-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
If the universe is only 14 billion years old, how can it be 92 billion years wide? (Video)
- Thread starter haxan7
- Start date
I wish I could find it. There was a video explaining this where it showed a grid pattern so you could see the expansion of space. As the light is travelling toward earth the space both in front of light (between the earth and the light) and the space behind the light (between the light and the star) was and is expanding. This continues happening the entire time the light is travelling, the space in front and behind keeps expanding. So even though when first emitted the light is 42 MLY away the space in front expands so the light travels 14 billion LY to cover that distance. It should also be pointed out since the light is travelling toward the earth the space between the light and earth is going down so there is less expansion in this area than in the space between the light and the star. That's why even though the light travelled 14BLY through space to cover what was originally 42 MLY the total distance the star or whatever would be now is actually 46BLY.
I thought he did another one where he showed it but maybe that's another science guy. If I ever find it I'll post a link.
I thought he did another one where he showed it but maybe that's another science guy. If I ever find it I'll post a link.
HoodWinked
Member
probably dark matter
Aggelos
Member
yes because there's a tiny difference between comoving distance and proper distance.
en.wikipedia.org
So, as Lawrence Krauss so eloquently put it -> "We lied to you back at school when we taught you that light is the fastest thing in the universe. The light speed is the fastest thing, but space can do whatever the hell it wants!...."
en.wikipedia.org
And in our universe, space is expanding. The universe is accelerating in its expansion. Hence there's a difference between comoving distance and proper distance.
Light travels locally with its crazy-ass speed, but space is expanding.
For instance MACS0647-JD, is the farthest known galaxy from Earth. it formed about 427 million years after the Big Bang. It took light 13.26 billion light-years to travel from there to Earth (Comoving Distance). But space has been expanding all the while, so now its proper distance is 32 billion light-years.
en.wikipedia.org
Comoving and proper distances - Wikipedia
So, as Lawrence Krauss so eloquently put it -> "We lied to you back at school when we taught you that light is the fastest thing in the universe. The light speed is the fastest thing, but space can do whatever the hell it wants!...."
Lawrence Krauss - Wikipedia
And in our universe, space is expanding. The universe is accelerating in its expansion. Hence there's a difference between comoving distance and proper distance.
Light travels locally with its crazy-ass speed, but space is expanding.
For instance MACS0647-JD, is the farthest known galaxy from Earth. it formed about 427 million years after the Big Bang. It took light 13.26 billion light-years to travel from there to Earth (Comoving Distance). But space has been expanding all the while, so now its proper distance is 32 billion light-years.
MACS0647-JD - Wikipedia
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Because space is expanding too.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Related video:
The observable universe is a sphere around us based on the limitations of the time since the big bang (13.8 billion years) and the speed of light. The actual universe is an unknown size.
All of space is expanding, even the space we occupy, but at small scales it is a modest effect and counteracted by gravity. Gravity keeps the solar system intact and galaxies together in spite of the expansion, but the distance between galaxies increases steadily. The farther away an observable object is in the sky, the faster it is moving away from us.
The expansion of space has been accelerating in the time since the big bang, and that acceleration has been increasing. Since acceleration requires energy, we don't know what is causing this, and we have to fill in the blanks with "dark energy" (totally unknown) for now.
All of space is expanding, even the space we occupy, but at small scales it is a modest effect and counteracted by gravity. Gravity keeps the solar system intact and galaxies together in spite of the expansion, but the distance between galaxies increases steadily. The farther away an observable object is in the sky, the faster it is moving away from us.
The expansion of space has been accelerating in the time since the big bang, and that acceleration has been increasing. Since acceleration requires energy, we don't know what is causing this, and we have to fill in the blanks with "dark energy" (totally unknown) for now.
clem84
Gold Member
I wonder if during the time humanity has been looking at the stars with decent observation devices, if this has been a long enough time to actually see some stars getting dimmer? Like the stars astronomers were looking at 50 or 100 years ago, do they appear a little less bright when today's astronomers look at them in their telescope? I don't know if the speed at which the universe is moving, expending, is something that can actually be observed in such a short amount of time.
Last edited:
Kenpachii
Member
Bunch of scientists assume stuff that fits there narrative.
Sorry but they don't know how old the universe is even remotely, no matter what they tell you. Also why if the universe is expanding and why are we not expanding with it? are we on a boat sailing through the universe as result?
