Is Our Observable Universe Limited by the Cosmic Horizon?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Ricky2357
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Horizon
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of the cosmic horizon in relation to luminous objects and the implications of the universe's accelerating expansion. Participants explore concepts related to the particle horizon and event horizon, examining whether objects captured within these horizons remain visible indefinitely.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that if a luminous object is captured inside the cosmic horizon, it remains there forever, particularly in the context of the particle horizon.
  • Others argue that while this may hold true for the particle horizon, it does not apply to the event horizon, where objects may cross from inside to outside.
  • A participant suggests that if the universe's accelerating expansion continues indefinitely, galaxies outside the local supercluster may move beyond the cosmic horizon and become unobservable.
  • Another participant questions whether there is a contradiction between the assumptions about the horizon and the accelerating expansion, particularly in a flat, matter-dominated universe.
  • Some clarify that in standard expanding models, no objects leave the particle horizon, while accelerated expansion introduces an event horizon where objects can cross.
  • A later reply discusses the analogy between the cosmological event horizon and black hole event horizons, noting that light from outside the cosmological event horizon will never reach an observer.
  • One participant mentions that even if an object recedes at infinite velocity, it would remain observable until its light redshifts beyond detection, drawing parallels to black hole behavior.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the behavior of objects in relation to the cosmic horizon, with no consensus reached on the implications of these horizons or the nature of visibility over time.

Contextual Notes

Discussions include varying definitions of horizons and assumptions about the universe's expansion, which may affect interpretations of visibility and the behavior of objects in relation to the cosmic horizon.

Ricky2357
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
Is it true that if a luminous object is captured inside the cosmic horizon , then it stays in the horizon forever?
And is it also true that if the accelerating expansion of the universe continues forever , then galaxies outside our local supercluster will move beyond the cosmic horizon and will no longer be visible?
 
Space news on Phys.org
Perhaps, but what is your point? I think everything we see will always be visible - albeit a bit redder in the future.
 
Ricky2357 said:
Is it true that if a luminous object is captured inside the cosmic horizon , then it stays in the horizon forever?
This is true for the particle horizon but not for the event horizon. In usual matter dominated models new objects may enter the particle horizon and no visible objects leave it. Only in the limiting case of a de-Sitter expansion (cosmological constant dominated model) no new objects enter the particle horizon, but also no visible objects leaves it.

Ricky2357 said:
And is it also true that if the accelerating expansion of the universe continues forever , then galaxies outside our local supercluster will move beyond the cosmic horizon and will no longer be visible?
In may move beyond the event horizon and its light emitted in future will never reach us.
 
Last edited:
My question is : if these assumptions about the horizon and the accelerating expansion hold (say for a flat and matter-dominated universe), then isn't there a contradiction between them?
If not, is it the acceleration that alters this standard feature of the particle horizon?
 
Both assumptions are true if they relate to two different defintions of horizon as I have pointed out above. In the usual expanding models no objects leave the particle horizon. On the other hand models with accelerated expansion have an event horizon. Objects may cross the cosmological event horizon from inside to outside.
 
Okay this makes sense. Thank you for the information hellfire!
 
Suggest a book

Ricky2357 said:
Is it true that if a luminous object is captured inside the cosmic horizon , then it stays in the horizon forever?

Captured? [EDIT: OK, I guess Hellfire cleared that up!]

Ricky2357 said:
And is it also true that if the accelerating expansion of the universe continues forever , then galaxies outside our local supercluster will move beyond the cosmic horizon and will no longer be visible?

Ditto Hellfire: if you mean by "capture" what I would mean by "capture", I don't see how both statements could be true, but your second statement is true.

Just thought I'd add that the undergraduate textbook by D'Inverno, Understanding Einstein's Relativity, offers a fine discussion of simple cosmological models including nonzero Lambda FRW models. As he illustrates with a nice diagram, in such models, pairs of galaxies tend to move beyond each others' cosmological horizon.
 
Last edited:
Ricky2357 said:
Is it true that if a luminous object is captured inside the cosmic horizon , then it stays in the horizon forever?
...

Although Ricky's question has been well-answered, I'll comment on a cause of confusion simply in the language used.

It is the "outside" of the cosmological event horizon that is analogous to the "inside" of a BH event horizon.

A flash of light which is aimed at us and traveling towards us, but is at this moment outside the cos. event horiz. will never reach us.

this is analogous to the situation with a flash of light aimed at us from inside a BH event horizon. It also will never reach us.

Ricky I think your question about the space inside the ev. horiz. "capturing" something suggests that you have inside and outside spaces confused. It is the space outside the EH which captures (opposite from what one pictures happening with a black hole)
 
A pretty torturous way of explaining cosmological redshift, IMO. Even if an object within our observable horizon suddenly receded at infinite velocity, it would remain observable to us - forever [at least until its photons redshifted beyond detection]. Similarily, an object falling into a black hole never actually 'disappears', it merely redshifts [slows down] as it approaches the event horizon. You will literally wait for eternity before it disappears from view. A BH, in that sense, simulates a cosmological event horizon.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
778
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
7K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
6K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
5K