Any math gurus out there? Like real gurus?

Thunder_ChildThunder_Child Member Posts: 2,343
edited January 2016 in Miscellaneous

I have a very non GS question and well...FB just doesn't have the type of people I need to find.

So here goes....if 13.7 billion year have past from a starting expansion rate of 0...and currently is 46.2 miles per second per 3 million light years. How long would it take to match a rate of 46.2 miles per second per 46.2 miles ? I'm certain that question will be hard to ask any other way...how many years ?

A light year is 186,000 miles a second BTW

Comments

  • tatiangtatiang Member, Sous Chef, PRO, Senior Sous-Chef Posts: 11,949

    I don't understand the question. What does "46.2 miles per second per 3 million light years" mean? That would be like saying "a car travels at 60 miles per hour per foot." Why do you have two distances in a single rate expression? Does that have to do with the expansion rate?

    New to GameSalad? (FAQs)   |   Tutorials   |   Templates   |   Greenleaf Games   |   Educator & Certified GameSalad User

  • SocksSocks London, UK.Member Posts: 12,822
    edited January 2016

    A light year is 186,000 miles a second BTW

    What !? :smile: A light year is a measure of distance rather than speed, and is about 5,800,000,000,000 miles.

  • zweg25zweg25 Member Posts: 738

    When you clarify this question could you inform us why you are interested in this?

  • zweg25zweg25 Member Posts: 738

    Cheers :)

  • RabidParrotRabidParrot Formally RabidParrot. Member Posts: 956

    8

  • RThurmanRThurman Member, Sous Chef, PRO Posts: 2,880

    Ummm........

  • SocksSocks London, UK.Member Posts: 12,822

    if you view it from the perspective of 13.7bn years ago the rate of expansion was 46mps / infinite light years (ie no expansion) . . . . now (13.7bn years later) the rate of expansion is 46mps / 3m light years . . . you can see the issue with taking infinity and 3m light years and extrapolating backwards to 46 miles . . . !?

  • DuesDues Member Posts: 1,159

    42 ;)

  • The_Gamesalad_GuruThe_Gamesalad_Guru Member Posts: 9,922
    edited January 2016

    Time is relative. At the begining of the universe Gravity was extremely denser which slows time. You also have to take into account that Galaxy's are expanding away from each other not expanding in concert. Objects in space can like Galaxies, can travel faster than the speed of light and still be in the theory of special relativity. Becuase the objects themselves don't gain any speed it is the distance of space between them that grows because of the expanding universe. Calculating travel in space takes into account distance, gravity and time. An example. Draw dots on an uninflated balloon. Now blow it up. Did the dots move farther apart? If so at what speed?

    Plus: there was never zero as something must exist for there to be a zero value. Light never starts a zero it is always 186,000 miles per second from the start. It can be slowed and bent by gravity. E=Mc2

  • ArmellineArmelline Member, PRO Posts: 5,363

    I have no idea if I understand this question, but you seem to be asking how long it will take something to match the speed of the expansion of the universe. If so, we need to know the acceleration of the thing. Assuming it's the same as the universe, then surely the answer is 13.7 billion years. For any other answer we'd need to know the acceleration.

    Or this is all way over my head.

  • Thunder_ChildThunder_Child Member Posts: 2,343
    edited January 2016

    @zweg25 said:
    When you clarify this question could you inform us why you are interested in this?

    I believe this question is no different that a person falling 32ft/sec per/sec....other than reaching a terminal velocity...kind of thought process. Eventually if the rate increased exponentially you would be falling faster and faster than 32ft per sec.

    To clarify....regardless if infinity existing...I know space/time itself is expanding...for this question you would be seperating time from space....every second...for every 3 million light years there is an expansion of 46.2 miles...and it increases exponentially 46.2 miles per second...so what I'm trying to understand is that distance actually would decrease over time....to say eventually 46.1 miles per say...every 2.9 million light years and so on....

    Eventually the expansion would increase...because it is known to be accelerating...and so based on a start and current rate....it should somehow be calculable to determine how long it would take before the expansion rate is equal to the distance it expands per second....@tatiang this is why I have a rate of 46.2 miles per sec per 46.2 miles. @zweg25 I'm want to know this as a general idea of how long a time would pass before the laws of physics...and nuclear bonds would be held in place before the expansion rate increased enough to start destabilizing and allow heavier...then eventually lighter (Hydrogen) atoms to fly apart due to the space between the proton, neutrons and electrons...and eventually quarks and down to strings that...then even then would expand so fast they lose their 5 dimensional properties...back to base 2D membranes where the "time path integer of probabilities separate and decrease to nearly 0. Most of that is irrelevant as I'm only looking for a time frame before the expansion matches the distance per second.

