Posted by
lrudolph on
Oct 24, 2013; 9:25pm
URL: http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/Most-Distant-Galaxy-What-s-wrong-with-this-statement-tp7584094p7584097.html
> From the BBC at
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24637890
> (today)
>
> /Because it takes light so long to travel from the outer edge of the
> Universe to us, the galaxy appears as it was 13.1 billion years ago (its
> distance from Earth of 30 billion light-years is because the Universe is
> expanding)./
I don't see much wrong with it (though I don't know if it's a true statement).
"Galaxy X was 13.1 billion light-years from here-and-now, along a light-like
geodesic, when it emitted the radiation we are presently detecting. The present
location of Galaxy X (assuming the truth of present physical theories, etc.) is,
partly because the Universe has been expanding, 30 billion light-years from
here-and-now, in the sense that (with the same disclaimer) radiation we are
presently emitting will be detectable at Galaxy X in 30 billion years." Does
my attempt at paraphrase go beyond, or not as far as, the original? If not,
what's wrong with the paraphrase?
Lee Rudolph
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
to unsubscribe
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com