Size of the Universe? I'm confused.

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter TheSwamper
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Confused Universe
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the size of the universe, specifically the concept of the observable universe and how it relates to the age of the universe. Participants explore the implications of light travel time, the expansion of the universe, and the nature of cosmic measurements, touching on both theoretical and observational aspects.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express confusion about how the universe can have a radius of ~46 billion light years while being only 13.7 billion years old, questioning how we can see objects that emitted light billions of years ago.
  • Others clarify that the observable universe's size is different from the total universe's size, suggesting that we cannot see light emitted from regions currently beyond our cosmic event horizon.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of the universe's expansion, with some arguing that light emitted from distant galaxies may never reach us due to their superluminal recession.
  • Participants mention that the universe was once in a state of pure energy and discuss the limits of our observational capabilities regarding the early universe and the existence of photons.
  • Some contributions highlight the role of cosmic background radiation and gravitational waves in understanding the universe's early conditions.
  • One participant introduces an analogy of the universe as an expanding soap bubble, noting that our perspective is limited to the surface of the bubble.
  • There is mention of the "cosmic event horizon," which defines the distance beyond which events cannot be observed, leading to further discussion about the implications of this threshold.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the size of the observable universe and the implications of cosmic expansion. The discussion remains unresolved, with various interpretations and hypotheses presented without consensus.

Contextual Notes

Some limitations include the dependence on definitions of observable versus total universe size, the complexities of light travel time in an expanding universe, and the unresolved nature of certain cosmological phenomena.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to individuals seeking to understand cosmology, the nature of the universe, and the implications of its expansion, particularly those with a foundational knowledge of physics.

TheSwamper
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
I have to preface my questions by saying that I have only a little better than a high school understanding of physics; as such I humbly ask that any answers be termed in a way that I'll be able to understand them.

I've read that the universe has a radius of ~ 46 billion light years. And we know that it's about 13.7 billion years old.

This hurts my head. How could we possibly see something that far away? Light simply wouldn't have had time to get to us from that far? How is it that we can see beyond the 13.7 billion year mark? Wouldn't the largest area we can view be roughly double that, 27.4 billion light years? And if we can't see it, how can we know?

Furthermore, how can the universe even have a measurable size? Are we even certain it's finite?

I have seen Hubble photographs of the earliest galaxies, which formed when the universe was about a billion years old. Wouldn't they be so far from us by now that there's no way the light could have reached us? Did we see them with some sort of gravitational lensing, allowing us to see beyond the 13.7 billion year mark?

I've also read that the universe, for a time, was pure energy - no matter. And after that it was still a while before there were even photons. Have we been able to see back to this time? Physicists seem fairly certain what happened right up to only a few Planck times after the Big Bang. How can they know? Do we have any evidence of what happened prior to the existence of photons, other than math?

Forgive me if these seem simplistic, but my desire to understand is strong enough to risk the embarrassment.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Light does not move 1 billion miles per year..
 
TheSwamper said:
I've read that the universe has a radius of ~ 46 billion light years. And we know that it's about 13.7 billion years old.

This is the size of the "observable universe" which is different from the size of the total universe.

How could we possibly see something that far away?

We can't. 13 billion years ago some gas emitted some light. We calculate that that gas is 46 billion light years right now. But the light that gets emitted right now, won't reach us for another 46 billion years.

How is it that we can see beyond the 13.7 billion year mark?

We can't.

Wouldn't the largest area we can view be roughly double that, 27.4 billion light years?

No. As something gets further away, it's going to move away faster.

And if we can't see it, how can we know?

Educated guess.

Furthermore, how can the universe even have a measurable size? Are we even certain it's finite?

The figure that's quoted is "how much of the universe we can see". It could be infinite.

I have seen Hubble photographs of the earliest galaxies, which formed when the universe was about a billion years old. Wouldn't they be so far from us by now that there's no way the light could have reached us?

Correct. It's a "reasonable guess" that those galaxies would have evolved in the same way that nearby galaxies evolve.

