Faster than light universe?
-
Nope, but good try :) The speed of light isn't based on a revolution of a small planet orbiting a small non-descript star in the unfashionable western reaches of the Galaxy. Measurements of time and distance all follow the same rules when measuring anything from the size of the universe to the size of a molecule. Get down below that and you have to talk to Uncle Quantum Mechanics, who's surly, disagreeable and slipperier than a greased weasel.
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
It's also worth pointing out, not many people know too much about the outer extrimities of the Universe (if any) yet. We are trying to apply modern physics to it, but haven't completely succeeded. So, there still exists the chance we could be wrong about it.
Absolutely - and this is the beauty of Science. Trying to find how big the universe is is like being put in a pitch black room and being asked what colour the walls are. It's one deductive step after another and each step we take may be right or wrong, but with each success or failure we get another clue and get closer to the answer.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Chris Maunder wrote:
Nope, but good try
At least it compiled. :-D
Chris Maunder wrote:
Measurements of time and distance all follow the same rules when measuring anything from the size of the universe to the size of a molecule.
I don't think the actual measurement/distance of it will change, per sé. I think what changes is our interpretation of the measurement that changes.
Jeremy Falcon
-
Reminds me of a poem... :)
---- Scripts i’ve known... CPhog 1.8.2 - make CP better. Forum Bookmark 0.2.5 - bookmark forum posts on Pensieve Print forum 0.1.2 - printer-friendly forums Expand all 1.0 - Expand all messages In-place Delete 1.0 - AJAX-style post delete Syntax 0.1 - Syntax highlighting for code blocks in the forums
Catchy. :laugh:
Jeremy Falcon
-
God works in mysterious ways. ;P Marc
Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmerMarc Clifton wrote:
God works in mysterious ways.
:laugh::laugh:
Jeremy Falcon
-
Dario Solera wrote:
The question is, what is there, beyond those 180 billion light years? :~ No one can answer that question.
Since nothing in the current universe can ever get "beyond", it's also irrelevant.
Isn't there a theory that gravitrons or something can jump between universes?
BW
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
-- Steven Wright -
Jeffry J. Brickley wrote:
universe of 3D space
Did you order Universe LiteTM? Pay a little more (or get the subscription) and you can get the 7, 11, 16 or 26 dimension version. I heard the 11 and 26 dimension versions are really unstable and back backwards compatibility problems, though.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Chris Maunder wrote:
11 and 26 dimension versions are really unstable and back backwards compatibility problems, though.
which is why superstring theory has moved onto compactification of dimensions to 10. Bosonic hyperspace of 26 dimensions suffers the problems of tachyon particles with imaginary mass. More current discussions involve supersymetry, dimensional compactification, and M-theory variants. :cool:
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Christopher Duncan wrote:
but as a techie I'd still bust them for using two different definitions of a measurement unit (year)
How so, there's only one measurement and we're trying to explain an unkown with it? Unless I missed something obvious.
Jeremy Falcon
Because if the radius of the universe is 90 billion light years but the universe is less than 20 billion years old, then you have to play some games with the term "year" to make the math work. And remember, I'm just tossing all this out for fun. I don't know the first thing about astrophysics.
Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes www.PracticalStrategyConsulting.com
-
I'm a simple kinda guy, so feel free to poke fun at my complete lack of understanding in the domain of astronomy and astrophysics. However, this article, Universe Might be Bigger and Older than Expected[^], concludes that the universe is 15.8 billion years old and 180 billion light years wide. If the big bang is still the current predominant thinking, then assuming a somewhat spherical universe, 180 billion light years wide would indicate a radius of 90 billion light years. So, if nothing can travel faster than the speed of light, and the universe has expanded so wide that it would take light 90 billion years to reach the outer extremities, how is this distance possible in only 15.9 billion years? Are objects in the universe travelling faster than the speed of light to compensate, or did they just look at the source code to find out where the cheats are? :-D Yes, I realize that there are probably perfectly good explanations for this that simply point out my ignorance. However, from a layman's point of view I do it a somewhat entertaining concept. :)
Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes www.PracticalStrategyConsulting.com
-
God works in mysterious ways. ;P Marc
Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmerMarc Clifton wrote:
God works in mysterious ways.
