Galaxies going faster than light ? [v.2]

river said:
The thing is , is that in the first 48sec. Of the video Fraser said " perhaps " it is because of the expansion of the Universe ; dark energy .

Nobody knows . There is no definitive explanation at all .

That is the thing isn't it.
Click to expand...
No. It isn't the explanation has been given at least six times.
 
Here:

Einstein-the-ant lives on the surface of a small latex balloon called Antland, along with all his anty friends.
He has discovered a universal law that says no ant, nor any ant-like object can travel across Antland any faster than 1 cm per second. This is inviolate.
A clown comes comes along, and finds Antland stuck in the branch of a tree.
He undoes the knot and, with a giant breath, blows up the balloon to one hundred times its size.
All the ants in Antland find themselves 100cm apart, in just a few seconds.
Little River-the-ant says "Ho ho! We are now far apart in so short a time! Surely this violates Einstein Ant's Theorem!"
To which EtA says "It does not. Read my theorem. Indeed, no ant in Antland has traveled across Antland any faster than 1cm per second. Indeed, none of us have even moved from the morsels we were eating."
 
DaveC426913 said:
Here:

Einstein-the-ant lives on the surface of a small latex balloon called Antland, along with all his anty friends.
He has discovered a universal law that says no ant, nor any ant-like object can travel across Antland any faster than 1 cm per second. This is inviolate.
A clown comes comes along, and finds Antland stuck in the branch of a tree.
He undoes the knot and, with a giant breath, blows up the balloon to one hundred times its size.
All the ants in Antland find themselves 100cm apart, in just a few seconds.
Little River-the-ant says "Ho ho! We are now far apart in so short a time! Surely this violates Einstein Ant's Theorem!"
To which EtA says "It does not. Read my theorem. Indeed, no ant in Antland has traveled across Antland any faster than 1cm per second. Indeed, none of us have even moved from the morsels we were eating."
Click to expand...

Old

Explains nothing about galaxies going faster than the speed of light , explains nothing at all .
 
river said:
Old

Explains nothing about galaxies going faster than the speed of light , explains nothing at all .
Click to expand...
If even that simple metaphor washes over you, I can't help you.

You have crossed the threshold from not understanding to not wanting to understand.
 
river said:
Hmmmm...or you don't really understand this galaxy going faster than light, yourself .
Click to expand...
It has been common knowledge as long as I have been alive. I grew up with it and understand it like I understand high school geometry.

It's not rocket science.

Since you freely admit you don't understand CE, you have no basis by which you could judge my knowledge. Thus this is nothing more than a trolling shot. Don't be like this.
 
Last edited:
Kittamaru said:
The amount of spatial expansion that would be experienced on even the scale of a large solar system (even beyond the orbit of Sol and Pluto) would be negligible at best, and essentially indistinguishable from the probability of error on our current calculations. That fact notwithstanding; you are trying to ignore gravity again. An orbit is a complex thing; a careful balancing act of inertial forces (velocity, kinetic energy, etc) and gravitational forces (gravitational attraction between two masses).

Think of it like a table with a fine silk tablecloth. The tablecloth represents the "fabric of the universe". In the center of the table, you have a plate. Tethered to that plate by an elastic band is a saucer. The saucer has a velocity in a straight line, but is held a relatively set distance from the plate by the elastic band, causing it to orbit the plate.

Now, the tablecloth is quickly yanked out from under the plate and saucer. Do they move? Sure, perhaps a tiny bit - but because of inertia and the connection, they find that equilibrium again against such minuscule changes. Same applies on a planetary scale - if the change in distance due to cosmic expansion was sufficient enough, sure - the objects would fall out of orbit (and we would all be dead). As it stands, it isn't.

After all, if gravity is strong enough to overcome cosmic expansion on the scale of distances between the Milky Way and Andromeda, why would it be unable to do so on the scale of something so much smaller as a solar system?
Click to expand...

This yanking of table cloth analogy is bad, rather pathetic. Think about it again and again till you realise that. Please do not give any analogy while discussing science with me, keep that for others.

The hubble law is

v = Hd, where v is the recession velocity, d is the distance (do not bother about comoving / proper etc) and H is the hubble constant can be takes as around 70 kms per sec per megaparsec.

Now the approximate radial span of MW is 0.015 Mparsec, so we can say that the nearest satellite Galaxy can be safely taken at a distance 0.015 Mpc (it will be higher but dont bother).

so v = 70 * 0.015 = 1 Km per sec recession velocity...that is space between MW and this satellite galaxy is expanding @ 1 Km per seconds that is 86400 kms per day. This is what your claim is?

It may be small, very small, as compared to cosmological distances, but sufficient to chuck that galaxy out of MW orbit sooner or later.

My question is still open how Gravity brings this 86400 kms back the very same day (rather how it is dynamically compensated every moment.).
 
DaveC426913 said:
It has been common knowledge as long as I have been alive. I grew up with it and understand it like I understand high school geometry.

It's not rocket science.

Since you freely admit you don't understand CE, you have no basis by which you could judge my knowledge. Thus this is nothing more than a trolling shot. Why don't you stop?
Click to expand...

It has been common knowledge that galaxies in deep space go faster than light ? Hmm.. well in my 15yrs of discussing all things in cosmology and BB. On the Internet and University; Nobody but nobody has mentioned anything remotely hinting at this , at all .

And actually this is new this galaxies going the speed of light .
 
The God said:
I am really at loss of words to counter such claims.....
This is no science.
Click to expand...

Not only is it no science , what pretell has geometry have to do with galaxies going the speed of light ?

I wonder how BB still survives as a cosmology theory .

But anyway .
 
It's been explained to you SEVERAL TIMES that the galaxies aren't going faster than light, so why do you still think they do?
 
Daecon said:
It's been explained to you SEVERAL TIMES that the galaxies aren't going faster than light, so why do you still think they do?
Click to expand...

Because NASA said so .

Or something is . NASA does not know what is going faster than the speed of light . But just that something is . In deep space .
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top