Never mind, while I see the "proof", and this page:
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/age.html
seems to suggest 10-20 billion years old--that seems wrong to me--but that
is a lot of information to digest, and I don't want to be drug away from
other pursuits at this moment...
But, it looks like I will have to stand corrected for now... sorry if my
error in "time" (hey, it ain't real anyway grin) caused any grief...

Warmest regards,
John
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
| Cecil Moore wrote:
|
| John Smith wrote:
|
| Portions of this universe are over 100 billion years old--that
| translates directly to 100 billion light years... that is a lot of
| distance... even thought the echo of the big bang itself may have
| subsided, I just cannot believe we can't hear bounces of other signals
| (signals which cannot be accounted for)...
|
|
| How is it possible for portions of this universe to be
| eight times older than the Big Bang which occurred
| about 12.5 billion years ago?
|
| What came (or went) before the Big Bang?
|
| - Mike KB3EIA -