Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Faster than Light, kind of......

Last response: in News & Leisure
Share
September 21, 2011 5:08:51 PM

One object can move faster than light

Antoerh one of Popscis articles that was woefully short, but still insanely interesting.

Quote:
There is no limit to how fast the universe can expand, says physicist Charles Bennett of Johns Hopkins University. Einstein’s theory that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light in a vacuum still holds true, because space itself is stretching, and space is nothing. Galaxies aren’t moving through space and away from each other but with space—like raisins in a rising loaf of bread. Some galaxies are already so far away from us, and moving away so quickly, that their light will never reach Earth. “It’s like running a 5K race, but the track expands while you’re running,” Bennett says. “If it expands faster than you can run, you’ll never get where you’re going."


Im having a bit of a hard time wrapping my head around this. The comments section provides some interesting insight from users.

More about : faster light kind

September 21, 2011 6:52:43 PM

wanamingo said:
One object can move faster than light

Antoerh one of Popscis articles that was woefully short, but still insanely interesting.

Quote:
There is no limit to how fast the universe can expand, says physicist Charles Bennett of Johns Hopkins University. Einstein’s theory that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light in a vacuum still holds true, because space itself is stretching, and space is nothing. Galaxies aren’t moving through space and away from each other but with space—like raisins in a rising loaf of bread. Some galaxies are already so far away from us, and moving away so quickly, that their light will never reach Earth. “It’s like running a 5K race, but the track expands while you’re running,” Bennett says. “If it expands faster than you can run, you’ll never get where you’re going."


Im having a bit of a hard time wrapping my head around this. The comments section provides some interesting insight from users.



You can't think of space as empty blackness filled with planets and stars etc.... the term 'Big Bang' is confusing b/c it wasn't just the matter exploding out into space.. this was when EVERYTHING started. Even space itself. A better term is "Big Expansion"

The 'raisins on a muffin' analogy is spot-on.. also you can imagine if you had a balloon that wasn't inflated and you took a Sharpie and put dots all over it. Now begin to blow up the balloon. You will see that the distance between the dots gets greater and even that the dots further away from each other will move apart faster than the ones that are closer.

Again, don't think of the big bang as all the matter exploding into a void called 'space'
September 21, 2011 6:54:51 PM

"Some galaxies are already so far away from us, and moving away so quickly, that their light will never reach Earth."


This is true.. think about a star a billion light years away.. the star you are seeing while looking up at the night sky is just the light that it sent out a billion years ago.. There are parts of space that we will NEVER see b/c the light will never be able to reach us.
Related resources
September 22, 2011 4:40:09 PM

Possibly a stupid question. What is the universe expanding into?

Is it something abstract like probability or is it just an infinite expanse of nothing? If you could make it to the edge of space what would you see?

4 dimensions expanding into 3 dimensional space?

Is that where Cthulu lives?
September 22, 2011 6:50:55 PM

Itself is expanding, it isn't something contained inside a bunch of blackness. It is everything. And in theory if you flew out into space long enough you would come back to where you started.
September 22, 2011 9:24:31 PM

wanamingo said:
Possibly a stupid question. What is the universe expanding into?

Is it something abstract like probability or is it just an infinite expanse of nothing? If you could make it to the edge of space what would you see?

4 dimensions expanding into 3 dimensional space?

Is that where Cthulu lives?


Space is not infinite. Scientists do not know what happens when you reach its edge nor do they know what is outside of it/whats it expanding into, but it is not infinite. It has an edge, but if you hit that edge, the place you be would now be part of the universe and space. Thats one theory, another says that there is a multiverse, with many of them in an array.
September 23, 2011 1:44:54 PM

blackhawk1928 said:
Space is not infinite. Scientists do not know what happens when you reach its edge nor do they know what is outside of it/whats it expanding into, but it is not infinite. It has an edge, but if you hit that edge, the place you be would now be part of the universe and space. Thats one theory, another says that there is a multiverse, with many of them in an array.