I've also read that the universe, for a time, was pure energy - no matter. And after that it was still a while before there were even photons. Have we been able to see back to this time?

No. Once the universe gets to be about 3000K, it no longer transmits light so that's as far back as we can directly see. We can make guesses about what happened before. For example, based on the amount of helium in the universe, we can make reasonable guesses as to how the universe behaved when it was 3 minutes old.

Also, at some point we may be able to "see" gravity waves or neutrinos.

Physicists seem fairly certain what happened right up to only a few Planck times after the Big Bang. How can they know?

Educated guesses. It's like trying to figure out what's in the center of the earth. You can't see it directly, but you can guess based on how sound gets transmitted through the earth.

In the case of the big bang, you have what are basically sound waves create fluctuations in the cosmic background, and that provides a *lot* of information. You can also figure stuff out by nuclear reaction rates.

Do we have any evidence of what happened prior to the existence of photons, other than math?

Yup. The interesting thing is that we know a lot about the big bang because we can see the ripples in the cosmic background. The big mystery right now is the "dark ages". Once the universe can transmit light, things "go dark" until the time that the first stars form which gives you about a billion years of mystery. How galaxies formed is something of a bigger mystery than the big bang.

Also photons did exist. The problem is that once you heat gas hot enough, it starts absorbing and reabsorbing photons.

But people are figuring this out.
 
Thank you very much Two-Fish.

One follow up question if you don't mind.

With Earth at the centre, how can the observable universe be greater in size than the time allowed for light to travel to us? Since, as you said, it's rate of expansion increases proportionally with distance from us. Wouldn't the observable size be some number less than 27 billion light years across?
 
The expanding universe is analogous to an expanding soap bubble, but with one more dimension.

Currently the bubble has a radius estimated to be about 46 billion light years. But the center of that bubble is a point lying outside of the surface of the bubble itself. We live in the surface of the bubble and we can see only 13.7 billion light years in all directions from our point on the surface. The rest of the surface is there, but light from that part has not yet had time to reach us.

This is all theoretical, however. The universe may have a more complex 'shape' than this analogy would suggest.
 
twofish-quant said:
We calculate that that gas is 46 billion light years right now. But the light that gets emitted right now, won't reach us for another 46 billion years.

Actually, isn't it correct that if it emits light right "now", it will NEVER get to us since the point of emission is receding from us "now" at about 3c ?
 
twofish-quant said:
... 13 billion years ago some gas emitted some light. We calculate that that gas is 46 billion light years right now. But the light that gets emitted right now, won't reach us for another 46 billion years.
...

phinds said:
Actually, isn't it correct that if it emits light right "now", it will NEVER get to us since the point of emission is receding from us "now" at about 3c ?

Phinds, you are making an important point about the light NEVER reaching us. It's hard to explain why in just 10 words or less and what you said is not the full explanation (I'm sure you realize it was simplified.) The full story involves *acceleration*, not just the fact that the material emitting the light is receding at 3c.

The threshold of Never-See---the distance to current events we will never see no matter how long we wait, called the "cosmic event horizon", is about 16 billion LY. If a galaxy is now, say 17 billion LY away from us and has a supernova explode today we would NEVER see that explosion. Not in 46 billion years or 50 or 60 or ever, no matter how long we waited.

It's not JUST that the distance to it is expanding superluminally, which it certainly is. It's that (according to standard cosmology) the Hubble constant is not slated to decline to below around 60 km/s per Mpc which means the Hubble radius (within which distances grow slower than light) is not slated to extend beyond about 16 billion LY, ever. And that's because of the positive Lambda--the acceleration.

Does the FAQ have a good simple discussion of the cosmic event horizon? The usual abbreviation is CEH. Lineweaver has some clear discussion in his "Inflation and the CMB" article from back around 2003. If our FAQ doesn't have a simple clear account then maybe somebody (you? twofish?) should contribute one.
(Whoever is in charge might or might not accept your essay but it would be good to submit something and see, if they don't have anything on CEH)
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 148 ·
5
Replies
148
Views
13K