Skip to comments.
New Theory Suggests Start of Universe
AP via Yahoo! ^
| January 8, 2002
| Paul Recer
Posted on 01/09/2002 5:24:37 AM PST by Darth Reagan
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161 next last
Here's my question. Assuming that the farthest thing away from us is 14 billion light years distant, and the universe is 15 billion years old, then how fast do stars and other matter have to travel to get that far away? If this object that's 14 billion ly away from us is 7 billion light years from the originating point of the Big Bang, then that matter had to travel at almost half the speed of light to get there. Of course, I'm assuming that this is the maximum distance of any object from us, and I'm not sure that's the case
I've never seen this addressed...maybe my math and assumptions are faulty. Any help?
To: Physicist
Paging. I suspect you may know the answer to my question above.....
To: Darth Reagan
If this object that's 14 billion ly away from us is 7 billion light years from the originating point of the Big Bang, then that matter had to travel at almost half the speed of light to get there. The whole universe was contained in the Big Bang. It's not like the debris of an explosion expanding through space, rushing away from some central point. The whole space was once confined to a small point. The whole space is expanding. The Big Bang is everywhere, which is why the Cosmic Microwave Background comes from all over the sky.
3
posted on
01/09/2002 5:31:45 AM PST
by
VadeRetro
To: Darth Reagan
"And God said, 'Let there be light'"
'Nuff said.
To: VadeRetro
So, its about space expanding, not objects moving -- and the objects are "attached" to a certain point in space (and, I suppose, move relative to the universe near their spot of "attachment"). That makes more sense.
To: Darth Reagan
I don't want to talk about it.
6
posted on
01/09/2002 5:35:45 AM PST
by
Consort
To: Darth Reagan
You got it. The recessional velocities come from the expansion of the space itself. There could be things far enough away that they are receding from us at faster than light speed. We will never see such objects, since their spectra are basically red-shifted to zero energy.
7
posted on
01/09/2002 5:37:34 AM PST
by
VadeRetro
To: Darth Reagan
I don't know if objects are "attached" to points of space. Rather, the space "within" objects is so small compared to the universe as a whole that the expansion of the space is undectable.
8
posted on
01/09/2002 5:38:51 AM PST
by
abandon
To: Darth Reagan
How much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?
To: Darth Reagan
Lanzetta also used images of nearby star fields as a yardstick for stellar density and intensity to conclude that about 90 percent of the light in the very early universe was not detected by the Hubble. When this missing light was factored into the three dimensional perspective, it showed that the peak of star formation came just 500 million years after the Big Bang and has been declining sinceIs this what's known in scientific circles as the fudge factor?
10
posted on
01/09/2002 5:45:35 AM PST
by
jwalsh07
To: VadeRetro
What's beyond space?
To: Darth Reagan
To: NC_Libertarian
What's beyond space? You can't get from here to there.
To: Darth Reagan
Is that what he's saying? I think objects move through space, even if space is expanding. So are there any theories that space is infinite? Are there boundaries? Or I've heard before that if you travel long enough (a *very* long time of course) in one direction you would end up at your starting point.
Comment #15 Removed by Moderator
To: QueenCityAllan
Big Bang is compadible with Creation Theory. It's merely a scientific explanation for God's work.
To: QueenCityAllan
"And God said, 'Let there be light'" And there was nothing, but it could be seen.
To: QueenCityAllan
God created a reality of natural laws in meticulous balance. It's interesting to ponder.
To: QueenCityAllan
In fact, the more and more we discover about the origins of the universe and civilization, the more accurate Genesis appears to be. Science and religion go hand in hand.
To: NC_Libertarian
Or I've heard before that if you travel long enough (a *very* long time of course) in one direction you would end up at your starting point. A lot of truth to what you say here, it happened to me often during a misspent youth.
20
posted on
01/09/2002 5:58:27 AM PST
by
jwalsh07
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson