shape room, but you can only see that part of it in which a square can be made and there is no means to see the outside part, so in such a situation how can any observation made up by you be correct, after all according to you the structure in which you are present is visible only 1 square shape.


Now last, but not the least, we will not only have to re-correct all the observed galaxies to date, Rather its actual figures have to be recalculated considering the variable value and its path. Now it may be that our universe is much older than we think, but the fact and details submitted by Rajendra Gupta are not reliable enough in the eyes of big scientist and Professors (Rajendra Gupta) to think about them seriously, and for this reason, it would be better if it is kept in the category of only one hypothesis.





Spread the love

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top