GALAXIES MOVING FASTER THAN LIGHT? [Space Engine]
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ก.ค. 2024
- Patreon page:
www.patreon.com/user?u=231819...
Hello and welcome to What Da Math!
In this video, we will talk about redshift and blueshift, faster than light travel and explore the edge of the universe.
Enjoy and please subscribe
Get the game free here: en.spaceengine.org
Twitter: / whatdamath
Facebook: / whatdamath
Twitch: / whatdamath
Other videos here: • Space Engine
![[SUB] 베몬이 교관님 멘탈을 탕탕 후루후루~٩(๑❛ᴗ❛๑)۶ FOREVER 웃게 되는 갓기들의 수련회 | 돌들의침묵 | BABYMONSTER(베이비몬스터) 'FOREVER'](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/FISAO7BwIxE/mqdefault.jpg)
This was a really eye opening video. Really enjoyed hearing about the info being presented here. It's mind boggling, and thanks for the cool video.
LOL the second quasar he showed whas the exact same one as the first XD
Lol
Maybe our understanding about photons behaviour is wrong.
We have to study more about photons behaviour when traveling in a very long time (galactic distance). It maybe deform (redshifted) through time, so we get wrong perception as long distance galaxies move faster than speed of light, but actually not.
Great as always, Anton! Could you maybe do a video on the 2nd biggest moon in our system, the nitrogen rich lake filled oasis, the orange world, Titan!
Light a match and it basically explodes :)
+The 5th Sin “Goat sin of Lust” Gowther its impossible because you need oxigen, and Titan doesn't have any oxigen in its atmosphere
+Ariyan Ahmed and Titan's atmosphere literally would smell like a shit right in front of your nose (the methane)
+Ariyan Ahmed it wouldn't smell because the smell is caused by the bacteria. You would still suffocate and die, though.
awesome videos keep up the great work
What da math did I just watch? :P Nice video, very informative and interesting.
Thats so cool how space engine lets you travel at ludicrous speed
You can actualy hold shift+LMB and move your mouse to zoom in for a HUGE amount. Redshift is much more apparent when you are telescoping the skies like that. Nice vid BTW.
not having watched the video, I'd assume that there is no absolute or objective reference, so technically if you have point A and point B somewhere and something travels from A to B at approx. the speed of light, and something travels from B to A at the speed of light, and they don't collide, the relative speed is 2x the speed of light. So I'd say you'd need some kind of absolute reference... watching the video now :D
~ Lee Hide ~ if you're doing a calculation you have to assume a frame of reference. Relativity requires a frame of refrrrence.
Very well presented. Thank you. May I please ask you what microphone you used & how you set it up. I really like the quality sound of your videos. Thanks.
Actually you can go a bit faster if you go into spaceship/airplane mode and fly the maximum distance, and then quickly switch back to cursor mode. You'd be flying at a speed of like 1.5 Gly I think.
Hello pony brother.
Beautiful demonstration of effect of spacetime stretch and observable universe - or why the night sky is so dark.
So lets say you were driving a car in space (Doc Brown's Delorean, for instance), at greater than the speed of light. If you turned the headlights on, what would happen?
you can't drive anything at faster than light. you can't even get to might speed in an object that has mass
I mean theoretically, what might happen if a light source was moving faster than the speed of light.
Vsauce has a vid on that
+Desert Tortise 18 He answers it. Go watch it again.
If there were no relativistic effects, it probably would be, like it is in the case of sound.
A lightwave, the shape of a cone in front of the space ship (Assuming the atoms emitting the light could "push" the light to higher speeds, like you can do it sound)
But every relativistic effect forbits this in principle. For your headlight as too for the light itself.
I love your channel! I wish I would have a teacher like you in High school.
Suggestion: Could you talk about the galaxies, clusters and super clusters moving towards a point somewhere in the universe?
Funny, if you select a heavily redshifted galaxy in this game, it'll often be "RG-0-0-0-XXX" because the lower the number, the larger the object is, and you don't see small galaxies at that distance.
