Is it true that the universe may be younger than we think since at the big bang the matter of the known universe was traveling at near light speed?

Answer 1

Well, there isn't really any fact that says the universe is younger than we once thought, but scientists do speculate that the universe might be younger than we thought, because there are theoretical particles (like the graviton, a particle that creates gravity) that say the universe is younger than we think, but since the particles are just a theory, we don't actually know. It just depends on what information you choose to believe in. Currently, common science teachings say the universe is 13.69 billion years old, which is quite old.

Answer 2

Scientific progress has a way of making everything we knew before wrong, as we learn new facts. Three hundred years ago, the accepted "scientific" age of the Earth was a few tens of thousands of years old; every new fact we learn seems to push back our horizon.

Yes, it's _possible_ - but I don't think it likely. For one thing, the current estimate of 14 (or so) billion years as the age of the universe isn't based on the observed diameter of the universe, since every advance in telescopes reveals things even further away. The 14 gigayear age is based in part on the 4 degree Kelvin "black body radiation" which is believed to be the "echo" of the Big Bang. If the universe were substantially older, the black body radiation would be at a lower level.

The "Scientific Method" requires that scientists - and all of us - be willing to accept new evidence and to put aside old theories that no longer agree with the evidence. One of the WORST crimes that a scientist can commit is to falsify research data to make it support his pet theories; if it were up to me, I would revoke the diploma of anyone guilty of research fraud.

However, as a scientist I keep an open mind; if new evidence suggests that the universe is substantially older (or younger!) than our current "best guess", I'm willing to accept it.