Correct is saying that space is finite but it is most definitely infinite in expansion. I just don't want people to think there is like a brickwall out there somewhere hah
September 23, 2011 4:06:05 PM




I'm not one to act as a preacher, but as another source of understanding, the Bible mentions a place as "outer darkness" which may be outside of what we could perceive as being beyond space itself. A place so far removed that light does not exist because it hasn't reached there yet and probably never will.


September 23, 2011 4:44:24 PM

is that about neutrinos? I'm at work and that website is blocked. Very interesting little guys those are.
September 24, 2011 12:09:36 AM

gnarxy said:
Correct is saying that space is finite but it is most definitely infinite in expansion. I just don't want people to think there is like a brickwall out there somewhere hah


Yeah, it is still expanding, but I'm not so sure its infinite in expansion either. In math, infinity is no big deal, but in physics, infinity rarely exists.

However, all our questions will probably be answered in the next few thousand years as human technology/knowledge expands.
September 24, 2011 4:02:35 AM

In math, it isnt a big deal because it is a concept not a tangible thing. In physics, you have to use that concept to describe things more granularly.
September 25, 2011 2:12:14 PM


Pure math and physics are no different ... just that the latter has a substantive focus. In saying that, many mathematicians have a number of interests, any that are interested in the macro or micro are usually called physicists anyway ... who could tell the difference?

I must admit I struggled with higher order tensors and field equations.

The maths within the GLM however did fit well with me so I applied it within psychological research with considerable success.

I find the research process and methodologies in this area a lot easier ... even stepdown analysis (directive MANCOVA) is much easier to use and understand for me ... though most psychologists and allied social scientists run away from anything beyond T-Tests.

Frankly third year physics and maths is beyond me ... my brain isnt wired for the additional layer of complexity required.

Higher order maths and physics is extremely exiting when you "get" a new concept.

Alas I am clever enough to know I am not clever enough.

Knowing that is quite a humbling experience.

Only the truly dumb are happy ....
September 25, 2011 4:34:19 PM

Reynod said:
Pure math and physics are no different ... just that the latter has a substantive focus. In saying that, many mathematicians have a number of interests, any that are interested in the macro or micro are usually called physicists anyway ... who could tell the difference?

I must admit I struggled with higher order tensors and field equations.

The maths within the GLM however did fit well with me so I applied it within psychological research with considerable success.

I find the research process and methodologies in this area a lot easier ... even stepdown analysis (directive MANCOVA) is much easier to use and understand for me ... though most psychologists and allied social scientists run away from anything beyond T-Tests.

Frankly third year physics and maths is beyond me ... my brain isnt wired for the additional layer of complexity required.

Higher order maths and physics is extremely exiting when you "get" a new concept.

Alas I am clever enough to know I am not clever enough.

Knowing that is quite a humbling experience.

Only the truly dumb are happy ....



Its all relative man. http://comment.rsablogs.org.uk/2010/10/14/rsa-animate-c...

September 26, 2011 6:20:50 AM

I absolutely loved the phsyics, higher order calculus', and differential equations courses in Uni. Most hated them but to explain how stuff works works through math and analytical processes always interested me. :) 
September 28, 2011 2:27:09 AM

I thought this was going to be about the overclocked neutrino. Yes, I did say overclocked.
September 28, 2011 4:15:41 AM

Im only saying what I heard that sounds the most feasible
the Nuts are moving through another dimension kinda like passing through holes in space not black wholes or anything just dimensional type stuff
which make the distance shorter giving only the illusion of light speed.

pop science 2006.... lots of talk regarding a taurus (pretzel) shaped universe
which I guess just adds to the idea of the edge of space, if the crazy theory I mentioned space could be expanding right behind where the universe had just expanded,
lots of thoughts on folds in space and strange routing through different dimensions
oh wow the guys that come up with these theories are just amazing
!