What's the name of that effect, where distant objects seem to be larger because you only see the large things?
light my friend :)
At 7:05 the equation is (600-450)/600=z, in the video it says 0.33 but shouldn't it be 0.25?
lol saw that and looked for the first comment
Scaling is great! If we had a miniature model of our 100,000 LY wide galaxy, that would fit on our desktop, we could observe something very weird. If someone had turned on a powerful flashlight at one edge of the real size galaxy, and pointed it towards the other end, that light would take 100K years to reach the other edge. Now, if we downscaled the light source proportionally to the scaling of the galaxy we would never even notice the light beam moving across the galaxy. In fact we‘d have to sit at our desktop for 100k years to see that light beam reach the opposite edge of the galaxy. All on our desktop. So if there are intelligent creatures that study natural world and are logical and calculating, they would have their own concept of the absolute speed limit.
Great video!!!!!!
5:26 That's the same galaxy as before!
Hello Can you tell me what type of platform you are using to run this visual program. Simulation ?
Please do much more Space Engine!
+iilikecereal I agree.
Your vids are the best
Anton - Do u believe that the universe and earth is part of a simulation of sorts? (Love you voice) and u r a very interesting person; not to mention SMART!
In a future video, could you possibly explore one of the galaxies at the edge of the observable universe?
I did already
what would happen when you propel your self to the speed of light with dark energy, but on the moment before you hit the limit you start to bend space/time, will the laws of physics allow you then to go faster or what happend then ?
Doesn't matter how fast you go, you're always technically bending spacetime (that's what this whole dilation matter is about). If time gets increasingly stretched near the speed of light, up to the point where it nearly stops at the speed itself, then you'd find yourself in a paradoxical situation going faster. Not only would you need infinite amounts of energy to accelerate to or past "c", but you might also go back in time for all we know! And as we all know, time travel is very paradoxical indeed.
Simply put, it ain't possible.
at around 7:00, is it divided by 600 or by 450? Because (600-450)/600 = 0.25, not 0.33
Anton, do you think there will be a Big Rip? Or a Big Contraction?
What lensflare you use?
When you have a laser pointer and point it at the moon and move it across moon really fast is that considered the speed of light by the laser moving at one end to the other?
no, since you distributed photons across the moon. The same when you spray water across the street.
Paused this at 1 minute... I see the video is kinda old but speed of light isn't the limit, I remember in a PBS Space Time video a whiiiiiile back they mentionned an atom or something going faster than light. In the same video though they mentionned that a ship going at the speed of light could not stop or be stopped (without impact) since nothing inside it would be able to move. A ship going 99,99% the speed of light could be stopped by light if some kind of set up was done properly. In that same video I asked what if the other atom was used to stop a ship going at the speed of light and well, never got an answer lol. Back to video now! :)
So the real question i would like to know is how is space itself able to expand at such rates and can we put a definite number to this rate. Is it ever an increasing rate, steady, or fluctuating? What is the cause?
3:28 'ZOINK!' lol
Unfunny
Can you make a series of exploring?
Wait, so, at the edge of Universe, that is, visible universe isn't actually the end, there are "normal objects" there, but we can't see them because they are faster than light? Amazing! That actually made happy, it's really makes me sad to think the Universe has an end or will die.
the universe will die some day because of heat death. Equilibrium temperature will be reached everywhere.
Pedro Joao
That is (there are objects outside our visible universe) itself makes the Big Bang theory false, or at least not completely true.
If the Hubble constant is 71 km/sec/Mpc, then a galaxy that has an observed distance of 7.8105 billion light years has been moved by the expansion of space, during the time that the light was traveling to Earth, to a present distance of 13.8 billion light years. Which means that although we can see where the galaxy was 7.8105 billion years ago, we could not send a signal in reply that can reach that galaxy. The time step used for the numerical integration of the galaxy's recessional motion was 100 years.
Can I run this on a computer with Intel graphics, 8 GB ram, and 1 terrabyte disk space
When we say that the Galaxies are moving away from us faster than the speed of light it raises several more questions.
1. Are all Galaxies moving away from one point in the same direction?
2. Are all Galaxies moving at the same speed?
3. If we are also moving at a certain speed then is our speed slower than those Galaxies which are moving away from us?
4. Are Galaxies moving away from each other in opposite directions which makes them move faster than the speed of light? If Galaxies are moving in opposite direction then obviously they are circling each other which implies that the space has boundaries.