Also why if there was a big bang to start with, did all that matter come from? when everything expands outwards? Does that mean it will eventually come back again? or do creation of universes just magically happen.
Sorry i don't believe any of that shit.
The same as with faster then light is now possible guys, universe is expanding faster then light!. Oh boy they where so convinced you could never go faster then light, and now they finally stopped smoking crack and start to see the bullshit they are spewing.
The, we will never see past this barrier is some proper laughable shit.
Anyway still fascinating at how big the universe is.
Last edited:
cormack12
Gold Member
I was too, but then I saw this documentary with Neil DeGrasse Tyson and it all made sense at the end
Kenpachii
Member
Funny enough our galaxy being a giant planet that exploded is in my view a far more realistic solution.
GamingKaiju
Member
Betelgeuse.
Astronomers have seen its light dim and expect it’ll go supernova within the next 100,000 years so not in our lifetime.
PleaseDontBanMe
Banned
I'm dumb
Tschumi
Member
So what, flat earthers are going Universal now?
Whoever said the universe underwent a consistent rate of expansion?
Nobody with a brain, that's for sure.
Edit: for all i or anyone else here might know, the universe might have finished 99.999% of it's expansion within a few fartbeats of the big bang. Also, as evilore said, what we see =/= what there is. Also, I'm pretty sure gravity comprehensively warps everything we see, it seems like an inevitability that most of the light that reaches us has been distorted hugely by the stellar masses it has passed near on the way.
Whoever said the universe underwent a consistent rate of expansion?
Nobody with a brain, that's for sure.
Edit: for all i or anyone else here might know, the universe might have finished 99.999% of it's expansion within a few fartbeats of the big bang. Also, as evilore said, what we see =/= what there is. Also, I'm pretty sure gravity comprehensively warps everything we see, it seems like an inevitability that most of the light that reaches us has been distorted hugely by the stellar masses it has passed near on the way.
Last edited:
MastaKiiLA
Member
While nothing can travel faster than the speed of light, that is but a speed limit of space. However, space itself can expand at an unlimited speed, which is what happened during the first period of cosmic inflation.
Think of it as being inside a big balloon. The fluid (let's say air) inside the balloon limits your speed of motion in any direction to a finite number. You can never move in any direction faster than that. However, that is not a speed limit for how quickly the balloon itself can expand. The balloon can expand at double, triple, or more the speed limit.
Not a perfect analogy, but should help to frame up the difference between the limit set by the speed of light, and the ability of the universe to be many times larger than the distance that the fastest thing (light) could have traveled in the amount of time that the universe has existed. Add to the fact that the universe doesn't expand from any specific point, but rather expands in all directions everywhere.
That's my understanding of our current understanding of the universe. In a very short period of time, the universe was already too large for a beam of light to be able to travel from one side to the other. This is even ignoring the dark age where the universe was very opaque. So we would never have been able to see all the galaxies and stars in the universe, because the point of space, that we currently occupy now, was always going to be out of reach of light from other points in space that have long been outside of what we call the "observable universe".
The most we will ever be able to see is distant infant galaxies some time after the hot gases cooled and reionized, allowing for light to travel unobstructed. That would be the cosmic microwave background (CMB).
Think of it as being inside a big balloon. The fluid (let's say air) inside the balloon limits your speed of motion in any direction to a finite number. You can never move in any direction faster than that. However, that is not a speed limit for how quickly the balloon itself can expand. The balloon can expand at double, triple, or more the speed limit.
Not a perfect analogy, but should help to frame up the difference between the limit set by the speed of light, and the ability of the universe to be many times larger than the distance that the fastest thing (light) could have traveled in the amount of time that the universe has existed. Add to the fact that the universe doesn't expand from any specific point, but rather expands in all directions everywhere.
That's my understanding of our current understanding of the universe. In a very short period of time, the universe was already too large for a beam of light to be able to travel from one side to the other. This is even ignoring the dark age where the universe was very opaque. So we would never have been able to see all the galaxies and stars in the universe, because the point of space, that we currently occupy now, was always going to be out of reach of light from other points in space that have long been outside of what we call the "observable universe".
The most we will ever be able to see is distant infant galaxies some time after the hot gases cooled and reionized, allowing for light to travel unobstructed. That would be the cosmic microwave background (CMB).
FunkMiller
Gold Member
Have you ever considered it may be just that they are more intelligent than you, and you maybe can’t grasp or make sense of the information you’re being given?
