"Astronomers have pushed NASA's Hubble Space Telescope to its limits by finding what is likely to be the most distant object ever seen in the universe. The object's light traveled 13.2 billion years to reach Hubble, roughly 150 million years longer than the previous record holder. The age of the universe is approximately 13.7 billion years."
"The object's light traveled 13.2 billion years to reach Hubble, roughly 150 million years longer than the previous record holder. The age of the universe is approximately 13.7 billion years."
If we started off with some Big Bang singularity 13.7 billion years ago, and this object is now 13.2 billion light years away, that means that it averaged close to light- speed away from us?
Given that objects in our universe are accelerating away from each other, how does any object average near light-speed?
Unless ... it popped into existence 13.2 billion years ago 13.2 billion light-years away, and its light is just now reaching us.
Unless, did you take into account the expansion of Space itself - and with it the distances observed within?
Personally I don't see any conflict between the modern cosmological model and the assertion that God created the universe from nothing. They both say the same thing, one moment there was nothing, and the next, all the energy in the universe today existed. Let there be light! BANG!
The bump that gets the feathers of religiously petrified sun-parrots all ruffled is that light traveling 13+ billion years sort of contradicts their quaint notion that Creation is only a few thousand years old.
They're welcome to their opinion - but when they start asserting that I must accept of their cosmic calendar instead of believing what my own eyes see as a condition of my (or my children's) membership in "THEIR" body of Christ, well... then I start plucking Fallible and Uninspired plumage.
"Unless, did you take into account the expansion of Space itself - and with it the distances observed within?"
Well, I didn't want to get technical so I ignored that. My point was that the "Big Bang" occurred some 13-14 billion years ago, but not from a single point.
To me, that's more plausible than this "remote object" starting out right next to us 13.7 billion years ago (during the Big Bang) and ending up 13.2 billion light-years away during that time. It would have to be travelling near light speed all the way, and the red-shift would be extreme.
I believe space-time is expanding to accommodate our expanding universe. But I don't see how the expansion of space-time has any effect on the objects within our universe.
Nah. "C" just is. It's like Pi or Plank's Constant.
"The speed of light in vacuum, commonly denoted c, is a universal physical constant important in many areas of physics. Its value is exactly 299792458 metres per second," www.google.com/search?q=s...f+light&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8