The Horizon Problem


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : The Horizon Problem

1 · 2 · Next
Author Message
Profile Dr Imaginario
Send message
Joined: 10 Aug 11
Posts: 172
Credit: 22,735
RAC: 0
Portugal
Message 1157403 - Posted: 30 Sep 2011, 10:33:10 UTC

The horizon problem is a problem with the standard cosmological model of the Big Bang.

It points out that different regions of the universe have not "contacted" each other because of the great distances between them, but nevertheless they have the same temperature and other physical properties.

This should not be possible, given that the exchange of information (or energy, heat, etc.) can only take place at the speed of light.

The horizon problem may have been answered by inflationary theory, and is one of the reasons for that theory's formation. Another proposed, though less accepted, theory is that the speed of light has changed over time, called variable speed of light.

II understand that the Inflationary Theory is more consensual, as if the VLS theory is proven to be correct, than most of theories in Physics will have to be reviewed.

Nevertheless, I feel that human brains are too small even to get a glimpse of how and why the universe was created.

God’s / Superior being existence is being challenged all the time by science, even Stephen Hawking in it’s last book denies the existence of God.

Nevertheless there is a gap in the Bing Bank Theory where science ends and philosophy and religion beguines and get mixed.

Like I said maybe this is due to the fact that Human intelligence is not prepared to understand the magnitude of the Universe.

OzzFan
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 13307
Credit: 27,857,704
RAC: 15,803
United States
Message 1157447 - Posted: 30 Sep 2011, 14:05:38 UTC - in response to Message 1157403.

... even Stephen Hawking in it’s last book denies the existence of God.


Actually, that's not true, though I note that believers have twisted his words to be exactly that.

In reality, his words were ostensibly that God is not required to explain the universe, saying that we don't need to resort to an unobservable, unexplainable being to tie in holes in theories about the origins of the universe.

Hawking carefully avoided saying that there wasn't a God, because even most Atheists will tell you that just because we haven't observed "God", doesn't mean the being doesn't exist. Though Atheists lack faith and therefore chose not to believe in a God until observable and incontrovertible evidence can be obtained (and Skeptic Atheists want peer-review and additional proof).

Profile Michael John Hind
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 6 Feb 07
Posts: 1300
Credit: 2,539,394
RAC: 2,745
United Kingdom
Message 1157971 - Posted: 1 Oct 2011, 18:43:55 UTC - in response to Message 1157447.

... even Stephen Hawking in it’s last book denies the existence of God.


Actually, that's not true, though I note that believers have twisted his words to be exactly that.

In reality, his words were ostensibly that God is not required to explain the universe, saying that we don't need to resort to an unobservable, unexplainable being to tie in holes in theories about the origins of the universe.

Hawking carefully avoided saying that there wasn't a God, because even most Atheists will tell you that just because we haven't observed "God", doesn't mean the being doesn't exist. Though Atheists lack faith and therefore chose not to believe in a God until observable and incontrovertible evidence can be obtained (and Skeptic Atheists want peer-review and additional proof).


True Ozz, Hawkins never said there is no God.

Profile Johnney Guinness
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 06
Posts: 2950
Credit: 2,306,418
RAC: 0
Ireland
Message 1158342 - Posted: 2 Oct 2011, 19:26:06 UTC
Last modified: 2 Oct 2011, 19:48:05 UTC

Dr Imaginario
Don't let other people put you off making your observations! You are correct about the Horizon Problem. It creates problems in physics and astronomy that are simply not possible!! So your right! I agree with you 100%.

Now go to the root of the Horizon Problem. Whats the root cause of the Horizon Problem?? If you follow the problem back, you will find its caused by our measurement of the Redshift of light; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift

The whole Big bang theory, and all the many problems that go with the big bang theory all stem back to one single observation - That as light travels through vast distances in space, and as objects move toward or away from you, the light Redshifts.

So Dr Imaginario if you want the true solution to the Horizon Problem, go to the root of the problem. There is a flaw in our current theory of light redshifting. You can chat about the problem for as long as you like, but the solution lies in finding the flaw in our current theory of Redshift. In my opinion, there is a flaw in our theory of Redshift.

