Are they moving faster than light?

In summary, some galaxies are indeed receding at speeds faster than the speed of light, but this does not contradict Special Relativity as it applies to the expansion of the universe. This is possible due to the curved nature of spacetime and the fact that the speed limit only applies to local, non-expanding spacetime. Additionally, the concept of universal time based on the CMB allows for a consistent framework for discussing these phenomena.
  • #1
Desiree
22
0
I have heard and read that some galaxies are receding at speeds even faster than light's, is that true? If they are, then would this not contradict the very well accepted speed limit = 300,000 km/s?

Note: the question asked by a non physicist/astronomer/cosmologist.
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #3
Desiree said:
I have heard and read that some galaxies are receding at speeds even faster than light's, is that true? If they are, then would this not contradict the very well accepted speed limit = 300,000 km/s?

Note: the question asked by a non physicist/astronomer/cosmologist.

most galaxies that we can see are receding faster than light, at the present moment (in CMB restframe time). and they were receding faster than light at the time they emitted the light which is now reaching us. this is typical.
true for anything with a redshift of 1.6 or more, if I remember right.

it doesn't contradict Special Relativity, it just means that the distance to the galaxy (and its surrounding locale) is increasing by a certain percentage each year----and if the distance is large enough that annual percentage increase will be more than one lightyear-----so the distance is growing faster than c.

that doesn't mean that the galaxy out there could catch up with and pass a photon of light!

THAT would be a violation of Special Rel.
figure. the photon out there in the same locale as the galaxy is ALSO receding along with everything else in the neighborhood.

If the photon is aimed away from us and it has a race with the galaxy there is no way the galaxy can catch it. Both are receding faster than c along with the whole locale, the whole neighborhood. PLUS the photon is moving at c, relative to the galaxy.

Special Rel is mainly useful as a local approximation. It applies to flat non-expanding spacetime. so over large scales, with a curved spacetime and expansion, the stuff about speed limit and addition of velocities doesn't apply in a straightforward fashion.

Remember: it is a physics law that nothing can ever catch up with and pass a photon of light
On the other hand, a whole locale with galaxies, photons of light, and the kitchen sink, can be receding at several times the speed c.

You might enjoy Siobhan Morgan's cosmology calculator, which gives you recession speeds for objects at various redshifts. She's an astronomy professor at a University in Iowa, has a lot of her course materials online. Or did the last time I looked. by putting the right redshift in the calculator you can easily get recession speeds of 2, 3, four or more times the speed of light.
http://www.uni.edu/morgans/ajjar/Cosmology/cosmos.html
this thread has some pointers about using the calculator
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=1523913#post1523913
new url given in post #4
=============

there's a technical point: the CMB defines a universal concept of rest (when the CMB sky is approximately the same temperature in all directions, no Doppler hot spot)
and that provides an unambiguous meaning of simultaneity. a universal now. that all observers at CMB rest can agree on---at least to a good approximation.

that's the time standard I'm referring to when I say the galaxy is receding NOW, or was receding THEN, at some speed.

this universal standard time concept is built into the Hubble law, so when people use the Hubble parameter they are tacitly adopting universal time. The H parameter is the ratio of recession speed now, to distance now.

it is actually pretty intuitive, so not something to worry about. gives cosmologists a convenient working timeframe for normal everyday calculation and discussion.
 
Last edited:
  • #4
marcus said:

that doesn't mean that the galaxy out there could catch up with and pass a photon of light!

THAT would be a violation of Special Rel.

Remember: it is a physics law that nothing can ever catch up with and pass a photon of light
On the other hand, a whole locale with galaxies, photons of light, and the kitchen sink, can be receding at several times the speed c.

Thanks marcus. Your info solved this riddle of speed limit to me.
 

Related to Are they moving faster than light?

1. What is the speed of light?

The speed of light in a vacuum is approximately 186,282 miles per second or 299,792 kilometers per second.

2. Can anything travel faster than the speed of light?

According to Einstein's theory of relativity, nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. This is because as an object approaches the speed of light, its mass increases and it requires an infinite amount of energy to reach the speed of light.

3. How do scientists measure the speed of light?

Scientists use a variety of methods to measure the speed of light, including using lasers and precise timing devices. One common method is the use of the Michelson-Morley experiment, which measures the time it takes for light to travel a known distance.

4. Are there any exceptions to the speed of light rule?

While no physical object can travel faster than the speed of light, there are some phenomena that can appear to exceed the speed of light. For example, the expansion of the universe can cause objects to appear to be moving faster than the speed of light due to the stretching of space.

5. What would happen if an object could travel faster than light?

If an object were able to travel faster than the speed of light, it would violate the laws of physics as we currently understand them. This would have significant implications for our understanding of space, time, and the universe as a whole.

Similar threads

Replies
26
Views
3K
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • Cosmology
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Cosmology
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
27
Views
2K
Replies
59
Views
5K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
8
Views
1K
Back
Top