Universe 93 billion light years?

AI Thread Summary
The observable universe is approximately 93 billion light-years in diameter, despite being 13.7 billion years old, due to the expansion of spacetime. Light travels at a constant speed, but the universe's rapid expansion means that the distances light has traveled do not directly correlate to the age of the universe. The Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) radiation we observe today originated from matter that was about 44 million light-years away at the time of emission, but due to the universe's expansion, this matter is now around 48 billion light-years away. The universe has expanded by a factor of about 1100 during this time, complicating the relationship between light travel time and current distances. Thus, the diameter of the observable universe reflects the cumulative effects of cosmic expansion rather than a simple calculation based on light travel time.
filegraphy
Messages
93
Reaction score
0
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe)

If the universe is 13.7 billion years old, how is the diameter 93 billion light years? Light travels 1 light year for every year. Then if two particles were expanding outwards to form the size of the diameter, it would be approximately 28 billion light years. Can somebody explain this confusion?
 
Space news on Phys.org
From the same article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe#Misconceptions

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 makes sense only 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
 
filegraphy said:
The visible universe is thus a sphere with a diameter of about 28 billion parsecs (about 93 billion light-years). (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe#Misconceptions)

Can you explain the calculation to this diameter.
Basically, the CMB which we see today was emitted from matter that was, at the time, about 44 million light years away. At the time, however, the universe was expanding very rapidly, so that the light has taken a full 13.7 billion light years to get here. In fact, for much of this time it wasn't even approaching us, but the rapid expansion left photons traveling in our direction even more space to travel than they crossed. Eventually the expansion rate slowed enough that the photon started to make headway, and finally arrive after 13.7 billion years.

In that time, our universe expanded by a factor of about 1100 times. This means that the matter which emitted the CMB we see today at 44 million light years away is currently around 48 billion light years away. But this distance has little to do with the path light traveled to get here.
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
Why was the Hubble constant assumed to be decreasing and slowing down (decelerating) the expansion rate of the Universe, while at the same time Dark Energy is presumably accelerating the expansion? And to thicken the plot. recent news from NASA indicates that the Hubble constant is now increasing. Can you clarify this enigma? Also., if the Hubble constant eventually decreases, why is there a lower limit to its value?

Similar threads

Back
Top