Dr Imaginario there are many problems in physics and cosmology. Many of them stem from Redshift. Dr Imaginario your brain is NOT to small to understand the problem. Your brain works very well, well enough to understand that the Horizon Problem is flawed. So its not that your mind can't understand the problem. Its that the commonly accepted theory is wrong and people are trying to convince you that its right! But you know in your own mind that it doesn't make sense. Dr Imaginario, in this particular case, your right and the majority of people are wrong. Don't let them tell you otherwise! Keep carrying out your research, its good! Keep notes of all the problems you find. Write them in a note book or on your computer. Then try to find solutions to the problems! Always trace the problem back to the root. What is the root cause of any problem! This is how to find solutions.

John.
____________

Profile Michael John Hind
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 6 Feb 07
Posts: 1300
Credit: 2,539,394
RAC: 2,745
United Kingdom
Message 1158486 - Posted: 3 Oct 2011, 13:02:36 UTC

It points out that different regions of the universe have not "contacted" each other because of the great distances between them, but nevertheless they have the same temperature and other physical properties.

This should not be possible, given that the exchange of information (or energy, heat, etc.) can only take place at the speed of light.

The horizon problem may have been answered by inflationary theory, and is one of the reasons for that theory's formation. Another proposed, though less accepted, theory is that the speed of light has changed over time, called variable speed of light.


Doc, I came upon this theory, back in 2002, of the speed of light having changed over time and I don't see any reasons why this could not be so. If we focus on this current exciting discovery that the neutrino can travel faster than the speed of light we will open up a new understanding regarding our universe. The neutrino experiment has still to be proved yet, but it's looking good so far. But what this experiment will indicate is that the neutrino is most probably not travelling faster than light but has the ability to interact with the extra dimensions in space in a way that the photon can not. This interaction being such that the neutrino travels a more direct line than that of the photon. I expressed this theory some weeks back on another thread on Seti but if proved correct then these extra dimensions may connect one end of our universe directly to the other.

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 7945
Credit: 4,009,346
RAC: 773
United Kingdom
Message 1158521 - Posted: 3 Oct 2011, 16:03:45 UTC - in response to Message 1158342.

... Now go to the root of the Horizon Problem. Whats the root cause of the Horizon Problem?? If you follow the problem back, you will find its caused by our measurement of the Redshift of light; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift

... There is a flaw in our current theory of light redshifting. You can chat about the problem for as long as you like, but the solution lies in finding the flaw in our current theory of Redshift. In my opinion, there is a flaw in our theory of Redshift. ...


OK, an interesting start there...

Now, can you give any further detail for 'how' or 'in what way'?

Keep searchin',
Martin

____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 7945
Credit: 4,009,346
RAC: 773
United Kingdom
Message 1158524 - Posted: 3 Oct 2011, 16:12:24 UTC - in response to Message 1158486.

Doc, I came upon this theory, back in 2002, of the speed of light having changed over time and I don't see any reasons why this could not be so. If we focus on this current exciting discovery that the neutrino can travel faster than the speed of light we will open up a new understanding regarding our universe. The neutrino experiment has still to be proved yet, but it's looking good so far. ...


There's an awful lot yet to be checked out for the Gran Sasso neutrino experiment. Note we're talking of a discrepancy of a very small fraction of time, or conversely only 15 metres spanning across Italy. All that is needed for such a discrepancy is a small surveying error, or even missing some aspect of operation of the equipment. Note that the detection area in the equipment itself is much larger than the 15 metres. Nonetheless, still very interesting.

Note that light can be physically 'carried' by a medium conveying it. For example, light shone through a perpendicular stream of water will be deflected the water flow (note, not by any effects of refraction). Perhaps early inflation 'carried' the light and heat along with it?

Keep searchin',
Martin

____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile Michael John Hind
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 6 Feb 07
Posts: 1300
Credit: 2,539,394
RAC: 2,745
United Kingdom
Message 1158538 - Posted: 3 Oct 2011, 16:41:42 UTC

My feelings are that light and it's speed are now old science and that the neutrino experiment will herald in a new and more exciting field of study....extra dimensions.

Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,432,110
RAC: 163
Korea, North
Message 1158543 - Posted: 3 Oct 2011, 16:51:11 UTC - in response to Message 1158538.

