Question for Creationists

[RoboMastodon]

The universe isn't expanding that fast, compared with its size. It should take quite a lot of time for my calculation to become wrong; I'm only claiming it to the nearest order of magnitude, and I rounded up.
I got the numebr two diffferent ways. The first one was relatively simple: I took the formula for the surface of a hypersphere and input ten billion light years as the radius. This assumes the Big Bang model of expansion and a statement by a news article I glanced at briefly. However, putting in 20 billion years didn't make a significant change.
I justified this against my YEC beliefs by claiming that the Earth was far younger than the universe, despite having the same start date, by virtue of relativity. I havent' actually pursued that line of thought.

The second calculation was a bit wierder. I took the speed of light as the speed of motion, and solved using one of Newton's formulas for the orbit distance. Since the mass of the object being orbited (the universe) influences the orbit as well, I came up with a number in the units "cubic kilograms per cubic meter." I used this, combined with the density of the universe, to get the mass and volume of the universe. I would have simply thrown out this new calculation had it contradicted my previous result, but they agreed perfectly, as far as my memory served.
I didn't save my exact numbers, so I would have to do the calaculation again to give them to you.

Since when has it been verified that the universe is hyperspherical? You say putting in 10 billion and 20 billion didn't make a significant change? If you used the formula for surface volume of a 4-hypersphere your answer should have changed by a factor of 2^3=8, that's almost an order in magnitude. And since when do Newton's Law apply when considering relativistic effects? Lastly, you do realize that some physicists have spent their life working on far more complicated calculations (using general relativity and cosmic background radiation) to get to the consensus that we have now (13.7 billion year old universe).

 

[Brilliand]

I don't have a good reason to assume the universe is hyperspherical, it's just a model I really like.
My results hovered just above 10^79, so I rounded up when it wasn't really warranted. A factor of 8 just makes 10^80 a better answer.
And I don't care if somebody else is puzzled by this, however intelligent and well-educated. I'll tackle it anyway, I just won't be particularly disappointed if I'm wrong.
I don't know how to go about looking for relativistic equations for gravity, nor whether they would fit orbiting the universe (I figured Newton's equations would fit because they don't account for something that doesn't apply-the curvature of space-time).