It’s perfectly okay to admit you don’t understand something... rather than just say it’s bullshit because you don’t.
bitbydeath
Member
Clearly the universe is overcompensating for something.
John2290
Member
I'm no scientist but I think the case of 14 billion years is the event horizon and not the actual age. Scientists just love capping things and barring edges in but time and again they are proven wrong by the new breed that comes after them. Lord knows what the expansions effect on time actually was, this number of 14 billion years is us looking out from where we are now, relative to where we are now and they'll never make me see otherwise. I've come to realize that science is nothing but a religion, people spend their whole lives and bank their reputation, livelihood, ego on what they persue and when it turns out to be a stray end or a dead end they make excuses to continue to follow it and then they get Jaded and use their expert status for financial gain taking money from corporations. There are a few good scientists and academics, I'm sure of it but as a whole it's become as corrupt and and dogmatic as the Catholic church had until the enlightenment, I don't know what you do about that but I for one won't believe a damn thing they say anymore unless it fits within the realm of reason. One week I'm told the world will end in fire in 12 years, the next I'm told it'll end in Ice sooner all while scientists are petitioning against these claims saying they are paid shills while a study tells me eating an egg a day will kill me and another says it'll prevent cancer and boost all aspects of daily life. Fuck em.
Last edited:
MastaKiiLA
Member
The difference between the rubbish you're saying, and what astronomers and astrophysicists are saying is that they don't pretend to know everything. Where did the matter come from? No one knows. There is actually point after the Big Bang, where our abilities to conclusively determine what happened before stops. Any theories before then are merely inferred from what we understand of what we can see.
You just saying you don't believe any of that shit would be the absolute worst attitude for any scientist to hold. Because you're incapable of understanding it now, you just throw up your hands and concede defeat. Well, if everyone held that attitude, we'd never have split the atom. You can't see atoms, but because people developed theories, and then spent years working the math and science of those theories, we have atomic energy today.
Similarly, we can't see beyond thousands of years after the Big Bang, The state of the universe before that made it opaque to light. However, theories were developed, and years spent working out the math and science behind those theories. And many scientists have reviewed and continue to review many studies completed over the years, in order to work out a best guess as to what happened to land us in the universe that we can see today. The Hubble Constant gets challenged all the time, and the number will no doubt get revised multiple times in the future. That's science. Science isn't iron-clad facts, it's an ongoing study that welcomes peer review and improvement.
As for the faster than light stuff, there is nothing we know of that can travel through space-time faster than light. This is the universal speed limit Einstein proposed. However, there has never been a speed limit established for space-time itself, which very much allows it to expand at speeds faster than the speed of light. The further away an object from us, the faster it is moving. We can very much see this with our own eyes, as light from the most-distant objects (usually quasars) is far more red-shifted than objects closer to us. So there is no reason to be skeptical of the idea that the universe is expanding, because we can look in any direction in the sky, and confirm this notion a million times over.
The why is the really interesting part, and science has pretty much admitted that it doesn't know why, so dark energy is the name given to this mysterious energy that drives the expansion. So science is very focused on finding an explanation for dark energy, which just continues the cycle of learning.
StormCell
Member
I'd just like to add that the last bit regarding dark energy is more the how. I've always respected that science attempts to infer the what and the how, but if your interest is in why you will have to consult the philosophers.
triplestation
Member
the pythagorean theorem
Romulus
Member
Amazing how little we know. I wouldn't be surprised if the observable universe is just a miniscule fraction of the actual universe.
In my opinion, just the fact that we just discovered gravity waves lol and we dont even understand dark matter proves to me how wrong our calculations probably are. We don't even understand the basic pillars. It's like building a house but we only know how the frame the walls. Everything else is a guess.
In my opinion, just the fact that we just discovered gravity waves lol and we dont even understand dark matter proves to me how wrong our calculations probably are. We don't even understand the basic pillars. It's like building a house but we only know how the frame the walls. Everything else is a guess.
Last edited:
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Philosophers don't know the answer to "why" any more than the scientists do.
