Bill 6

Ok, I have done some research on the web and find that there are some problems with what I have been saying. For one thing Special Relativity (SR) does not apply to objects at the edge of the observable universe. You have to handle them with General Relativity (GR).

I have spent some time trying to digest the information I got from a paper I found on ARVIX Expanding Confusion: common misconceptio...ineweaver, 2003 .
I'm still not sure I understand it all, but here I go trying to write out what I think it said.

The major point in the paper is that there is no sharp cutoff of what we can see at the Hubble Radius. The Hubble Radius is the point at which galaxies are receding from us at C (light speed). The light emitted by an object that is beyond the Hubble Radius moves away from the source at C. Some of it moves away from us, some of it moves toward us. At the time of emission the object is outside the Hubble Radius, so we cannot receive that light. But the Hubble Radius is expanding with time, so that light that was emitted outside of the Hubble Radius when is was emitted may well come within the Hubble Radius. In fact there seem to be many visible galaxies that have recession velocities greater than C.

The red-shift of light due to the expansion of the universe is not due to the doppler effect caused by the speed of the source. The shift is due to the expansion of the universe. Therefore the light is not red-shifted to a 0 frequency, or at least not at the Hubble Radius.

I am still trying to get my mind wrapped around what the authors had to say in the paper. In part that is because it is a technical paper, with a bunch of differential equations in it. I had 1 semester of differential equations over 30 years ago, and promptly forgot all about it when I got out of college. And I suspect that the math in their world is a bit above what I would have learned in a first course.

Anyway, that is what I have come up with so far. If anybody has something that will supplement what I have there, please feel free to reply.

Bill Gill

C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.