Wait ...maybe i just dont understand, but if its moving faster then light then how are we able to see it, film it or take a pic. Unless they are using the faster then light camera.
i think that blueshifted quasar you went to was the one you were coming from lol
which software are you using?
Space Engine
So if you say that we can see light that galaxies emmited before they accelerated beyond the speed of light and we cannot see their light if they do move faster than light, doesn't that mean there is a point at which a galaxy visually disappears from our view? I don't think we've ever seen a galaxy disappear like that, even though i think we should have seen, assuming there are so many galaxies out there .
Am i getting something wrong?
Nah, you're probably right and eventually we might start seeing less and less galaxies. He makes it sound like it'll take a long time, way longer than we've had the technology to actually look at them clearly.
We probably didn't "see" galaxies disappear, bcz when they cross the light speed limit they are already very redshifted for us to see, not mentioning that they are incredibly tiny at that moment
If you take into consideration that speed is relative, does that not cap the limit of speed to the speed limit of the speed of light?
speed of space itself according to this video and expansion seems to have nothing to do with speed of light
speed of light only effects matter?
i to am very curious to this
what is space? right type of question to ask?
If an object has zero spectral shift, it is either motionless with respect to the observer, or else it is spiraling in toward the observer.
θ = arccos{ −c/v + √[(c/v)² − 1] }
v/c = −2 / (cos θ + sec θ)
θ = the angle between the observer's light-of-sight in the direction of the object's motion relative to the observer, in the reference frame of the observer.
c = the speed of light
v = the speed of the object relative to the observer
If v=0.8c, then θ=120°, which means that the direction of its motion is turned 30° inward toward the observer from the transverse (perpendicular) direction. The reason is that special relativity acts like a mild red shift, and to counteract that effect the motion must be aimed slightly inward to provide a balancing doppler blue-shift.
Actually, this is only approximately correct. There are considerations from general relativity that I have ignored here. The acceleration caused by the changing direction of the velocity, and also the changing of the acceleration required by the shrinking distance, would both call for slight corrections to this equation. Probably every order of derivative of position with respect to time would contribute a term to a fully correct equation, though it would have the nature of a convergent series. I think.
Unfortunately speed in Space Engine does not alter the spectrum, otherwise you would be blinded by blue light while moving in relativistic speeds. I've noticed only 2 shifts: red shift - large distance; and blue - black hole proximity.
Gravity spectral shifts depend on the observer having a different level of gravitational potential energy than the emitter had. If they are equally deep in the gravity of some mass or other, then the observer sees no spectral shift in the light from the emitter. If the observer is more tightly gravitationally bound than the emitter was when it emitted the light, then the observer sees a blue shift. If the observer is less gravitationally bound than the emitter was, then he sees a red shift.
If the observer and the emitter are equally deep in their respective gravitational wells, then they will see no net shift in the light. If the light moves past some mass in between the emitter and the observer, it will red-shift as it goes down the gravitational potential and then blue-shift as it goes back up again.
I'm early... also great job on the video!
I've always wondered how galaxies collide if the universe is expanding so quickly and and they'e moving away from each other
Galaxy clusters are moving away from each other but galaxies within Those clusters can collide
Deep field galaxies on our left move from us at 99% C. So also do the deep field galaxies on our right. The galaxies are moving apart from each other at least nearly twice the speed of light. So it is "relative" from where you measure the speed. Neither side can see each other because the light of them can't be observed from each other. But that doesn't mean nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. The only thing that is established is that a physical object can't be "accelerated" to faster than the speed of light because the object itself doesn't have the capacity to fuel itself to that speed. But that doesn't prevent it from traveling faster than C for other reasons, such as outside influences... aka "dark energy"
I quote from the video, maybe not accurate, but the main meaning of it: "Every galaxies are moving away from each other, due to expansion of the space itself". That is not even close to be true.
We learned that Andromeda galaxy is closing to the Milky Way, it will collide with us (the Milky Way) in the distant future. Although this theory (collision of Andromeda and Milky Way) based on Hubble's law (which can't be proven yet, therefore it is just a theory too), we can observe actually colliding galaxies, what means not every galaxies moving away from each other (due to expansion).