I don't really see a problem. take 2 buckets of sand dumpt them on pavement on opposite sides of this world make sure they are at the same latitudes of course. spread the sand thinly and you'll see similar temperatures on both areas at around the same time of day with the same sunlight or night time. Now look at the temps around the universe. Of course the sun isn't involved but you'll see that there are consistent temps which isn't surprising since the Universe is pretty much the same material spread thin throughout
____________
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

Profile Michael John Hind
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 6 Feb 07
Posts: 1300
Credit: 2,539,394
RAC: 2,745
United Kingdom
Message 1158623 - Posted: 3 Oct 2011, 21:15:09 UTC - in response to Message 1158543.

I don't really see a problem. take 2 buckets of sand dumpt them on pavement on opposite sides of this world make sure they are at the same latitudes of course. spread the sand thinly and you'll see similar temperatures on both areas at around the same time of day with the same sunlight or night time. Now look at the temps around the universe. Of course the sun isn't involved but you'll see that there are consistent temps which isn't surprising since the Universe is pretty much the same material spread thin throughout


Thermal equilibrium within our universe? I suppose only because there are not enough particles floating about in space to carry heat away from massive stars
and into space so creating little hot-spot areas of there own. If the universe was awash with particles then we would not have thermal equilibrium for some regions would have the ability to be warmer than others.

Profile Johnney Guinness
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 06
Posts: 2950
Credit: 2,306,418
RAC: 0
Ireland
Message 1158691 - Posted: 4 Oct 2011, 2:00:55 UTC - in response to Message 1158521.
Last modified: 4 Oct 2011, 2:06:04 UTC

... Now go to the root of the Horizon Problem. Whats the root cause of the Horizon Problem?? If you follow the problem back, you will find its caused by our measurement of the Redshift of light; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift

... There is a flaw in our current theory of light redshifting. You can chat about the problem for as long as you like, but the solution lies in finding the flaw in our current theory of Redshift. In my opinion, there is a flaw in our theory of Redshift. ...


OK, an interesting start there...

Now, can you give any further detail for 'how' or 'in what way'?

Keep searchin',
Martin

Yes i can Martin,
As i said, follow the Horizon Problem problem back to its "root cause" and you will find its caused by our measurement of Redshift of light.

Martin you must have some idea of just how much of cosmology is based around our theory of Redshift of light. All the stuff in astronomy and cosmology that relate to the big bang and the universe as a whole all have their root in our measurement of Redshift.

Martin if there was a mistake in the way we measure Redshift, or a mistake in the theoretical physics that allows people to calculate Redshift, it would affect every single one of our theories that surround the big bang and cosmology. All you would need is one mistake. All you would need would be that one of our "assumptions" in the calculation of Redshift to be wrong.

We ASSUME that light only travels at one speed. Once you shine your flashlight up at the night sky, the waves of visible light start travelling, forever, and never stop until they hit something. We assume they travel at 3x10^8 m/s. Martin scientists around the world say they have tested this theory and light only travels at one speed. Well i'm telling you right here and now that thats wrong!! Light can travel much faster, hundreds or thousands of times faster under the correct conditions.

No point in saying it again, but Martin you know who told me this, don't you? You know where i got this information, don't you. I read it in "The Book". God told me.

John.
____________

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 7945
Credit: 4,009,346
RAC: 773
United Kingdom
Message 1158753 - Posted: 4 Oct 2011, 7:53:48 UTC - in response to Message 1158691.
Last modified: 4 Oct 2011, 8:06:11 UTC

... Now go to the root of the Horizon Problem. Whats the root cause of the Horizon Problem?? If you follow the problem back, you will find its caused by our measurement of the Redshift of light; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redshift

... There is a flaw in our current theory of light redshifting. You can chat about the problem for as long as you like, but the solution lies in finding the flaw in our current theory of Redshift. In my opinion, there is a flaw in our theory of Redshift. ...

OK, an interesting start there...

Now, can you give any further detail for 'how' or 'in what way'?

Yes i can Martin,
As i said, follow the Horizon Problem problem back to its "root cause" and you will find its caused by our measurement of Redshift of light.

