5 ms·
Correct, as I understand it. No matter can travel at the speed of light, and no light can travel faster than the speed of light. But the rule doesn't extend to
by seanw444 4y ago
Correct, as I understand it. No matter can travel at the speed of light, and no light can travel faster than the speed of light. But the rule doesn't extend to the rate of expansion of the "field" on which those things exist.
- seszett 4y agoWhen I read this, it seems to me like this is more or less the same as saying that the speed of light is decreasing, but I am probably wrong?
- jhoechtl 4y agoIs this something anybody ever thought out to look at things this way? Sounds like an intriguing Gedankenexperiment
- eigenket 4y agoYeah, ideas like this are usually called "tired light" models, they have been extensively explored for the last hundred years or so. A lot of these models have been shown to be false by experiments, but I guess if you try you can probably cook up models which haven't been falsified by anything yet.
- dpkirchner 4y agoLike if you calculated the speed not in meters per second but fraction-of-the-universe per second?
- cout 4y agoWhat if space isn't expanding and we are just shrinking?
- make3 4y agoonly if the expansion is really equal everywhere I guess
- function_seven 4y agoI vote we bring back “aether” as a valid term. The aether is stretching everywhere, and in so doing it spreads distant things away faster than light can overcome.
- make3 4y agoI mean that's just space