I admit that these vids are very informational and interesting, some of the theories mentioned in them are in huge contrast. They can't be true at the same time. We don't know which theory is true, we can only judge them based on observations, and we know that our observations can only be quasi-true or virtually true, especially about very distant objects. The Big Bang theory can be easily traversed, I'm not saying I believe in creationism, but there's something wrong with all of the theories: we can't prove them.
Thank - you for sharing all these videos aimed at younger minds still open and not finished learning like mine(entertained by the pretty colours/graphics) at 62. Please ignore the insulting comments made by old farts bitter and finished learning , not funny.
you could use telescope mode from a farther distance and far away galaxies will shift to a red color
My Q is today space expanding.
After some time if space collapsing then galaxy can came near or time can reversed?
Georges Lemaître was a Belgian cosmologist and mathematician.
So are we accelerating still from The Big Bang or are we headed towards the great attractor?
About Univers sandbox 2, what about terraform a fragment/comet? I donno if its possoble but if it is, please make it. BTW, Sorry for my bad English :D
such a small object would probably not be able to prevent its atmosphere from getting blown away
I'm totaly dumb at Austronomia but what if he will make many collisions and then he will get more mass, then he will became a moon (I think :D) and then he will be able to terraform it.
yep ;)
Papa franku shall take us to the holly rice fields beyond the obserbable universe!! Prepare your sacrifices!
damn, your'e right!
if your using space engine, none of the galaxies are moving. they are not red or blue because of movement, they are because of distance. The furthur away ones are red because its very far, space is stretching, causing red shift. but the square box universe in space engine is not stretching either. Stars do not move either, only planets, asteroids move.
George Lemaitre was not French but Belgian ! Great video !
That's incredible explanation. But think about this, let's say, you are looking at a dimmest absolutely red galaxy. And the light you are seeing right now is the light, that was emitted about 16 billion years ago from that galaxy. And let's say in a few seconds this light will disappear. Is there a chance to have such a situation, when relative motion of our galaxy and remote galaxy have (or had) such velocity which allowed the photons just freeze in front of observer's face? And by making a step forward (after the galaxy spot have just disappeared) you are able to see (detect by the eye) that dim light beam again? I guess it is possible. It would be case of really frozen light. What do you think?
doesnt anyone here think that the spiral galaxies in this game are just sprites until it is seen edge-on?
quasar storm of course
Hi Anton. I dunno if you read this or not(since the video is pretty old(might be i try it to put this question to one of your newest videos if i find one whit the pretty same content.)
Where could be the center of the Universe? Is it whitin the Observable Universe?
So i mean, as the center, if we say Big Bang is real, then it has to be in somewhere of our Universe, and i mean the location of Big Bang, and if we say the Universe is streching, then there aswell has to be a central point of it aswell.(which is might be the location of Big Bang)
One answer i can think about, is that, its basically "everywhere". So i mean, before the Big Bang, not just all the material is concentrated in one point, but even the Space(-time) itself was just a point.
And i think this question have to be really important aswell, because the speed (and "amount") of stretching have to be based on this point aswell i think.
Red shift and blue shift are not in SpaceEngine. Here some galaxies are red when they're really far far away. If you get away enough some galaxies will be red and the others will basically disappear
Speed is relative to the observation point so... It's okay to travel faster than light as long as it is not a single particle right? I mean, like driving a car inside a spaceship that goes basically at lightspeed would make you go faster but spacetime adapts slowing you down in time terms if I'm correct. So things should be going faster than lightspeed sometimes
no unfortunately nothing can go faster than light
Anton Petrov Man, the expansion of the universe is supposed to be faster than light... Then galaxies and other stuff are going faster. Stephen Hawkings made a pretty similar example of what I just said about yourself travelling faster than light, you just have to get really close to lightspeed in a train for example and then run to the fron of the train. The speed of the train plus your own speed will make your total speed greater, so Stephen Hawkins says that time will pass by slower for you, when you get out of the train you'd be younger that your twin. Hope it helped.
Anton Petrov
I found this from a physics site that basically explains what I want to say, I don't speak english properly, sorry I don't make myself clear if that's the case.
