As in, are there some parts of physics that aren’t as clear-cut as they usually are? If so, what are they?

  • bitwaba@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    The expansion of the universe is measured at 70km per second per megaparsec (~3 million light years).

    So if you take 2 things that started say ~3 billion light years apart (which would be ~1000x a megaparsec), that means every single second the universe has existed those 2 points have gotten 70,000km further apart. And now that they’re further apart, they separate even faster the next second.

    For reference:

    • 31.5 million seconds in a year. ( 3.15 x 10^7 )
    • universe is 13.8 billion years old ( 1.38 x 10^10 )

    So we talking about this 70,000km getting added between the 2 points ~4 x 10^17 times.

    Then you gotta bring calculus into it to factor in the changing distance over time.

    It … adds up. Which is why you’ll see the estimates for the observable universe’s radius being ~46.5 billion light years (93 billion light year diameter), even though the universe had only existed for ~14 billion years.

    • TauZero@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      And now that they’re further apart, they separate even faster the next second.

      That’s a common misconception! Barring effects of matter and dark energy, the two points do NOT separate faster as they get farther apart, the speed stays the same! The Hubble constant H0 is defined for the present. If you are talking about one second in the future, you have to use the Hubble parameter H, which is the Hubble constant scaled with time. So instead of 70 km/s/Mpc, in your one-second-in-the-future example the Hubble parameter will be 70 * age of the universe / (age of the universe + 1 second) = 69.999...9 and your two test particles will still be moving apart at 70000km/s exactly.

      The inclusion of dark energy does mean that the Hubble “constant” itself is increasing with time, so the recession velocity of distant galaxies does increase with time, but that’s not what you meant. Moreover, the Hubble constant hasn’t always been increasing! It has actually been decreasing for most of the age of the universe! The trend only reversed 5 billion years ago when the effects of matter became less dominant than effects of dark energy. This is why cosmologists were worried about the idea of a Big Crunch for a while - if there had been a bit more matter, the expansion could have slowed down to zero and reversed entirely!