StormCell
Member
It's kind of a saying that I've heard. The implication being made is that they spend a lot more time on the subject. That no one can really gain more traction on the "why" is irrelevant to the philosophers and maybe a small joke to the rest of us.
mango drank
Member
Read the first two chapters of this Brian Greene book and prepare to shit your pants:
The Hidden Reality: Parallel Universes and the Deep Laws of the Cosmos 0, Greene, Brian - Amazon.com
The Hidden Reality: Parallel Universes and the Deep Laws of the Cosmos - Kindle edition by Greene, Brian. Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Use features like bookmarks, note taking and highlighting while reading The Hidden Reality: Parallel Universes and...
www.amazon.com
Taxexemption
Member
I just assume so called scientist make these things up while they are having their coom parties.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Cool. It's a deepity.
On Deepities and Bullshit
The so-called Law of Attraction, one of the cornerstones of New Age positive thinking, is a textbook case of what Dan Dennett calls a "deepity"—an ambiguous claim that on one reading is either true but trivial, on another is false but would be earth-shattering if true.
Okay, but just because someone spends a lot of time on a subject, doesn't necessarily mean they're going to understand it better. One needs the proper tools and methodologies to be able to understand a subject. What tools are available to a philosopher that would make him or her better at understanding the nature of a supernova better than an astrophysicist and then derive the answer to "why" it occurred?
It's not a joke to me. I think I have a different understanding of philosophy's role in society than you. I think that philosophy is great to analyze and understand human history as well as to derive ethics and morality. The early philosophical practices of the ancient world are the foundations for our current civil society, and their work in philosophical reasoning served as the precursor to the scientific method. Scientists learn new things about our reality while the philosophers take that new information and think about how to best utilize it for society's benefit.
Pagusas
Elden Member
This seems like an appropriate place to ask the question I’ve always wondered about:
If light is the universal speed limit of all things, does that also mean that an action is linked to light? As in an action can’t take place faster than light itself. Or is light just the byproduct of actions (fusion/fusion/energy movement) and actions are not governed by the speed of light.
An example: when a nuclear bomb goes off, did the nuclear reaction inside of it happen at the speed of light? Is “instantaneous” a possibabilty? Is the speed of light just the limit of our measuring abilities and the universe could operate on a different frequency than the speed of light? If entanglement is real and not just spoky action at a distance, would that mean light isn’t the fastest thing in the universe, rather information/data is?
If light is the universal speed limit of all things, does that also mean that an action is linked to light? As in an action can’t take place faster than light itself. Or is light just the byproduct of actions (fusion/fusion/energy movement) and actions are not governed by the speed of light.
An example: when a nuclear bomb goes off, did the nuclear reaction inside of it happen at the speed of light? Is “instantaneous” a possibabilty? Is the speed of light just the limit of our measuring abilities and the universe could operate on a different frequency than the speed of light? If entanglement is real and not just spoky action at a distance, would that mean light isn’t the fastest thing in the universe, rather information/data is?
JimmyRustler
Gold Member
This is measured via light waves. Wave lengths are different depending on it it the source you are observing is moving towards you or away from you. So when you observe the stars and see that most are moving away from you, you can draw the conclusion that the universe is expanding. As to how astronomers know the speed is actually increasing... well... iirc they discovered gravity waves some time ago from two collapsing black holes when some device moved like 0.00000000001 millimeters, so I guess it‘s possible for them to measure the increasing expansion via light waves as well.
Last edited:
Kadve
Member
Light (or rather, radiation/photons) are a byproduct of nuclear reactions which are governed by the strong force and not limited to the speed/energy of photons.
The speed of light is also only a constant in regards to the theories of special relativity. Concepts such as quantum mechanics and dark energy exists outside of these theories and are therefore not limited to the speed of light either.
Last edited:
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Overgeneralization and not an accurate description of "scientists" and what they love to do.
Not an accurate representation of either science or religion. What are your examples of this that shape your understanding of what science and religion are?
What is this "realm of reason", and how do you know your understanding of reason is better?
This is a problem with how you get your news. This isn't a problem with science.
Last edited:
JimmyRustler
Gold Member
Well, from what I know nothing can accelerate beyond the speed of light. But assuming the bing bang theory is correct the universe itself should have expanded or still expands faster than the speed of light. So... Who knows? Space is fascinationg.
Good question. This is addressed by special and general relativity. The speed of light is more like the speed of causality.
c is the constant that defines reality, and if c were infinitely fast, time and space would not exist.
Here's a primer:
EverydayBeast
thinks Halo Infinite is a new graphical benchmark
The universe is huge I mean it looks like it’s expanding and gets misjudge all the time yes it’s old, huge and the science in it will give you a headache.
