In physical cosmology, the age of the universe is the time elapsed since the Big

Bang. The current measurement of the age of the universe is 13.7980.037 billion
years ((13.7980.037)109 years) within the Lambda-CDM concordance model.[1] The unc
ertainty of 37 million years has been obtained by the agreement of a number of s
cientific research projects, such as microwave background radiation measurements
by the Planck satellite, the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe and other pro
bes. Measurements of the cosmic background radiation give the cooling time of th
e universe since the Big Bang,[2] and measurements of the expansion rate of the
universe can be used to calculate its approximate age by extrapolating backwards
in time.
The Lambda-CDM concordance model describes the evolution of the universe from a
very uniform, hot, dense primordial state to its present state over a span of ab
out 13.8 billion years[3] of cosmological time. This model is well understood th
eoretically and strongly supported by recent high-precision astronomical observa
tions such as WMAP. In contrast, theories of the origin of the primordial state
remain very speculative. If one extrapolates the Lambda-CDM model backward from
the earliest well-understood state, it quickly (within a small fraction of a sec
ond) reaches a singularity called the "Big Bang singularity". This singularity i
s not understood as having a physical significance in the usual sense, but it is
convenient to quote times measured "since the Big Bang" even though they do not
correspond to a physically measurable time. For example, "10-6 seconds after th
e Big Bang" is a well-defined era in the universe's evolution. If one referred t
o the same era as "13.8 billion years minus 10-6 seconds ago," the precision of
the meaning would be lost because the minuscule latter time interval is swamped
by uncertainty in the former.
Though the universe might in theory have a longer history, the International Ast
ronomical Union[4] presently use "age of the universe" to mean the duration of t
he Lambda-CDM expansion, or equivalently the elapsed time since the Big Bang in
the current observable universe.
Since the universe must be at least as old as the oldest thing in it, there are
a number of observations which put a lower limit on the age of the universe; the
se include the temperature of the coolest white dwarfs, which gradually cool as
they age, and the dimmest turnoff point of main sequence stars in clusters (lowe
r-mass stars spend a greater amount of time on the main sequence, so the lowestmass stars that have evolved off of the main sequence set a minimum age).
The problem of determining the age of the universe is closely tied to the proble
m of determining the values of the cosmological parameters. Today this is largel
y carried out in the context of the ?CDM model, where the universe is assumed to
contain normal (baryonic) matter, cold dark matter, radiation (including both p
hotons and neutrinos), and a cosmological constant. The fractional contribution
of each to the current energy density of the universe is given by the density pa
rameters Om, Or, and O?. The full ?CDM model is described by a number of other p
arameters, but for the purpose of computing its age these three, along with the
Hubble parameter H_0, are the most important.
If one has accurate measurements of these parameters, then the age of the univer
se can be determined by using the Friedmann equation. This equation relates the
rate of change in the scale factor a(t) to the matter content of the universe. T
urning this relation around, we can calculate the change in time per change in s
cale factor and thus calculate the total age of the universe by integrating this
formula. The age t0 is then given by an expression of the form
t_0 = \frac{1}{H_0} F(\Omega_r,\Omega_m,\Omega_\Lambda,\dots)
where H_0 is the Hubble parameter and the function F depends only on the fractio
nal contribution to the universe's energy content that comes from various compon
ents. The first observation that one can make from this formula is that it is th
e Hubble parameter that controls that age of the universe, with a correction ari
sing from the matter and energy content. So a rough estimate of the age of the u
niverse comes from the Hubble time, the inverse of the Hubble parameter. With a

value for H_0 around 68 km/s/Mpc, the Hubble time evaluates to 1/H_0 = 14.4 bill
ion years.[5]
To get a more accurate number, the correction factor F must be computed. In gene
ral this must be done numerically, and the results for a range of cosmological p
arameter values are shown in the figure. For the Planck values (Om, O?) = (0.308
6, 0.6914), shown by the box in the upper left corner of the figure, this correc
tion factor is about F = 0.956. For a flat universe without any cosmological con
stant, shown by the star in the lower right corner, F = 2/3 is much smaller and
thus the universe is younger for a fixed value of the Hubble parameter. To make
this figure, Or is held constant (roughly equivalent to holding the CMB temperat
ure constant) and the curvature density parameter is fixed by the value of the o
ther three.
Apart from the Planck satellite, the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP)
was instrumental in establishing an accurate age of the universe, though other
measurements must be folded in to gain an accurate number. CMB measurements are
very good at constraining the matter content Om[6] and curvature parameter Ok.[7
] It is not as sensitive to O? directly,[7] partly because the cosmological cons
tant becomes important only at low redshift. The most accurate determinations of
the Hubble parameter H0 come from Type Ia supernovae. Combining these measureme
nts leads to the generally accepted value for the age of the universe quoted abo
ve.
The cosmological constant makes the universe "older" for fixed values of the oth
er parameters. This is significant, since before the cosmological constant becam
e generally accepted, the Big Bang model had difficulty explaining why globular
clusters in the Milky Way appeared to be far older than the age of the universe
as calculated from the Hubble parameter and a matter-only universe.[8][9] Introd
ucing the cosmological constant allows the universe to be older than these clust
ers, as well as explaining other features that the matter-only cosmological mode
l could not.[10]
NASA's Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) project's nine-year data rele
ase in 2012 estimated the age of the universe to be (13.7720.059)109 years (13.772
billion years, with an uncertainty of plus or minus 59 million years).[2]
However, this age is based on the assumption that the project's underlying model
is correct; other methods of estimating the age of the universe could give diff
erent ages. Assuming an extra background of relativistic particles, for example,
can enlarge the error bars of the WMAP constraint by one order of magnitude.[11
]
This measurement is made by using the location of the first acoustic peak in the
microwave background power spectrum to determine the size of the decoupling sur
face (size of the universe at the time of recombination). The light travel time
to this surface (depending on the geometry used) yields a reliable age for the u
niverse. Assuming the validity of the models used to determine this age, the res
idual accuracy yields a margin of error near one percent.[12]
Calculating the age of the universe is accurate only if the assumptions built in
to the models being used to estimate it are also accurate. This is referred to a
s strong priors and essentially involves stripping the potential errors in other
parts of the model to render the accuracy of actual observational data directly
into the concluded result. Although this is not a valid procedure in all contex
ts (as noted in the accompanying caveat: "based on the fact we have assumed the
underlying model we used is correct"), the age given is thus accurate to the spe
cified error (since this error represents the error in the instrument used to ga
ther the raw data input into the model).
The age of the universe based on the best fit to Planck 2013 data alone is 13.81
30.058 billion years (the other estimate of 13.7980.037 billion years uses Gaussia

