主题:【原创】宇宙学的终结 -- 苏萸
楼上不妨先充实一下自己的天文学知识。
所谓宇宙膨胀‘超光速’,可以说是,也可以说不是,更保守的说---it depends。这不是因为学界对宇宙膨胀速度有争议,而是因为这句话没有包含足够清晰的物理学定义,可以作出模棱两可的理解,从而得出不同的答案。这不是错误,而是不够严谨。
楼主的介绍源自Scientific American的科普文章‘The End of Cosmology?’,内容基本忠于原文,最大的偏差恐怕是标题中少了个问号。
原文可以在此全文阅读:
如果你觉得我跟很多民科一样,都是不专业的,半懂不懂的,那倒也没错。可是这些结论并不来自于我。
以下科普资料分别来自NASA官方网站、UCLA天文系、Cornell天文系,请注意,这些都是科普问答而不是学术前沿的猜想。每段引言都有红字,这属于不同天文学家的不同说法,第一段与其他段落的红字说法似乎截然相反,但其实它们并没有冲突:
Dr. Eric Christian
I would like to add a cautionary note, in case you might be wondering. Don't get confused! This expansion does not violate Einstein's theory of relativity, even though the imaginary dough of the even larger Universe, which we can't see beyond that edge, appears to recede at speeds larger than the speed of light. The dough represents space itself, and in our expanding Universe space itself is expanding, carrying the galaxies (represented by the raisins) along on a ride. Einstein's limit to the speed of light applies only to motion through space, and not to expansion of space itself.
Dr. Eberhard Moebius
Again, this is a question that depends on which of the many distance definitions one uses. However, if we assume that the distance of an object at time t is the distance from our position at time t to the object's position at time t measured by a set of observers moving with the expansion of the Universe, and all making their observations when they see the Universe as having age t, then the velocity (change in D per change in t) can definitely be larger than the speed of light. This is not a contradiction of special relativity because this distance is not the same as the spatial distance used in SR, and the age of the Universe is not the same as the time used in SR. In the special case of the empty Universe, where one can show the model in both special relativistic and cosmological coordinates, the velocity defined by change in cosmological distance per unit cosmic time is given by v = c ln(1+z), where z is the redshift, which clearly goes to infinity as the redshift goes to infinity, and is larger than c for z > 1.718. For the critical density Universe, this velocity is given by v = 2c[1-(1+z)-0.5] which is larger than c for z > 3 .
For the concordance model based on CMB data and the acceleration of the expansion measured using supernovae, a flat Universe with OmegaM = 0.27, the velocity is greater than c for z > 1.407.
Dr. Edward L. Wright
Dr. Dave Rothstein
We do not know what happens to a substance if it moves faster than the speed of light for the very simple reason that it can never move faster than the speed of light. The speed of light poses a fundamental limit to the speed that an object can take, relative to objects nearby it. In fact, no object with any finite rest mass can move at the speed of light. That is why all the particles that move at the speed of light (e.g. photons) have zero rest mass. As a particle with mass approaches the speed of light, its energy increases and becomes infinite at the speed of light, which is the reason why it can never be accelerated to reach that speed. This has actually been verified by experiments, and it has been shown that nothing moves faster than the speed of light.
However, the above discussion only applies to objects on small scales in the universe -- for example, if you take a baseball or a planet or a star or a galaxy and try to accelerate these objects to the speed of light relative to objects nearby them, it is impossible to do. However, there is nothing which prevents objects that are separated by huge distances from moving relative to each other faster than the speed of light. Over these large distances, the effects of the universe's expansion become important, and the above discussion no longer applies.
Dr. Jagadheep D. Pandian
- 相关回复 上下关系8
🙂有些无益的讨论确实没有必要了:) 苏萸 字46 2008-02-27 12:35:51
🙂说明一下: 闲看蚂蚁上树 字455 2008-02-27 13:00:15
🙂西西河不是天文论坛,请楼主 萨佛131 字445 2008-02-27 00:28:20
🙂宇宙膨胀‘超光速’不是民科,也不是争议话题,而是事实
🙂我看还不能算事实。 njyd 字196 2008-03-02 06:38:13
🙂请把我跟萨佛的讨论看下去 1 卷心菜 字710 2008-03-02 07:15:22
🙂谢谢!花.虽然由于英文水平限制,还要多花时间读 萨佛131 字144 2008-02-27 14:24:20
🙂大致学了科学美国人2008-3那文章.感觉属哲学讨论 萨佛131 字1304 2008-02-28 01:31:15