    @Lost_Oasis_Games this doesn't really have much to do with light other than its distance over time. Light didn't exist...let alone allowed to move distance before the moment of last scattering...about 500,000 years after inflation had occurred. It was at the beginning only space itself expanding. There was no Mass yet and was more energy based and quarks were the primary "thing" at start...but that time is so small compared to the large scale I'm referring...again I'm kind of just looking for a general time scale. Not sure I completely am able to ask this question correctly...hopefully this clarifies to everyone. It's just fun thought stuff :smile:

    Lol. I am a geek and have been so for 35 years now :-). I need help...maybe an intervention!

    I have a great interest in space and time...large and small scales of it all...dimensions...and about how things happen by only chance, choice and actions of others...this does include even both space and time.

  • SocksSocks London, UK.Member Posts: 12,822

    @Armelline said:
    I have no idea if I understand this question, but you seem to be asking how long it will take something to match the speed of the expansion of the universe.

    The question is how long will it take for the speed of expansion to reach 46 miles per second per 46 miles . . . . or to put it another way how long will it be before something that is 46 miles away from you is moving away from you at 46mps.

  • tatiangtatiang Member, Sous Chef, PRO, Senior Sous-Chef Posts: 11,949
    edited January 2016

    Yep, way over my head. @Socks can you explain why an expansion rate is stated as distance per time per distance? My naive assumption is that speed is the same whether it's over an inch or a mile.

    Got me curious...

    New to GameSalad? (FAQs)   |   Tutorials   |   Templates   |   Greenleaf Games   |   Educator & Certified GameSalad User

  • ArmellineArmelline Member, PRO Posts: 5,363

    @Socks said:
    The question is how long will it take for the speed of expansion to reach 46 miles per second per 46 miles . . . . or to put it another way how long will it be before something that is 46 miles away from you is moving away from you at 46mps.

    I'm still struggling with how you can have 46mph per x miles. Or 32ft per second per second. One is speed per distance, which confuses me, and the other is speed per time, which also confuses me.

  • Thunder_ChildThunder_Child Member Posts: 2,343
    edited January 2016

    @Armelline its Accelerating. Let's say...

    1 year ago it was 40mps per 4mly
    Today it is 46.2mps per 3mly
    Next year it's 59mps per 1mly

    Eventually it might be not just 46.2mps per 3mly...but I guess could be...1,345mps per 250 thousand light years..eventually they meet....and....it would end up And can be a negative number I believe...and it will take a certain amount of time to get to that rate.

    Never mind I feel dorky now having asked. Lol

  • ArmellineArmelline Member, PRO Posts: 5,363

    So what you're referring to isn't speeds but accelerations? 1,345mps per 250,000 light years, so it would accelerate 2690mps over 500,000 light years?

    This is why I didn't do a maths (or physics) degree...

  • The_Gamesalad_GuruThe_Gamesalad_Guru Member Posts: 9,922

    maybe your question is better posted to the astrophysics lab at MIT?

  • SocksSocks London, UK.Member Posts: 12,822
    edited January 2016

    @tatiang said:

    @Socks can you explain why an expansion rate is stated as distance per time per distance?

    Imagine a 9 x 9 grid of dots.

    'You' are located at the centre dot.

    If we enlarge the grid of dots as a whole (like scaling up an actor in GS), you will remain fixed at the centre while all the dots move away from you.

    The dot one grid space to your left will be moving away at speed X, the dot two grid spaces to your left will be moving away from you at speed X *2, the dot three spaces to your left will be moving away from you at speed X *3 ( . . . and so on).

    So, the speed of expansion is relative to the distance from you.

    You can say the expansion is speed X per grid space . . . . so in the case of the universe the speed of expansion is 46.2mps and the grid space is ~17,400,000,000,000,000,000 miles (3m LY) . . . so from where you are positioned something 17,400,000,000,000,000,000 miles away is moving away from you at 46.2mps . . . something that is 34,800,000,000,000,000,000 miles (double 17.4tn) away from you is moving away from you at 92.4mps . . . . and so on.

