|
}}
{{archives}}
== What is the origin of "377 000 years after BB"? ==
The age of the universe at the recombination appears in this article as "377 000 years". I do not necessarily question that value, but in this article it is simply given as a well-known fact - no source, no reference to an article that explains it all.
I assume that the value is based on some assumptions, but what are these assumptions? Where-ever I look in WP, "380 000 (something)" is stated as a fact, but nowhere how this value has been derived ...
[[User:Hilmer B|Hilmer B]] ([[User talk:Hilmer B|talk]]) 16:37, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
:See note in ref#3 (revision as of 09:40, 29 January 2020) for Hinshaw, Weiland & Hill 2009. [[User:Alan G. Archer|Alan G. Archer]] ([[User talk:Alan G. Archer|talk]]) 17:04, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
== Lead sentence ==
:::::You're just repeating your insistence on an unsupported precision. You haven't convinced anyone that the change to the lead is an improvement to the article or helpful to readers. [[User:Schazjmd|<span style="color:#9966FF;">Schazjmd</span>]] [[User talk:Schazjmd|<span style="color:#5500FF;">''(talk)''</span>]] 15:01, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
::::::Why did this even go that far? This is obvious trolling and/or complete incompetence regarding the subject. --[[Special:Contributions/46.91.53.11|46.91.53.11]] ([[User talk:46.91.53.11|talk]]) 18:59, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
== First Molecules/Recombination conflict ==
The section of First Molecules is giving a timeline at about 100,000 years, which I understand comes from the linked article. However, the article is referencing a Nature Journal entry<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Güsten |first1=R |last2=Wiesemeyer |first2=H |last3=Neufeld |first3=D |title=Astrophysical detection of the helium hydride ion HeH+ |journal=Nature |date=2019 |volume=568 |pages=357-359 |doi=10.1038/s41586-019-1090-x |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1090-x.epdf?sharing_token=9klAKdp7edAh-z6OT2TpANRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0M0LFdQ3tocaORCW5MBZZ58SWD0GvyVyVFWFJhWOmesDfQ85ur40yrZwa0Sk5qLAnZp5coYY3X0SwVev_vADu5MlFBVpax7kU6yj35VFcCwlmcj8OjoktjvXxPDzVrrCN-zCZd5D1SH6IlO2s3lTf36aZGNfe5MzaV62sbEpALLyg%3D%3D&tracking_referrer=www.space.com |accessdate=9 November 2020}}</ref> which only states that the molecules could only start forming during the recombination epoch, and doesn't give any specific time when this would be.
The following section on Recombination then gives a conflicting date of 370,000 years, which would make most readers assume that the first molecules would have formed much earlier than the recombination.
I'm not sure what the preferred way to resolve this conflicting information should be, but wanted to highlight this issue. --[[User:Elentir~mediawiki|elentir]] ([[User talk:Elentir~mediawiki|talk]]) 16:15, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
:I found a source which discusses the recombination timeline for various ionization levels of both helium and hydrogen, with the earliest recombination to HeII around 18,000 years after the big bang and HeI at around 100,000 years, which matches the timeline for the earliest molecules. I think the Recombination section needs to be expanded to include this data as recombination covered a timespan of several hundred thousand years (~18,000y–~370,000y), finally ending with decoupling.
:See graph on pg. 8 for best illustration of timeline. ''Signals From the Epoch of Cosmological Recombination''<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Sunyaev |first1=R. A. |last2=Chluba |first2=J. |title=Signals From the Epoch of Cosmological Recombination |journal=Astronomical Notes |date=August 2009 |volume=330 |issue=7 |pages=657-674 |doi=10.1002/asna.200911237 |url=https://arxiv.org/abs/0908.0435 |accessdate=11 November 2020}}</ref>[[User:Elentir~mediawiki|elentir]] ([[User talk:Elentir~mediawiki|talk]]) 12:16, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
{{reflist-talk}}
== Semi-protected edit request on 17 March 2021 ==
| 