Skip to main content

The Fastest Things In The Universe

By

Gravitational waves can't actually be seen as in this simulation.
When gazing at the night sky from here on Earth, it’s easy to picture the Universe as calm and unhurried. But in reality, out there in space, things move fast – really fast. Putting aside particle accelerators and the like, the fastest-moving man-made object was the Helios 2 spacecraft launched in the 1970s. It reached a top speed of 68.75 km/s (153,800 mph) on its mission to the Sun. But this was just a leisurely stroll compared to the fastest things in the Cosmos. So, where do we find the real speed freaks of the Universe? Here’s a run-down of the top five.

1. Expansion of the Universe

Speed: Greater than the speed of light!

The Universe is expanding. But the Universe isn’t filling up ‘empty space’ as it expands because it is ‘space’ itself which is expanding. Although the laws of physics say that two objects can’t move faster than light speed with respect to each other, there is no such restriction on the actual expansion of the space through which they move.

In principle, the furthest we can see in the Universe is called the ‘cosmological horizon’, beyond which light cannot yet have reached us during the lifetime of the Universe. Although we can never see it, the Universe still exists beyond this limit, and those invisible parts of the Universe are receding from us at greater than the speed of light. Unfortunately, because we can never observe those parts of the Universe, we cannot be sure how fast they are receding from us. However, the entire Cosmos may be a trillion trillion times as big as our ‘observable’ Universe, so that its most distant parts could be moving away from us at many millions of times the speed of light!

2. Light

Speed: 299,792.458 km per second

Claiming that the expansion of empty space is the fastest thing in the Universe is cheating a bit. It’s more honest to say that the fastest ‘physical’ thing in the Universe is simply light itself (or in fact the whole electromagnetic spectrum).

Of course, the Universe has a self-imposed top speed limit - the speed of light at 299,792.458 km/s. Nothing moves faster than this. Why? Well, objects that have mass require energy to accelerate them and the laws of physics say that to accelerate a mass up to light speed would require infinite energy. More confusingly, objects traveling faster than light would have to be traveling backwards in time!

3. Gravitational Waves

Speed: 299,792.458 km per second

In fact, it’s not just light that travels at light speed. All mass-less particles do, as do the force fields such as the weak and strong nuclear forces and the gravitational force. So do ‘gravitational waves’, the ripples in the fabric of ‘space-time’ created by moving mass. Although we haven’t yet built instruments powerful enough to detect these gravitational waves, their existence has been proven by looking closely at the orbital decay of a binary pulsar system called PSR B1913+16.

4. Cosmic Rays
Artist's impression of a blazar.

Speed: 299,792.4579999 km per second

What about ordinary matter traveling at high speed? The record is held by cosmic rays. These aren’t ‘rays’ at all – they’re subatomic particles created in the most powerful events in the Universe such as galaxy mergers and ‘hypernovae’. The fastest cosmic ray yet detected was traveling so close to the speed of light that it had the same amount of energy as a medium-paced cricket ball, although it was a fraction of the size of a single atom! It had a thousand billion billion times the energy of protons that the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) can produce at maximum energy!

5. Blazar Jets

Speed: 299,492.666 km per second

For large chunks of matter (as opposed to subatomic particles) the speed record is held by the ‘jets’ seen in ‘blazars’. Cannibalistic black holes at the heart of these active galaxies release huge amounts of energy which is funneled into jets by a dense, highly-magnetic accretion disk. The jets in some blazars have been observed to move at about 99.9% the speed of light! These blobs of material are at least the size of the solar system!



Comments

  1. DivergentDroid20 September 2015 at 22:13

    Gravitational waves.. BS.. the claim of proof is by examining something billions of miles away with a telescope - you can't get there to examine further or do any test etc.. it's all made up hogwash.. Hey folks.. Here's the truth - Gravitational Waves are a THEORY and the Observations of the binary star system are now Part of that theory but does Not Prove the theory. It may be a best guess at worst but because your teaching this as fact which is Wrong, this is NOT Real Science. Congrats.. you've made Science into Pseudoscience.

