Register to reply

Far away galaxies moving faster than light?

by CarlosLara
Tags: faster, galaxies, light, moving
Share this thread:
CarlosLara
#1
Apr28-12, 08:38 PM
P: 17
Good evening. I just watched a documentary called The Universe-Light Speed. In it, astrophysicist Alexei Filippenko said that galaxies which are very far are moving away from us faster than the speed of light. Also, cosmologist Alan Guth said that during inflation the universe expanded faster than the speed of light. What did they mean exactly? I know that neither matter or energy can break the limit imposed by the speed of light, so I am a little confused.

Thank you in advance.
Phys.Org News Partner Space news on Phys.org
Mysterious molecules in space
After early troubles, all go for Milky Way telescope
Prospects for the 2014 Perseids
Mark M
#2
Apr28-12, 08:50 PM
P: 526
Carlos, nothing can move through spacetime faster than c. But, the expansion of the universe is the growth of space itself, which is not limited. So, essentially, relativity places a limit on local frames of reference, but there is no limit on global frames on an expanding universe. (e.g. receding galaxies in an expanding universe)

Also, remember that it isn't the galaxies themselves that are receding. They appear to be receding because new space is being created in between galaxies.
CarlosLara
#3
Apr28-12, 08:58 PM
P: 17
Oh ok, then it is not accurate to say that the galaxies are moving away from us faster than light, but rather it's spacetime in between us and those galaxies that is moving (expanding) faster than light. But, if we measure the time dilation of such a galaxy from the reference frame of Earth, how will we perceive it? How do we perceive the characteristics of an object which appears to move faster than the speed of light?

Chalnoth
#4
Apr29-12, 06:39 AM
Sci Advisor
P: 4,782
Far away galaxies moving faster than light?

Quote Quote by CarlosLara View Post
Oh ok, then it is not accurate to say that the galaxies are moving away from us faster than light, but rather it's spacetime in between us and those galaxies that is moving (expanding) faster than light. But, if we measure the time dilation of such a galaxy from the reference frame of Earth, how will we perceive it? How do we perceive the characteristics of an object which appears to move faster than the speed of light?
Well, if we try to measure the speed directly, such as through the redshift, we don't get a speed faster than light. The "speed" that is talked about is the inferred speed due to the change in distance over time. This speed is faster than light.

But the time dilation can be read directly off of the redshift of the object.
Calimero
#5
Apr29-12, 06:46 AM
P: 256
Quote Quote by Mark M View Post
Also, remember that it isn't the galaxies themselves that are receding. They appear to be receding because new space is being created in between galaxies.
I think that you should be much more careful with that kind of interpretation. Galaxies are separating due to the inertia, that is due to the fact that they were doing so in the past. As a result space between them is expanding.
Chalnoth
#6
Apr29-12, 06:56 AM
Sci Advisor
P: 4,782
Quote Quote by Calimero View Post
I think that you should be much more careful with that kind of interpretation. Galaxies are separating due to the inertia, that is due to the fact that they were doing so in the past. As a result space between them is expanding.
Both ways of looking at this situation are equivalent.
sweet springs
#7
Apr29-12, 07:01 AM
P: 449
Hi.

Quote Quote by Calimero View Post
As a result space between them is expanding.
Not only between the galaxies, at anywhere, for an example between my head and foot, do space expand?

Regards.
Chalnoth
#8
Apr29-12, 07:17 AM
Sci Advisor
P: 4,782
Quote Quote by sweet springs View Post
Not only between the galaxies, at anywhere, for an example between my head and foot, do space expand?

Regards.
No. The expansion of space is an average effect on large distances. The local matter density is more than enough to overcome the expansion.
Calimero
#9
Apr29-12, 07:28 AM
P: 256
Quote Quote by Chalnoth View Post
Both ways of looking at this situation are equivalent.
Well, in most aspects I agree, but then again you can't say that galaxies themselves are not receding as a physical interpretation.
Chalnoth
#10
Apr29-12, 07:30 AM
Sci Advisor
P: 4,782
Quote Quote by Calimero View Post
Well, in most aspects I agree, but then again you can't say that galaxies themselves are not receding as a physical interpretation.
Sure you can. Why couldn't you? Perhaps the simplest way of looking at the expansion is that galaxies are mostly stationary with respect to a space-time that is expanding.
sweet springs
#11
Apr29-12, 07:40 AM
P: 449
Hi.

