>the fastest speed possible is the speed of light >the

>>8766600
>the universe is expanding
prove it

>>8766658

I don't need to senpai, people smarter than me did that.

>>8766658
Hubble's Law

>>8766665
Bullshit

>>8766600
don't mistake a made up math thing to explain evidence for the actual evidence itself.

>>8766667
All medals and awards have hereby been stripped from Edwin Hubble posthumously and shall be presented to this brilliant young man for decisively upturning the scientific consensus.

File: 1472652131822.jpg (23KB, 245x271px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 245x271px

>There are suns out there which with circumferences larger than the orbit of Neptune

File: RE-KS3-Y7-Red-Shift-Stars.png (9KB, 336x207px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 336x207px

>>8766658

The expansion of empty space is not the same thing as something moving in spacetime.

>>8766600
What is speed? It's a certain distance travelled in a certain time. What is distance? It's something that only exists in a space. No space, no distance.
So when talking about everyday things such as the speed of light, radio waves, spaceships, cars or snails, we talk about their movement THROUGH SPACE. If a photon from star A flies towards star B, it would reach it in say 100 years (because they are 100 ly from another). It it just starts at A and I throw a lot of space between A and B all the time, the photon will take longer because it can still only fly at the same speed but now has a greater distance to overcome. But there is no limitation on how rapidly I could throw space between A and B.

>>8766748
Space is infinitely large though (you can't measure Space as something like matter since it doesn't exist)
A star would just be moving to a empty spot,, so your argument is invalid

File: l.jpg (105KB, 601x768px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 601x768px

>>8766748
a photon travels from star A to star B in 0 seconds. did you even learn special relativity?

>>8768328
I'm obviously talkin about the reference frame of a massy observer. Get some reading skills

>>8768328
What if there was a blackhole between star a and b, and I travel around the blackhole. Who would arive faster at star b? Me or the speed of light?

>>8766686
I think this is wrong

Waves traveling through space loose energy overtime and naturally become redshifted. If they didn't, light waves would travel infinite time, with no loss of energy and violent laws of entropy.
Just my theory anyway

>>8766686
The fact that light has a shift and the fact that universe is expanding has nothing in common. It's just an interpetation. Maybe wrong

File: 1457537362942.jpg (45KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 480x480px

>>8766600
> he wants off my ride
Hmm..... give me a moment to think
...
No. NYEH HEHEHE

>>8766600
>>there is no "speed limit" in space brainlet

If you were to shine a laser pointer at the moons surface, and then flick your wrist the laser would be moving faster than the speed of light.

>>8768694
If you were to completely miss the black hole? Obviously you would arrive first, the light would be absorbed by the black hole.

>>8768792
No it wouldn't.

>>8768804
https://youtu.be/lR4tJr7sMPM

>>8768792
No it wouldn't. Check Michelson Morley experiment. The speed of light is not bound by the classic relativity (adding velocities law). Every inertial(and not ?) reference frame, agree that the velocity of light is the same.

>>8766677
lol

>>8768792
No, that wouldnt work, as it would make lightsabre way to powerful.

>>8766600
nothing inside the universe can move faster than the speed of light.

>>8768756
If they just "loose energy" the wavelength wouldn't change. The amplitude shrinks, which I guess it does.