    ReplyDelete
  2. tonyon25 November 2015 at 19:36

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. tonyon25 November 2015 at 20:07

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  4. tonyon25 November 2015 at 20:07

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. tonyon28 November 2015 at 16:27

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous20 August 2020 at 20:17

    Aha! I am afraid that Unknown was right, as she always is... XxxC

    ReplyDelete
  7. Humaun Kabir5 March 2021 at 09:33

    Thank you for your so cool post. Please share with us more good post.

    flat earth map

    ReplyDelete
  8. HansOlo16 January 2022 at 14:35

    There is only one thing that we can actually be certain of — Jeffrey Epstein did not die by his own hand; rather, he was silenced by an errand boy acting under orders from the plutocratic cabal who control Donald Trump, their useful idiot, who holds sway over Republicans and other racist, Bible-thumping anthropoids who suckle at the Orange Abomination's pustulent cloaca.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Feel free to argue with this post...

Popular posts from this blog

Victorian Christmas Ghost Stories

By
An engraving by R. Graves entitled 'The Ghost Story', circa 1870. In his first full-length novel, The Pickwick Papers (1836-1837), Charles Dickens gave us a peculiarly Victorian view of the Christmas tradition. The host of a Yuletide gathering, Mr. Wardle of Dingley Dell, informs his guests that “Everybody sits down with us on Christmas Eve, as you see them now — servants and all; and here we wait, until the clock strikes twelve, to usher Christmas in, and beguile the time with forfeits and old stories”. So begins a long association of the traditional ghost story with Christmas-time; a tradition that has largely died out, but one that should be revived. Of course, the tradition of telling spooky stories at Christmas is much older than Dickens. It was already well-established in the early nineteenth century. In Old Christmas (from The Sketch Book of Geoffrey Crayon, Gent ., 1819), Washington Irving describes a busy Yuletide fireside with the parson “dealing forth strange a...
9 comments
Read more

Black Holes 101

By
Artist's impression of a black hole. With new blockbuster movie Interstellar now in cinemas, there's a flurry of interest in black holes and wormholes. Theoretical physicist Kip Thorne was a scientific consultant for the production and insisted that the depiction should stay within legitimate boundaries. Apart from the odd bit of artistic license, of course! Black holes are scary, right? They suck in everything in their path. They devour whole planets, stars even, ripping them apart like mere wisps of smoke. They condemn anything that confronts them to an unknowable oblivion. It’s the stuff of nightmare, or at least a bad disaster movie. But I think black holes get a bad press. They are misunderstood, misrepresented. The truth is they are fascinating creatures, if confusing, and not a little bit weird. So, relax for a moment while I give you my quick and dirty guide to black holes. The Black Hole 101, if you like. Let’s start with a simple definition of a black hole...
Post a Comment
Read more

Flat Earth Fallacy

By
I'm an accepting kind of person. I generally allow people to think what they want, believe what they want and (pretty much) say what they want, within reason. But occasionally an opinion is so far-fetched, insulting or incorrect that it debases human intelligence (all human intelligence, not just mine). And then I feel I must speak up. One such 'opinion' is the belief in a 'flat' Earth. Although this topic has a substantial history (see for example Christine Garwood's Flat Earth: The History of an Infamous Idea ), it has so far not been publicly contested in any great depth. Even Phil Plait, author of the ever-popular  Bad Astronomy Blog , declined to give such a preposterous proposition any real air-time. And I don't blame him. It really is the most absurd idea. But it should be denounced, for any number of reasons. The basic premise of the 'flat-Earth' protagonists is that ancient cultures were right, the Earth is flat , a circular disk bo...
10 comments
Read more

American's Guide To Pronouncing British Place Names

By
You all know there's some minor (though understandable) differences between British and American spelling. For example, we have 'colour' for 'color', 'favour' for 'favor' and 'harbour' for 'habor'. We have 'centre' for 'center', 'fibre' for 'fiber' and 'litre' for 'liter'. And so on. These don't usually cause us any problems, especially since they are normally pronounced the same (although with differences in accent, which is an entirely different subject!). But, British spelling idiosyncrasies go far beyond these simple examples, and never more so than in our emotive and quaint place names. British place name spelling is about as intuitive as the 'many worlds' interpretation of quantum mechanics - for the non-scientists among you, that means 'not at all'. Actually, it's not the spelling that's odd (they usually retain a perfectly logical spelling based ...
2 comments
Read more

Are Indie Authors Destroying The Market?

