-
"How can we look at the beginning of the universe?"
We cannot see anything prior to the final glow of the medium that released the CMBR. So 270,000 years after the Big Bang. They are being metaphorical.
"If the light from the bing-bang explosion only reaching us *now*, does that mean that the universe expanded faster than the speed of light right after big-bang explosion?"
You are so totally not thinking. *We* were created in the Big Bang, and we just got here *now*. Light from most distances is also arriving here *now*. And yes, the Universe inflated at many multiples of the speed of light, slowed to a veritable crawl, and accelerated to what we see today.
"Wouldn't that violate einstein's theory of general relativity?"
Heavens no, Relativity *describes* this. No bit of matter is moving especially fast with respect to other bits of matter that are at the same point in the Universe's history. Pretty much all galaxies at a given distance / age, recede at pretty much the same velocity... this recession velocity describes how *now* is departing from *then*, not how our galaxy is moving with respect to some ancient galaxy. It isn't like huge thrusters are involved or anything.
Expansion of space, does not violate Relativity.
Here are some cosmology links, so you can read up a bit more on this...
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmol…
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmol…
We cannot see anything prior to the final glow of the medium that released the CMBR. So 270,000 years after the Big Bang. They are being metaphorical.
"If the light from the bing-bang explosion only reaching us *now*, does that mean that the universe expanded faster than the speed of light right after big-bang explosion?"
You are so totally not thinking. *We* were created in the Big Bang, and we just got here *now*. Light from most distances is also arriving here *now*. And yes, the Universe inflated at many multiples of the speed of light, slowed to a veritable crawl, and accelerated to what we see today.
"Wouldn't that violate einstein's theory of general relativity?"
Heavens no, Relativity *describes* this. No bit of matter is moving especially fast with respect to other bits of matter that are at the same point in the Universe's history. Pretty much all galaxies at a given distance / age, recede at pretty much the same velocity... this recession velocity describes how *now* is departing from *then*, not how our galaxy is moving with respect to some ancient galaxy. It isn't like huge thrusters are involved or anything.
Expansion of space, does not violate Relativity.
Here are some cosmology links, so you can read up a bit more on this...
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmol…
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmol…
-
We are clearly seeing light from things that happened much longer ago than we can readily imagine. The idea is that light from these far galaxies had to leave them perhaps within a few million years or so from the time of the big bang.
You might like the book "The View from the Center of the Universe" or its website, www.theviewfromthecenter.com. They are about 6 years old or more, so you might find the book in a library. It (or they) talk about these cosmological things but don't try to impress you with the authors' math prowess.
You might like the book "The View from the Center of the Universe" or its website, www.theviewfromthecenter.com. They are about 6 years old or more, so you might find the book in a library. It (or they) talk about these cosmological things but don't try to impress you with the authors' math prowess.