There are things yet discovered. How do the god believers reconcile that Poseidon was once credited with creation of waves on the ocean, but now we know otherwise? You claim that because it cannot be explained now, it must be a god... so did the ancient Greek.

The Darwinian vs. God Contest One day a group of Darwinian scientists got together and decided that man had come a long way and no longer needed God. So they picked one Darwinian to go and tell Him that they were done with Him. The Darwinian walked up to God and said, "God, we've decided that we no longer need you. We're to the point that we can clone people and do many miraculous things, so why don't you just go on and get lost." God listened very patiently and kindly to the man. After the Darwinian was done talking, God said, "Very well, how about this? Let's say we have a man-making contest." To which the Darwinian happily agreed. God added, "Now, we're going to do this just like I did back in the old days with Adam." The Darwinian said, "Sure, no problem," and bent down and grabbed himself a handful of dirt. God looked at him and said, "No, no, no. You go get your own dirt!" a little humour! drs lets see

You're misunderstanding physics, basically. Space itself is expanding as well, putting in more distance between objects. So... now that we're done with that, how much harder is it to reconcile the myth that the earth is 6,000 years old when every single scientific discipline that provides historical evidence says otherwise?

I'm no physicist, but I know enough to know that moving at the speed of light isn't quite the same as moving apart at the speed of light. ie, 2 people walking away from each other each moving at a speed of 1 mph will move apart at a speed of 2mph. I know this doesn't account for the whole thing, but I suspect that considering the 4th dimension redoubles the effect of this idea. I could be completely wrong about this and it is completely unfounded. Incidentally though, the big bang is a singularity, like a black hole, which is defined as a place where the normal laws of physics don't apply. We know black holes exist, so why dispute the existence of the big bang?

Hmmm...I think it is about fifteen billion light years, Kornflapper. And I don't knee jerk that the Big Bang is the absolute answer. It is just the most accepted theory on the books today. There may be another one down the road. And where does your 46 billion come from? I have never heard that one....

One day we will laugh at our present day physics, just as we did when the world was thought to be the center of the universe. Give it some time. We are mere infants in the world of knowledge inside our Univers.e

While it is true that General Relativity tells us that objects cannot move faster than c relative to spacetime itself, this does not mean that mass cannot "ride" on expanding spacetime, potentially travelling faster than the speed of light away from another mass at a sufficient distance. This is possible because the universe is itself expanding. Draw some dots with a marker on a partially inflated balloon, and then inflate it all the way. The dots will appear to be moving away from each other, despite technically being in the same place. Perhaps ones that started 1 inch from each other will now be 2 inches, but dots that were 3 inches are now 6 inches. Dots will move away from each other at an increasing rate as they get farther away from each other. This is in essence how the expansion of spacetime functions, and we have observed more distant objects moving away at a faster rate than closer object. Conceivably, two objects could be so far apart, that each will appear to be moving away from the other at more than 1/2 the speed of light in reference to a central observer. At that point, light from the one object, will never reach the other. So one will no longer see the other. Furthermore, using the balloon model, one can see that while the dots are all moving away from each other, there is no central point of expansion (not one that is referenceable on the 2D surface of the balloon at least). More evidence for the uniformity of the universe and no central point is that it looks the same in every direction. Additionally, with the model of the closed universe like that on the surface of the balloon, heading in any one direction will end you up where you started. Applying this concept to a universe of 3 dimensions wrapped around a 4th, this can be mimicked. So while object may appear to be 26 billion light years apart to us, this may not be the case ultimately.

Well, anyone's capable of putting the decimal point in the wrong place :)

here is your answer read number 13. heck read the whole article i had more answers than i had questions. http://www.physics.adelaide.edu.au/~dkoks/Faq/Relativity/SpeedOfLight/FTL.html#13

There is a theory that under certain conditions, such as the big bang, that the speed of light is variable and at the time of the big bang its speed was much, much faster. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variable_speed_of_light

The universe is expanding, and has been doing so ever since the Big Bang, and will continue to do so for an infinite amount of time

Things moved alot faster when the alpha constant was different and absolute zero wasn't the barrier it is today.

answering ninja ""Incidentally though, the big bang is a singularity, like a black hole, which is defined as a place where the normal laws of physics don't apply. We know black holes exist, so why dispute the existence of the big bang?"" actually a black hole or singularity still holds to normal laws it just has larger or smaller numbers in the equations, as well as other applicable forces. example drop a rock , it travels x speed. (all parts of the equation apply) put a rocket on the back of the rock and point it down, it travels x speed + acceleration of rocket. all parts of the original equation still apply but additional information increasingly excels the beginning equation (especially if the rocket is the size of the apollo rockets) and the original rock weighed 5 pounds) fun to think of .

"Current interpretations of astronomical observations indicate that the age of the Universe is 13.73 ( ± 0.12) billion years, and that the diameter of the observable Universe is at least 93 billion light years, or 8.80 × 1026 metres. (It may seem paradoxical that two galaxies can be separated by 93 billion light years in only 13 billion years, since special relativity states that matter cannot be accelerated to exceed the speed of light in a localized region of space-time. However, according to general relativity, space can expand with no intrinsic limit on its rate; thus, two galaxies can separate more quickly than the speed of light if the space between them grows.) It is uncertain whether the size of the Universe is finite or infinite." Source and further information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe

its called dark matter and dark energy, it acts as an accelerator

If you're using a Wikipedia article for your numbers here, I shall address you to another part of that article which talks about misconceptions about the size of the universe. "13.7 billion light-years. The age of the universe is about 13.7 billion years. While it is commonly understood that nothing travels faster than light, it is a common misconception that the radius of the observable universe must therefore amount to only 13.7 billion light-years. This reasoning only makes sense if the universe is the flat spacetime of special relativity; in the real universe, spacetime is highly curved on cosmological scales, which means that 3-space (which is roughly flat) is expanding, as evidenced by Hubble's law. Distances obtained as the speed of light multiplied by a cosmological time interval have no direct physical significance."

I am less concerned what happened after the Big Bang than before it, but scientist at the moment suggest that Supernovas, which are within the lovely "baloon" description by Leetmeat earlier, are expanding space/time even faster. I think that the Universe is an "open system" and imported energy during and after the Big Bang explains the acceleration and Black Holes provide the output mechanisum. This is the only current theory which explains why energy/matter are in the Universe and why they are a constant. Everything in the Universe has inputs and outputs including humans (homoeostasis) so if we are a product of the Universe why should the Universe be any different?

Because the stretching of space as the Universe expands does not count as velocity. I may only be able to run at 10mph, but if I am on a travellator moving at 5mph, the distance from my point of origin increases at 15mph. (The analogy is not exact, but maybe you get the idea).

I could have something to do with acceleration. Time is distorted when accelerating.

The singularity that produced the Big Bang resulting in the known universe predate the laws of physics created by IT. One being the speed of light. The laws you know are thereafter the cosmic event and are bound to everything WITHIN the expansion.

the notion that objects can't move faster than light takes effect only in normal conditions, but when you talk about something as extreme as the big bang, there is so much energy that all of the subatomic paricles were pushed apart much faster than light so it is not surprising that galaxies are further apart than the universe is old.

On top of some of the answers people have already given, there's the hyperinflation. Its an unaccounted-for expansion early in the universe where it expanded several orders of magnitudes very quickly - if it hadn't of occured then the universe now would be something like 400 million kilometres big? I forget the exact number.

The distance between a stable object and one traveling must not only include the distance traveled but also take into account the rate at which space itself is expanding making the sum total greater than that of the actual distance traveled by the moving object.