You've probably learned that the speed of light is a constant (c). But what if you looked at it from different points of view? For instance, if you're standing on the Earth, then the speed of light is c. But what if you're standing on the train that's moving at half the speed of light? Shouldn't it look like the light is moving at half speed? Well, for all that it certainly seems like it should, it doesn't. The light moves at the same speed whether you're standing on the Earth, or on a speeding train.
But whoa! How can the light move at the same speed from the Earth's perspective as from the train's? Because velocity is equal to distance divided by time, and it seems like everybody should agree on the distance traveled and the time elapsed. But do they? According to special relativity (Einstein's work), distance and time don't work the way that we think they do either, and that get's really important when you're talking about speeds close to the speed of light.
I know that this wasn't exactly what you were asking, but I wanted to emphasize to you how things don't always happen according to the rules that you're used to. One of the basic rules of space and time is that no object can travel faster than c. That might seem ridiculous, because if you can get a train going at 0.9999999999c , you could then walk on it at 0.0000000002 c relative to the train, and that would add up to 1.0000000001 c. However, velocities don't add that way because time and space intervals aren't the same as seen from the ground and the train. Somebody on the train says that you're walking at 0.0000000002 c. Somebody on the ground thinks that your steps are much smaller than you or your friends on the train think, and that it takes you much longer to take those steps than you think. So they still end up thinking that you're traveling at less than c.
+snake698 the space can stretch faster than speed of light but nothing made of matter can travel that fast
Anton Petrov I just gave you an example of how that's relative. Doing the train experiment you won't just desintegrate into elemental particles, you know... It's okay if you want to say that adding 0.99999c + 0.02c it's not a greater speed than c, because spacetime will stretch, but the answer to "why has the dimensions stretched?" would be "because you just went over lightspeed". So... Ok mate :S I thought you were cool, but you seem a little close-minded, I just might have spent 15 minutes writing for that kind of answer... Those coment lack, at least, logical reasons. And after the reasons, you should post the sources that hold those reasons. Just so you know for the next time.
What you said is not necessarily true. As the outer expanses expand at faster than light speeds, the light they emitted b4 they reached that speed is still moving towards us. To add to that we are also moving towards the cosmic horizon because the space is expanding around us. The combined effect is we are pushed towards the horizon and the light emitted b4 super-luminal expansion is moving towards us, so it is possible to see galaxies that are no longer within the horizon.
DeepAstronomy explained this very clearly.
If we were at the Event Horizon wouldn't we be able to see farther? Like a Space Bubble?
+Fancy Cat Lets say that you are looking through the origin of a Black Hole. All you would see is darkness because Black Holes are the absence of light; BUT, lets say that you can see the "other side" of the Black Holes origin... All you would see is empty space because everything that is sucked into the Black Hole gets what's called, "speghettified." Every object that "makes it through" is compacted into basically nothing because the object wouldn't be able to take the intense amounts of gravity, not even a neutron star. So no, you cannot see the "other side" of a Black Hole. XD
No I'm talking about the event horizon of the universe the point WE cannot see beyond, wouldn't we be able to see beyond that?
If there is a Mutiverse where there's a way older Universe that has since expanded way faster than light (Big Rip) what would happen if it collided with our Universe? Would we even know it or is this proof against the Multiverse?
doesnt multiverse = multi-dimensional so the answer is never
kinda seems like you are asking if our universe is actually a sphere in which over an unbelievable amount of time could "circle" around at some point and collide?
or
our "universe" for lack of a better word lol (playing field?) is just one giant structure of some kind with finite space but multiple universes inside and at some point due to expansion will begin to interact with each other causing universal destruction?
My brain screamed when we got out of the observable universe, I so afraid. It's all looked like just hollow and nothingness...
And finally when back to earth, I feel safe, I feel home
Don't worry, there's a lot more galaxies beyond the observable universe ;)
In this infinitely massive universe creation of life is strange phenomena ..
can galaxies orbit around eachother?
Yes
What's this app I need it I was dreaming ( thing lol )
Its in the title.
If you went backwards in time for 14 billion years with all the stars and galaxies becoming reduced to nothing, leaving only helium and hydrogen, would space become atmosphere?