    Basically if you were to simply say the rate of expansion is 46.2mps that would only be true for objects 17,400,000,000,000,000,000 miles away - anything closer would be moving away from you more slowly, anything further away would be moving away from you faster.

    So . . . the rate of expansion (from where you are standing) is 46.2mps per 17,400,000,000,000,000,000 miles . . . .

    Hope that makes sense !

  • ArmellineArmelline Member, PRO Posts: 5,363

    @Socks said:
    Hope that makes sense !

    That all made perfect sense. I think what threw me was the reference to acceleration in relation to distance rather than time. My brain still hurts when I think about all this...

  • SocksSocks London, UK.Member Posts: 12,822

    @Armelline said:
    I'm still struggling with how you can have 46mph per x miles.

    That would be saying - in a system where everything is moving away from everything else at the same speed - that an object that is x miles away is moving away from you at 46mph . . . so an object that is X*2 miles away must be moving away from you at 92mph . . . . and so on.

  • tatiangtatiang Member, Sous Chef, PRO, Senior Sous-Chef Posts: 11,949

    @Socks Holy ****! That did make sense. By the way, you had me at "Imagine a 9 x 9 grid of dots. 'You' are located at the centre dot." Sounds like the intro to a Twilight Zone episode. :)

    New to GameSalad? (FAQs)   |   Tutorials   |   Templates   |   Greenleaf Games   |   Educator & Certified GameSalad User

  • SocksSocks London, UK.Member Posts: 12,822
    edited January 2016

    @tatiang said:
    @Socks Holy ****! That did make sense. By the way, you had me at "Imagine a 9 x 9 grid of dots. 'You' are located at the centre dot." Sounds like the intro to a Twilight Zone episode. :)

  • imjustmikeimjustmike Member Posts: 450
    edited January 2016

    @Thunder_Child said:

    @zweg25 said:
    When you clarify this question could you inform us why you are interested in this?

    I believe this question is no different that a person falling 32ft/sec per/sec....other than reaching a terminal velocity...kind of thought process. Eventually if the rate increased exponentially you would be falling faster and faster than 32ft per sec.

    To clarify....regardless if infinity existing...I know space/time itself is expanding...for this question you would be seperating time from space....every second...for every 3 million light years there is an expansion of 46.2 miles...and it increases exponentially 46.2 miles per second...so what I'm trying to understand is that distance actually would decrease over time....to say eventually 46.1 miles per say...every 2.9 million light years and so on....

    Eventually the expansion would increase...because it is known to be accelerating...and so based on a start and current rate....it should somehow be calculable to determine how long it would take before the expansion rate is equal to the distance it expands per second....@tatiang this is why I have a rate of 46.2 miles per sec per 46.2 miles. @zweg25 I'm want to know this as a general idea of how long a time would pass before the laws of physics...and nuclear bonds would be held in place before the expansion rate increased enough to start destabilizing and allow heavier...then eventually lighter (Hydrogen) atoms to fly apart due to the space between the proton, neutrons and electrons...and eventually quarks and down to strings that...then even then would expand so fast they lose their 5 dimensional properties...back to base 2D membranes where the "time path integer of probabilities separate and decrease to nearly 0. Most of that is irrelevant as I'm only looking for a time frame before the expansion matches the distance per second.

    @Lost_Oasis_Games this doesn't really have much to do with light other than its distance over time. Light didn't exist...let alone allowed to move distance before the moment of last scattering...about 500,000 years after inflation had occurred. It was at the beginning only space itself expanding. There was no Mass yet and was more energy based and quarks were the primary "thing" at start...but that time is so small compared to the large scale I'm referring...again I'm kind of just looking for a general time scale. Not sure I completely am able to ask this question correctly...hopefully this clarifies to everyone. It's just fun thought stuff :smile:

    Lol. I am a geek and have been so for 35 years now :-). I need help...maybe an intervention!

    I have a great interest in space and time...large and small scales of it all...dimensions...and about how things happen by only chance, choice and actions of others...this does include even both space and time.

    I'm afraid your reason for asking about this stuff is based on a false assumption. The universe is expanding, but it's the gaps between galaxies that are being bigger, not atoms themselves. They remain constant, so no matter how big the universe gets, atoms won't destabilise.

    Also you mention that galaxies are travelling faster than the speed of light. Other than theoretical particles, tachyons, nothing travels faster than the speed of light. The distances between the galaxies is increasing faster than the speed of light, but that's a very different thing.

