/sci/ - Science & Math

>>14744928
We will never know the age of the universe or see the first lights, we'd have to construct a telescope that could see outside our local light bubble while being inside it to avoid any relativistic distortion of information
Basically you need a telescope thay can see faster than the speed of light, which is impossible for obvious reasons

>>14744928
> we
>>14744942
> we
subjective, not science, ban yourself faggots

>>14744991
Yes anon, we know you're a parasite and not part of humanity, you don't have to remind us

The best model of what happened is already on wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_early_universe

This is all subject to change since theories of physics are likely to change, but based on models existing now this is basically what is believed to have happened.

>>14744942
>>14744991
>>14745008
>>14745026
Please stick to the question do not derail.

Yes The CMB does tell you about earlier times indirectly. The fluctuations observed can be rolled backwards in time using linear theory. There are also some secondary signatures imprinted on the CMB by processes at early times. One very hot topic is primordial gravitational waves produced as early as inflation, these would still be propagating and would leave a characteristic polarisation signature on the CMB. Many experiments are running or are planned to measure such signals. The problem is that inflation doesn't predict the amplitude of the feature and it may not be detectable above the foreground noise. Another similar example is spectral distortions, which have also not been detected yet. These could reveal evidence of early structures forming more rapidly than expected, which would put the CMB slightly out of blackbody equilibrium.

>>14745034
I answered your question why are you quoting me numbnuts

Time travel.