Skip to main content
Physics

Return to Question

added 78 characters in body
Source Link
johann
johann
  • 309
  • 1
  • 3
  • 9

In a Wikipedia article I read that the "Metric Expansion of Space" exceeds the speed of light. If this is true then we must be being disconnected from very remote parts of the universe since gravity can only travel at the speed of light.

In his book "A Brief History of Time", Hawking seems to still believe in the big crunch. Well, it does appear that way, as he devotes a lot of space about the vector of time reversing due to the big crunch.

But how can the big crunch still be a valid theory if the above statement is true, or is it not true?

This question is not about dark energy,although i do appreciate the replies.

In a Wikipedia article I read that the "Metric Expansion of Space" exceeds the speed of light. If this is true then we must be being disconnected from very remote parts of the universe since gravity can only travel at the speed of light.

In his book "A Brief History of Time", Hawking seems to still believe in the big crunch. Well, it does appear that way, as he devotes a lot of space about the vector of time reversing due to the big crunch.

But how can the big crunch still be a valid theory if the above statement is true, or is it not true?

In a Wikipedia article I read that the "Metric Expansion of Space" exceeds the speed of light. If this is true then we must be being disconnected from very remote parts of the universe since gravity can only travel at the speed of light.

In his book "A Brief History of Time", Hawking seems to still believe in the big crunch. Well, it does appear that way, as he devotes a lot of space about the vector of time reversing due to the big crunch.

But how can the big crunch still be a valid theory if the above statement is true, or is it not true?

This question is not about dark energy,although i do appreciate the replies.

Link to article, correct spellng
Source Link
Keith Thompson
Keith Thompson
  • 7.7k
  • 36
  • 42

The metric expansion of space and HawkinsHawking

In a Wikipedia article iWikipedia article I read that the "Metric Expansion of Space" exceeds the speed of light. If this is true then we must be being disconnected from very remote parts of the universe since gravity can only travel at the speed of light. In

In his book " A brief history"A Brief History of time" HawkinsTime", Hawking seems to still believe in the big crunch.Well Well, it does appear that way, as he devotes a lot of space about the vector of time reversing due to the big crunch. But

But how can the big crunch still be a valid theory if the above statement is true, or is it not true?

Thanks in advance.

The metric expansion of space and Hawkins

In a Wikipedia article i read that the "Metric Expansion of Space" exceeds the speed of light. If this is true then we must be being disconnected from very remote parts of the universe since gravity can only travel at the speed of light. In his book " A brief history of time" Hawkins seems to still believe in the big crunch.Well, it does appear that way, as he devotes a lot of space about the vector of time reversing due to the big crunch. But how can the big crunch still be a valid theory if the above statement is true, or is it not true?

Thanks in advance.

The metric expansion of space and Hawking

In a Wikipedia article I read that the "Metric Expansion of Space" exceeds the speed of light. If this is true then we must be being disconnected from very remote parts of the universe since gravity can only travel at the speed of light.

In his book "A Brief History of Time", Hawking seems to still believe in the big crunch. Well, it does appear that way, as he devotes a lot of space about the vector of time reversing due to the big crunch.

But how can the big crunch still be a valid theory if the above statement is true, or is it not true?

Source Link
johann
johann
  • 309
  • 1
  • 3
  • 9

The metric expansion of space and Hawkins

In a Wikipedia article i read that the "Metric Expansion of Space" exceeds the speed of light. If this is true then we must be being disconnected from very remote parts of the universe since gravity can only travel at the speed of light. In his book " A brief history of time" Hawkins seems to still believe in the big crunch.Well, it does appear that way, as he devotes a lot of space about the vector of time reversing due to the big crunch. But how can the big crunch still be a valid theory if the above statement is true, or is it not true?

Thanks in advance.