Which is exactly why He is called the Great Mystery. ;P
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Chris Maunder wrote:
11 and 26 dimension versions are really unstable and back backwards compatibility problems, though.
which is why superstring theory has moved onto compactification of dimensions to 10. Bosonic hyperspace of 26 dimensions suffers the problems of tachyon particles with imaginary mass. More current discussions involve supersymetry, dimensional compactification, and M-theory variants. :cool:
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
It all shows that you need to plan and document, plan and document before you start thinking you can just slap together 26 dimensions and assume it'll all work. Imaginary mass for tachyon particles? Can you say "kludge"? :rolleyes:
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
-
God works in mysterious ways. ;P Marc
Some people believe what the bible says. Literally. At least [with Wikipedia] you have the chance to correct the wiki -- Jörgen Sigvardsson
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmerReminds me of a "The Far Side" cartoon showing the stereotypical old, bearded white man version of God break dancing on the sidewalk, to which a bystander commented, "Wow. The Lord really does move in mysterious ways."
Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes www.PracticalStrategyConsulting.com
-
Because if the radius of the universe is 90 billion light years but the universe is less than 20 billion years old, then you have to play some games with the term "year" to make the math work. And remember, I'm just tossing all this out for fun. I don't know the first thing about astrophysics.
Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes www.PracticalStrategyConsulting.com
Christopher Duncan wrote:
Because if the radius of the universe is 90 billion light years but the universe is less than 20 billion years old, then you have to play some games with the term "year" to make the math work.
Ah, lessoned learned. I shouldn't talk astrophysics while my girlfriend is calling me to go get my food at the same time. :-D
Jeremy Falcon
-
It all shows that you need to plan and document, plan and document before you start thinking you can just slap together 26 dimensions and assume it'll all work. Imaginary mass for tachyon particles? Can you say "kludge"? :rolleyes:
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Chris Maunder wrote:
Can you say "kludge"?
kludge. :laugh:;P
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Isn't there a theory that gravitrons or something can jump between universes?
BW
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
-- Steven WrightBut how would we know? :confused:
š Cheers, Vikram.
I don't know and you don't either. Militant Agnostic
-
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote:
Just because light can't travel faster than a certain speed, doesn't mean that space itself can expand faster.
Sometimes it's the simple explanations that are the best.
Jeremy Falcon
-
It all shows that you need to plan and document, plan and document before you start thinking you can just slap together 26 dimensions and assume it'll all work. Imaginary mass for tachyon particles? Can you say "kludge"? :rolleyes:
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Chris Maunder wrote:
Can you say "kludge"?
I thought that was the definition of the human race. :-D
Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes www.PracticalStrategyConsulting.com
-
But how would we know? :confused:
š Cheers, Vikram.
I don't know and you don't either. Militant Agnostic
Because when you counted your gravitrons the next morning, you'd be missing a few. :-D
Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes www.PracticalStrategyConsulting.com
-
Chris Maunder wrote:
Nope, but good try
At least it compiled. :-D
Chris Maunder wrote:
Measurements of time and distance all follow the same rules when measuring anything from the size of the universe to the size of a molecule.
I don't think the actual measurement/distance of it will change, per sé. I think what changes is our interpretation of the measurement that changes.
Jeremy Falcon
Jeremy Falcon wrote:
At least it compiled.
It must be right then... I hear that all the time, no syntax error, it must be right... :laugh:
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote:
Just because light can't travel faster than a certain speed, doesn't mean that space itself can expand faster.
Sometimes it's the simple explanations that are the best.
Jeremy Falcon
I hope you saw that I missed a "can't" (was can). :)
-- This episode performed entirely by sock puppets
-
I hope you saw that I missed a "can't" (was can). :)
-- This episode performed entirely by sock puppets
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote:
I hope you saw that I missed a "can't" (was can).
I didn't notice that at all. :-O But, I still got what you were saying at least.
Jeremy Falcon
-
Exactly :) Relativity says that information cannot travel than the speed of light, it says nothing about objects travelling faster than the speed of light (as far as I can remember from my college days). If there are any object that travel faster than the speed of light, we have no way of sensing that they are actually doing so. So it is perfectly plausible to think of a universe that is wider than ~31 light years. Nicola