The way I understand it is the farther away a object is the faster it is moving away from us, but also the farther away something is the older it is. So could that mean things were moving apart faster in the past but are slowing down?

    • School_Lunch@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yes that is what I’ve always heard which is why I asked this question. I was hoping for bit more detail. My assumption is that we measure expansion through red-shift, and distance doesn’t matter in that measurement? My thought was that red-shift tells you that light waves have been stretched out, but how do you know when or where most of that stretching occurred?

      • lemming@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        The distance does matter. There are ways of measuring/estimating distances other than red shift. So basically you plot the distances against the red shift and if the relation is linear, the rate of expansion is constant, and that isn’t the case. Interestingly, it seems lately that the rate is different based on which way of measuring you use. Something is probably wrong and nobody knows what. That is exciting, because this is how you discover new things.