RaulDuke21

Thanks again everyone but I understand this expansion of space, I think, say galaxyA 1mly away is moving away from us, galaxyB 2mly away is moving away,(but the galaxies arent moving just space in between is getting bigger) but also galaxy A would see both us and galaxyB moving away from it at the same rate. That is a shortened sorta version of whats in my head. But what gets me is how light is being seen from far off distances from the past if we are all expanding away from each other at an accelerated rate, that light should have reached us earlier it would seem to me. Thanks again, and Martin im monitoring your new thread hope to find answers there.

Sisyphus, thanks for your posts but I am still troubles by this concept. Its the expansion that gets me the most. Things farther away are expanding faster than things closer to us, correct? If this is the case how could we see distant objects at all? I guess there would have to be a limit to what we could see. Even the distant objects I would think would be moving slower to our eyes because of time dilation. Or does the speed of light just bypass expansion somehow and we cannot explain it. Sorry for not quite understanding but this is really intriguing stuff.

Thanks, I now see my flaw. I was under the impression that all things were created at a central point. So I can see now that as the temperature cooled down enough for gas to start coming together and lighting up, it was already larger than our visible universe. We basically have no distance to anything just a time we can put to the CMB. What we are basically seeing is these stars that have just formed out of this gas from the CMB, correct? Basically any direction we point a telescope we could perhaps see these early stars and galaxies. I believe I understand what is going on now. Every documentary, everything that I have read makes it seem that a singular point started it all, but that is what was confusing me as it didnt make sense with our current universe. Thanks all!!

Thanks Airbrush for the reply, but that still doesnt fit with what I am thinking of. Ive got a couple more things I wanted to add before hitting bed that just occured to me. I am under the impression that we are 13.7 billion ly from the origin of the universe. If we expanded under the speed of light, than we shouldnt be able to see that far back in time. And if we are that far from the origin than the universe is much older because of slower expansion. Now if we expanded faster than light then slowed down, and we are 13.7 billion ly away than we would see that light now but the age should be much younger, so I am confused. I think whats getting me on this is I hear we expanded fast but we are supposedly accelerating now, yet we are expanding under the speed of light or we wouldnt be seeing these distant objects. Sorry about the post just trying to see logic in this. Thanks again for any help.

Ok ive been looking over alot of science forums for awhile now and there is something that keeps bugging me. I believe we estimate the universe at 13.7 billion years old. Hubble has taken deep field photos of galaxies that appear to be 13 billion years old. That appeared just after the dark age. Here is my problem. We can supposedly see things that happened just 700 million years after the universe began, yet at that time when the light came from those galaxies we couldnt have been more than 1.4 billion lys away from them. Thats even if we were moving at the speed of light up until that point. So how could we just now be seeing that light? I would have thought that light would be long dead. So please if someone could enlighten me and help me grasp what im missing here I would greatly appreciate it.