Quote Quote by Chalnoth View Post
No. The expansion of space is an average effect on large distances. The local matter density is more than enough to overcome the expansion.
If the expansion of space is an average effect on large distances, would not it contradict expansion of wavelength of each photon from the stars which is very short of 10^-6 m or so. It suggests that expansion occurs homogeneously in such micro scale.

Regards.
Chalnoth
#12
Apr29-12, 07:43 AM
Sci Advisor
P: 4,782
Quote Quote by sweet springs View Post
If the expansion of space is an average effect on large distances, would not it contradict expansion of wavelength of each photon from the stars which is very short of 10^-6 m or so. It suggests that expansion occurs homogeneously in such micro scale.

Regards.
No, that's an incorrect understanding of the situation. Perhaps a better way to understand it is that different parts of the universe expand at different rates, so that when a photon of any wavelength passes through an expanding region, it expands. It is the parts of the universe with very little matter, such as the vast space between galaxies, that expand.
Calimero
#13
Apr29-12, 07:51 AM
P: 256
Quote Quote by Chalnoth View Post
Sure you can. Why couldn't you? Perhaps the simplest way of looking at the expansion is that galaxies are mostly stationary with respect to a space-time that is expanding.
I have to go, will respond later. Hope we can continue this discussion.
sweet springs
#14
Apr29-12, 07:55 AM
P: 449
Hi. OK. As for the vast space between galaxies that expand,

Quote Quote by Chalnoth View Post
different parts of the universe expand at different rates, so that when a photon of any wavelength passes through an expanding region, it expands.
the expansion is very homogeneous in micro scale as homogeneous expansion of visible light wavelength show it. Is it OK?

Regards.
Chalnoth
#15
Apr29-12, 08:04 AM
Sci Advisor
P: 4,782
Quote Quote by sweet springs View Post
the expansion is very homogeneous in micro scale as homogeneous expansion of visible light wavelength show it. Is it OK?
No, the expansion is only homogeneous at very large scales. At smaller scales, different parts of the universe expand at different rates (with no expansion at all in gravitationally-bound areas, such as within galaxy clusters or galaxies). But the expansion impacts all objects within the expanding region identically. The wavelength of a photon passing through an expanding region just does not matter.
sweet springs
#16
Apr29-12, 08:37 AM
P: 449
Hi.

I still feel wonder that during traveling in expanding space the top and the tail of the wave train of one photon, say 1 meter length or so is expanded as pulled rubber. Expansion is very homogeneous so wave length is exactly proportional everywhere in this 1 meter. All the colleague photons are expanded perfectly in the same manner, not like that some are red light but others remain violet.

Regards.
Chalnoth
#17
Apr29-12, 12:48 PM
Sci Advisor
P: 4,782
Quote Quote by sweet springs View Post
Hi.

I still feel wonder that during traveling in expanding space the top and the tail of the wave train of one photon, say 1 meter length or so is expanded as pulled rubber. Expansion is very homogeneous so wave length is exactly proportional everywhere in this 1 meter. All the colleague photons are expanded perfectly in the same manner, not like that some are red light but others remain violet.

Regards.
No, expansion isn't about stretching anything. Photons aren't "pulled" by the expansion.

A better way to think about it is that because of the curved space-time they traverse, when they arrive at their destination it is as if they arrive with a relative speed difference compared to where they arrived from.
and9
#18
Apr30-12, 02:44 AM
P: 27
NO spacetime is neither created nor destroyed. Whoever said that spacetime is being created between two galaxes to accomodate for the expansion is wrong. It is called expansion for a reason -- we are literally expanding, or stretching if you will, the fabric of spacetime as the universe grows.

The spacetime can be stretched out to all infinities as well as compacted to the singularity of planck length in all directions.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Are galaxies moving faster than the speed of light? Cosmology 46
2cars moving slightly less than speed of light look faster than light to each other? General Physics 3
Hubble law&galaxies w speeds faster than light Cosmology 7
Galaxies travelling away from each other faster than light Cosmology 5
Galaxies travelling faster than the speed of light? Special & General Relativity 8