Friday, February 23, 2018

If The Universe Is 13.8 Billion Years Old, How Can We See 46 Billion Light Years Away?

If The Universe Is 13.8 Billion Years Old, How Can We See 46 Billion Light Years Away?

This is technically incorrect. It should say "How Can We See Objects That Are 46 Billion Light Years Away?" The difference between the two questions (or at least a part of the difference) lies in the fact that we see the way that the most distant objects looked long, long ago, when they were much closer to us, even though the objects may NOW be 46 billion light years away. But we can't see them as they are today, 46 billion light years away. Indeed, we can't really see anything beyond our solar system as it looks today, but at least we're sort of close. (The nearest star is four light years away.)

The general idea behind the article is still one of the most puzzling wonders of existence, however. How could distant objects be receding from us faster than the speed of light? Oh, that wacky, expanding universe!

3 comments:

  1. Well, the simple answer to that question is WE (humankind) think the speed of light is 186,000 feet per second. But just because mankind has determined what we THINK is the speed of something, doesn't necessarily mean that nature must agree with that assessment.

    How many other things have we been wrong about in the past? Let's see... there was that theory that all celestial bodies were encased in crystaline spheres and that they were stable in relation to one another; there was that deal that the Earth was the center of the universe and everything revolved around it; one of my personal favorites - the speed of sound will never be exceeded!

    Mankind tends to be very arrogant about 'facts' that we develop, even when some of those facts are later proven untrue or inaccurate.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Of course the Trump supporter thinks one of the most ironclad laws of physics is fake news...

    ReplyDelete
  3. Why is it that idiots like you always have to bring politics into a discussion?

    My comment is theoretical without a doubt, but still remains a possibility. It is a fact that most science is theoretical to begin with. It starts with someone asking "Why?" or "What if?" To believe that something is true just because mankind believes it to be true is the absolute height of arrogance.

    Remember at one time, GRAVITY was considered a myth.

    As for ironclad... those people back then - some of the greatest thinkers of the time - who believed that the Earth was the center of the universe and that everything revolved around it thought that was an IRONCLAD fact, also.

    Never say never....

    ReplyDelete