Recent content by jacobassett

Well yes but under just the right circumstances there is a situation where that could be true no matter how improbable.

Yes I understand that part of it that's not what i was trying to clarify.

Uh no you're wrong. We wouldn't be talking about it if it didn't exist, or at least theoretically exist. It may or may not but you can't just say it's a mathematical representation and that's it.

I know that...every surface would be on that point but this is based on the observer...if the observer moves than the cosmic horizon moves. I'm not saying you can see this space I'm just saying that it must exist.

How does it have no physical presence? There is a literal point in space where space is expanding at the speed of light away from us...

Alright so what is at the point where the universe is expanding at the rate equal to the speed of light?

Yeah so why do people think it's so phenomenal that these waves act like particles then?

The observable universe may be 47 billion ly across but I was saying to the nearest horizon. I know you can't actually go there because the horizon depends on the observers position in space. But theoretically is there a sphere of intense light surrounding us at the point of the horizon?

I have a question about the cosmic horizon. If theoretically I go out 20 billion light years to the cosmic horizon as there a point in space where there is a huge build up of light where space is moving away at exactly the speed of light? Is this this the 2d representation of reality they talk...

My question about the double slit experiment is this: why is it that nobody suspects that the detectors used to detect particles as they pass through the slits in the double slit experiment aren't causing some interference with the experiment which makes it seem as though they are acting like...