Anton you need to look into Halton Arp and use space engine to visit his galaxies that prove redshift is not just distance.
some quasars are connect to galaxies and guess what they have different redshift.
whoops, failure of standard model
standard model is not related to this. Get a PhD first then disprove it by yourself
"Warp 74 Mr. Sulu."
any thing van do that so if you go past of very close to that speed good by you have no past or momory of it you never are there for 18 yours but to you you are there the whole time just 1 day away.
Try to construct an understandable sentence, with correct spelling and punctuation, maybe your comments will gain some reason and will be read by people who will try to answer them.
0:00 - 0:04 same
I think knowing the size of the Universe would melt your brain.
+WeAreZero Humans know the observable parts of it is an total of 16,000,000,000 lightyears!
The Unknown ,,,,, No. That's not right. Just saw the furthest galaxy discovered is 33 billion light years away. You would think since the universe is supposedly only 13billion years old that nothing could have gotten more than 13 billion light-years from the central start point, i.e. the big bang. But that's not the case. Pretty sure it has to do with the fact that space seems to generate more space so that everything looks like it is moving directly away from everything else. Kinda freaky. 2 ways that's possible, 1)we just happen to be at the center of the universe. Something must be, it could be us. OR Much more likely. 2) It looks like that from everywhere. P
Your Z equation on screen is wrong; it is dividing by the red-shifted frequency, not the correct original frequency.
No particle (photon or matter) can move faster than light by accelerating (as a rocket does), BUT effects can move faster than light if the cause seems to be doing so. A lighthouse has a rotating beam of light. Go far enough away and the beam tip will be moving sideways faster than light even though each radially-moving particle is not. If all of these particles are identical, then at that distance and more the universe would see a series of particles impacting, say, a CRT-like screen moving sideways and causing a glowing dot that is moving sideways faster than light -- you can thus make a video display with images generated faster than light by the scanning information generating each pixel. Since the display is moving faster than light, ANYTHING USING THAT LIGHT POINT PIXEL can do things using that information at faster-than-light speeds. Not one particle is ever moving faster than light, but information is being transferred faster than light. As Scotty of STAR TREK said: "You canna break the laws of physics, but you can bend them a little."
Wow,our universe is an giant bread that expends,when will be eaten?
You mean we could be inside a black hole of another place. That place is also in another black hole. That place is also inside one? That could have no end or did it all have a beginning? I think I will die without ever really knowing the truth.
So, by definition, we have been living in a black whole our whole life, from the perspective of people outside the cosmological even horizon.
John C G does that make any sense? first evidence that this cosmology is broken as crap
The freaky thing is that there are black holes inside our black hole that we live in our whole life. From the people outside the visible horizon, we are just a big blob black hole, but, from our perspective, there are black holes structured in the way of the WMAP and anchor our black hole universe.
@@ShifuCareaga it makes a lot of sense
@@kebeiwjwgseywgw5590 no, it doesn't. It literally violates proven thermodynamic laws, violates mathematical principles, and all observations. As well as fails all philosophical thought experiments.
As for the idea that there are black holes inside of our black hole, that's some of the most bunkish stuff I've ever heard anyone say.
WMAP was mostly noise reflect from the Earth. They literally had to do massive error correction to get anything, and the remaining data is incredibly suspect. But none of it had anything to do with black holes. They've looked at radio signals and have never found a hole in the center of the signal. There is 0 proof of a black hole, only of a highly radioactive galactic pinch at center. All sorts of stuff is coming out, it really can't even be called a black hole because light escapes them all the time, as well as plasma and electric current and magnetic "flux tubes". Nothing about SGR A* suggests a singularity (which is 1 mass, literally in the entire Universe). Complete and total farce of science.
@@ShifuCareaga whar are you talking about i was talking about tue video, and anyway black holes exist
why does it say null 2.1
Question: If there was a mass large enough to drag EVERYTHING towards it at the speed of light, what would be created in the centre of all of this gravity?
A gigantic Black hole.
But you know, what if you had something so massive that it could pull stuff faster than light??
Tarek E That would be the eventuality of something like this, what you have to bare in mind is that i couldn't pull it faster than the speed of light. It would reach a "speed barrier" or interstellar terminal velocity.