n priors based on earlier estimates from other studies to determine the combined
uncertainty). This number represents the first accurate "direct" measurement of
the age of the universe (other methods typically involve Hubble's law and the a
ge of the oldest stars in globular clusters, etc.). It is possible to use differ
ent methods for determining the same parameter (in this case
the age of the univ
erse) and arrive at different answers with no overlap in the "errors". To best a
void the problem, it is common to show two sets of uncertainties; one related to
the actual measurement and the other related to the systematic errors of the mo
del being used.
An important component to the analysis of data used to determine the age of the
universe (e.g. from Planck) therefore is to use a Bayesian statistical analysis,
which normalizes the results based upon the priors (i.e. the model).[12] This q
uantifies any uncertainty in the accuracy of a measurement due to a particular m
odel used.[18][19]
In the 18th century, the concept that the age of the Earth was millions, if not
billions, of years began to appear. However, most scientists throughout the 19th
century and into the first decades of the 20th century presumed that the univer
se itself was Steady State and eternal, with maybe stars coming and going but no
changes occurring at the largest scale known at the time.
The first scientific theories indicating that the age of the universe might be f
inite were the studies of thermodynamics, formalized in the mid-19th century. Th
e concept of entropy dictates that if the universe (or any other closed system)
were infinitely old, then everything inside would be at the same temperature, an
d thus there would be no stars and no life. No scientific explanation for this c
ontradiction was put forth at the time. In 1915 Albert Einstein published the th
eory of general relativity[20] and in 1917 constructed the first cosmological mo
del based on his theory. In order to remain consistent with a steady state unive
rse, Einstein added what was later called a cosmological constant to his equatio
ns. However, already in 1922, also using Einstein's theory, Alexander Friedman,
and independently five years later Georges Lematre, showed that the universe cann
ot be static and must be either expanding or contracting. Einstein's model of a
static universe was in addition proved unstable by Arthur Eddington.
The first direct observational hint that the universe has a finite age came from
the observations of 'recession velocities', mostly by Vesto Slipher, combined w
ith distances to the 'nebulae' (galaxies) by Edwin Hubble in a work published in
1929.[21] Earlier in the 20th century, Hubble and others resolved individual st
ars within certain nebulae, thus determining that they were galaxies, similar to
, but external to, our Milky Way Galaxy. In addition, these galaxies were very l
arge and very far away. Spectra taken of these distant galaxies showed a red shi
ft in their spectral lines presumably caused by the Doppler effect, thus indicat
ing that these galaxies were moving away from the Earth. In addition, the farthe
r away these galaxies seemed to be (the dimmer they appeared to us) the greater
was their redshift, and thus the faster they seemed to be moving away. This was
the first direct evidence that the universe is not static but expanding. The fir
st estimate of the age of the universe came from the calculation of when all of
the objects must have started speeding out from the same point. Hubble's initial
value for the universe's age was very low, as the galaxies were assumed to be m
uch closer than later observations found them to be.
The first reasonably accurate measurement of the rate of expansion of the univer
se, a numerical value now known as the Hubble constant, was made in 1958 by astr
onomer Allan Sandage.[22] His measured value for the Hubble constant came very c
lose to the value range generally accepted today.
However Sandage, like Einstein, did not believe his own results at the time of d
iscovery. His value for the age of the universe[further explanation needed] was
too short to reconcile with the 25-billion-year age estimated at that time for t

he oldest known stars. Sandage and other astronomers repeated these measurements
numerous times, attempting to reduce the Hubble constant and thus increase the
resulting age for the universe. Sandage even proposed new theories of cosmogony
to explain this discrepancy. This issue was finally resolved by improvements in
the theoretical models used for estimating the ages of stars. As of 2013, using
the latest models for stellar evolution, the estimated age of the oldest known s
tar is 14.460.8 billion years.[23]
The discovery of microwave cosmic background radiation announced in 1965[24] fin
ally brought an effective end to the remaining scientific uncertainty over the e
xpanding universe. The recently launched space probes WMAP, launched in 2001, an
d Planck, launched in 2009, produced data that determines the Hubble constant an
d the age of the universe independent of galaxy distances, removing the largest
source of error.[12]