By
You're probably aware that we are drowning in an ocean of mediocrity. Yes, I know, there's mediocrity all around us; the TV, the music business, in fact everywhere you care to look. But I'm talking about mediocrity in 'literature', as if that term actually means something these days. Once upon a time, not so long ago, 'literature' was a respectable part of the art world. Authors were mysterious intellectuals, removed from society, tortured souls poring over their foolscap notepads with quill in hand. They were just names, often widely-known ones, like A-list celebrities with no public face, controversy or paparazzi. The authors' agents, dark figures sifting through their ever-growing slush pile of tales, held sway over a global industry from behind locked doors. The authors' publishers were equally elusive, a forbidden realm for those with literary aspirations, with the ability to put their clients names right into the homes of the reading public...
14 comments
Read more

Who Was Ghost Story Writer "Mary E. Penn"?

By
The identity of Mary E. Penn, a late-Victorian author of ghosts stories and crime and mystery tales, is a complete enigma. Scholars of the macabre have been unable to discern any details of her person, origin or character (assuming she was indeed female). We only know that from the 1870s to the 1890s this author published a number of stories in periodicals, most commonly in The Argosy (Ellen Wood’s monthly publication). Some of her early contributions were anonymous (later attributed to Penn in The Wellesley Index to Victorian Periodicals ) and her name only appears from 1878 onwards. Her first story, At Ravenholme Junction , was published anonymously in The Argosy in December 1876, but was later ascribed to Penn on stylistic grounds by eminent supernatural fiction scholar Richard Dalby. Her other ghostly tales were Snatched from the Brink ( The Argosy , June 1878), How Georgette Kept Tryst ( The Argosy , October 1879), Desmond’s Model ( The Argosy , December 1879), Old Vanderhav...
1 comment
Read more

Is Amazon Ripping-Off Independent Authors?

By
The advent of indie publishing has had the same effect on writing as streaming has had on music. As a reader, you have a bewildering array of books to choose from, by established as well as back-room authors, from all over the world, in all genres, at all prices, and many for FREE. There's an awful load of rubbish in this global digital slush-pile, but there are also many excellent independent authors writing some top-notch books. That word, used above, - FREE -, is a matter of contention for me. Amazon run an author program called 'Select' which allows authors to discount their books (or make them available for FREE) for up to five days during a 90-day sign-up period. The philosophy is that the spike in downloads increases the book's Amazon ranking (and hence visibility) resulting in more sales once the book returns to its nominal price. Cynical ploy? The disadvantage of the 'Select' program is that you, the author, give Amazon the exclusive right to se...
7 comments
Read more

Are We Alone In The Universe?

By
Are these guys hiding at the bottom of your garden? Today, in a rather long blog post, I'd like to speculate a little about the possibility of life existing elsewhere in the Universe. Since I get asked about this topic just about every time I walk into a room, I’d like to tell you what science currently has to say about life in the Universe and what we’re doing to investigate the possibility. The belief that we are not alone in the Universe is of course as old as humankind itself. The idea that there are other worlds populated by other-worldly creatures is a common and natural trait of our species. I think it was an inevitable idea once we had conceived of our own self-identity. But, the concept of life-forms existing elsewhere in the Universe, in the modern scientific sense that we all understand today, is also not new. Many ancient Greek philosophers, including Leucippus, Democritus, Epicurus and Plutarch, were of the firm belief that other worlds existed and some even spec...
7 comments
Read more

15 Ways To Make Your Band Believe They Are Going Somewhere

By
It's a struggle being in a band. You spend all of your spare cash on equipment, room hire and studio time. You spend all your free hours practicing, writing songs, trying to hone your skills and come up with stuff that you are happy with and that you hope other people will enjoy. It's hard work, and often the only return you get is a few people nodding their heads in appreciation of your live set. But, given all this hard work, what do most bands want? They want to be recognised, taken seriously, successful even. And how do they measure that success? By playing sold-out shows? Selling enough merchandise to keep them in guitar strings? Having three people download their EP? Headlining Glastonbury? The measure of success is different from band to band. But, after many years spent in the regional 'music scene' (if there is indeed such a thing), I find it easy to spot those bands that don't have any measure of success (or talent), but make the mistake of trying to g...
5 comments
Read more