  • Thunder_ChildThunder_Child Member Posts: 2,343

    I ndont believe I ever mentioned galaxies moving faster than the speed of light. And as I also mentioned...way later when the expansion is greater than the bonds holding atoms together will they break apart. Atoms will destabilize and the distances between galaxies are not expanding faster than the soles of light or we would never see them. Eventually they will. This is my entire point.

  • SocksSocks London, UK.Member Posts: 12,822

    @imjustmike said:
    I'm afraid your reason for asking about this stuff is based on a false assumption. The universe is expanding, but it's the gaps between galaxies that are being bigger, not atoms themselves. They remain constant, so no matter how big the universe gets, atoms won't destabilise.

    This depends on which model of the universe is right, from a few possible options (open universe, closed universe or flat universe - and variations of these to do with the amount of dark matter) there is the option of a 'big rip' where atoms are eventually torn apart / destroyed.

  • imjustmikeimjustmike Member Posts: 450

    @socks I thought the big rip wasn't widely accepted? But if it is correct then atoms will one of the last things to go?

    Also, apologies @thunder_child, it was someone else in the thread talking about ftl galaxies

  • SocksSocks London, UK.Member Posts: 12,822
    edited January 2016

    @imjustmike said:
    @socks I thought the big rip wasn't widely accepted? But if it is correct then atoms will one of the last things to go?

    None of the models are wholly accepted, well at least there is no consensus, but the big rip along with the big freeze (together as a single model) is getting a lot of support in the last few years. And yes, if the big rip model is correct atoms would be the last to go (or maybe photons!?).

    EDIT: atoms would be the last matter to go.

    EDIT: anything more than 500 pixels outside of the universe will be automatically destroyed.

  • LumpAppsLumpApps Member Posts: 2,881

    Now imagine dots on a 8x8 grid and look at the center dot...

    That's Socks ;)

  • sciocoresciocore Member Posts: 1
    edited November 2022

    This is the distance in which space expands per second in a distance of 3 million lightyears...

    1 light year = 5879000000000 miles (5.879 Trillion miles)

    5879000000000 x 1000000 = 5879000000000000000 miles [1 million lightyears]

    5879000000000000000 x 3 = 17637000000000000000 miles [3 million lightyears]

    17,637,000,000,000,000,000 Miles (17.637 quintillion miles)

    Therefore (3 million lightyears) = (17.637 quintillion miles)

    So, space between 17.637 trillion miles is expanding at 46.2 miles per second.

    8,818,500,000,000,000,000 (23.1 mps)

    4,409,250,000,000,000,000 (11.55 mps)

    4,409,250,000,000,000 (997.92 miles per day)

    between 4,409,250,000 miles, space expands at (1923.191424 feet per year)

    between 4,409,250 miles, space expands at (23.078297088 inches per year)

    between 4.40925 miles, space expands at (586.18874603519998345 nanometers per year)

    between 23,280.84 feet, space expands at (5861.8874603519998345 angstroms per year)

    between 23,280.84 feet, space expands at (586188746.0352 femtometer [fermi] per year)

    between 1 feet, space expands at (25179.02043204627 femtometer [fermi] per year)

    between 12 inches, space expands at (68.98361762204458 femtometer [fermi] per day)

    between 1 inches, space expands at (5.748634801837048 femtometer [fermi] per day)

    Or this is to say...

    X = D(2.4*10^-18)^s

    D=Distance

    S=seconds

    This formula can also be used to identify the true nature of gravity since the formula only applies to empty space. Empty space expands while occupied space does not ... so the more mass an object has, the most space expands outside of the object pushing space/objects into the mass of an object.

    So when using this method to calculate distance expanded within a given amout of time for a specific region of space, one should also know any occupied space between point a nd b in order to adust variations of the outcome. Only the measurementof dark matter expansion will be the true expansion equation. This is why I refer to the formula mentioned aboce as the RISER formula ...Relative Interchangeable Space Expansion Rate (RISER).

    So to answer your question "How long would it take to match a rate of 46.2 miles per second per 46.2 miles?"...

    Answer: Stand still for one second while thinking about an object 3 million light years away. ...unfortunately you won't be able to do this accurately while standing on planet earth due to it moving approximately 1,000 mph ...so you will need to encompass yourself with a zero-point electromagnetic field at absolute zero. Send me a post card!

Sign In or Register to comment.