HippyTheIrishmen however, what you have to bare in mind is that galaxies go further away faster than the speed of light, because it is not the galaxies, but the space between them that expands. It would be the same thing here, it is not the object that is pulled Towards the Black hole, it is the space that is bended, and if you bend it enough (like in the case of a black hole), it could and would go faster than the speed of light. Try to refute what I just said..
PS: any warp drive would either use theoretical "negative energy", or gravity (more likely, cuz I think negative energy is BS). How would you create that kind of gravity? Well, you could use antimatter explosions, like in Star Trek, which would create lots and lots of energy, it would reach a certain point, where you would reach light speed, if you believe in warp that is...
Tarek E Interesting point about how it's the space that moves not the objects. If "Point X(the point at which everything is being drawn towards)" is drawing things towards it at the speed of light, then when point x reaches the stage where it is so big that it begins to draw things faster than the speed of light, surely it would create a wormhole from y(the thing being drawn towards x) to x as that would be the only way to allow it to happen.
And since this is happening with everything in the universe, meaning that everything is y, then that means if this were to happen the universe would collapse in on itself in one massive wormhole converging on one single point x.
Woah.
hmmmmm we are all wrong even me. if we put everyone's brain together in one book still there would be a >?< after
when you put dots on a balloon and blow on it it will expand.
just like the universe
yup.... but.... if too expanded, the balloon will explode, thus destroying it... if so, will the same thing happen to our universe? :O **faints**
@@davidhkrose Yes!! This is called the Big Rip.... everything gets torn apart down to the Planck level. Doesn't sound like a whole lot of fun to me.
HolyMotherofGrid
dude that comment was 2 years ago lol
i appreciate the info tho :)
This is scary
what would you see?
Well if i remember correctly everything beyond the observable universe (this could expand a bit but not by much i dont think) - our horizon so to speak, is actually expanding faster than the speed of light. Space itself that is.
So there are probably an infinite number of galaxies moving away from us faster then the speed of light.
That wording kinda fucks up the thinking though.
Only space itself is moving faster then the speed of light if i recall not the actual objects?.
So light from such objects will never reach us.
We will never know what we dont know and its pretty sad.
Imagine what we could see from earth anywhere from millions to billions of years ago. The observable universe would have been a much more lively and awesome sight!
We will never know how much stuff is beyond our horizon :/
Eventually the milky way, if it survives the merger will be alone in nothing but a see of blackness. The horizon will look like an infinite darkness. If intelligent beings are alive when that happens they will be severely handicapped in what they can learn! As i understand it, a huge percentage of our knowledge has come from viewing things outside of our own galaxy.
We are living in prime-time right now (which actually to us is pretty much infinite lol)
68000km/s is not 1/3 c, it's ~1/5. 68000mi/s is ~1/3. You seem to be getting mixed up between metric & imperial.
what if you went to the edge and tried to exit the visible universe?
What happens when it is proven that you can go 5 times the speed of light? I know Einstein wrote SOL was the speed limit. Scientists wrote all kinds of things when & if man flew faster than the speed of sound well it caused a loud noise we moved on to 3,4,5 times faster see .
Who's going to pull them over?
holy crap... no firsts or seconds? finally!!!
but what are those yellow galaxies
GODs not dead
I hope to see them again.
Does this mean that eventually it will be impossible for a galaxy to see the light of the next closest galaxy?
YEP 1 DAY WE WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO SEE AN OTHER GALAXY FURTHER THEN THE VIRGO SUPER CLUSTER.I WILL MISS IC 1101 ;(
Actually nothing farther than the local group.
A theory i think is the universe is in an endless lope so everything in saying already happend
Speed of dark goes the same speed but goes farther then light
what if you made a warp drive and exited the visible universe
Anton,
What you and everyone here should start to focus on is
How do we get the people of the world even more interested in this stuff? I mean everyone; from Eskimos to African tribesmen to Islamic scholars in the middle east to Wall Street traders.
When I was a kid we were told that by now people would be living on the moon and exploring Mars. How, how can we make it happen??
Fighting evil by moon light winning love by day light never running from a real fight she the one name sailor moonshe will never turn her back on her friends shes always there to defend