Martin you must have some idea of just how much of cosmology is based around our theory of Redshift of light. All the stuff in astronomy and cosmology that relate to the big bang and the universe as a whole all have their root in our measurement of Redshift.

Martin if there was a mistake in the way we measure Redshift, or a mistake in the theoretical physics that allows people to calculate Redshift, it would affect every single one of our theories that surround the big bang and cosmology. All you would need is one mistake. All you would need would be that one of our "assumptions" in the calculation of Redshift to be wrong.

We ASSUME that light only travels at one speed. Once you shine your flashlight up at the night sky, the waves of visible light start travelling, forever, and never stop until they hit something. We assume they travel at 3x10^8 m/s. Martin scientists around the world say they have tested this theory and light only travels at one speed.

Very good thus far. All comments there I can agree with.

Well i'm telling you right here and now that thats wrong!! Light can travel much faster, hundreds or thousands of times faster under the correct conditions.

A curious and interesting assertion. So... What evidence is there for that?...

No point in saying it again, but Martin you know who told me this, don't you? You know where i got this information, don't you. I read it in "The Book". God told me.

John.

Ahhh... Amen? ;-)

Sorry, that's where you lose it in that you start by quoting science and then you take a flying leap into religion.

To be consistent and to make any sense whatsoever, you should stay with your religion, or you need to stay in the world of science. A fundamental requirement of science is consistency and repeatability. One of the basic assumptions made for science is that various parameters describing how our world operates remain consistent over time and across our locality.

Note that there are even experiments to test those assumptions!


Sorry John, so far your assertions are little more than an updated version of Nostradamus.

Keep searchin',
Martin
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile Johnney Guinness
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 11 Sep 06
Posts: 2950
Credit: 2,306,418
RAC: 0
Ireland
Message 1158786 - Posted: 4 Oct 2011, 12:07:03 UTC - in response to Message 1158753.
Last modified: 4 Oct 2011, 12:38:28 UTC

...

John.
____________

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 7945
Credit: 4,009,346
RAC: 773
United Kingdom
Message 1158821 - Posted: 4 Oct 2011, 14:20:47 UTC - in response to Message 1158786.

...

John.


"S" ?

By my ancient book of cyphers and cryptics, and by a leap of faith, looks to me like you're trying to communicate... Mmmm... By the power of my infallible omnipotent guesswork, o fill in the blanks for what you obviously must be wanting to say:

— — — · · ·

?

:-)


By god! I've read his mind no less! And before he even thought it!!

Keep searchin',
Martin

____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 7945
Credit: 4,009,346
RAC: 773
United Kingdom
Message 1158989 - Posted: 5 Oct 2011, 9:52:10 UTC
Last modified: 5 Oct 2011, 9:54:24 UTC

Not just expanding... Expanding and accelerating:


Nobel physics prize honours accelerating Universe find

... The trio studied what are called Type 1a supernovae, determining that more distant objects seem to move faster.

Their observations suggest that not only is the Universe expanding, its expansion is relentlessly speeding up. ...



So... The fabric of our space and time is forever being stretched farther and thinner?

What does that do to time itself as our universe expands further? Is perhaps time itself a function of our universe expanding?...

What all that does mean is that we will forever see more and more material forever disappearing over a 'light-speed' event horizon. We will see ourselves always centred in that surrounding event horizon.

Noting the apparent recursive and consistent nature of nature: Are we yet another universe expanding as the black hole and event horizon in a prior 'surrounding' universe? And our own black holes each themselves form a new universe as our universe and themselves continue to expand forever?


The "Horizon Problem" and the cone of causality may suggest that we can never know...

Keep searchin',
Martin
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile Michael John Hind
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 6 Feb 07
Posts: 1300
Credit: 2,539,394
RAC: 2,745
United Kingdom
Message 1158993 - Posted: 5 Oct 2011, 10:05:40 UTC - in response to Message 1158989.

Not just expanding... Expanding and accelerating:


Nobel physics prize honours accelerating Universe find

... The trio studied what are called Type 1a supernovae, determining that more distant objects seem to move faster.

Their observations suggest that not only is the Universe expanding, its expansion is relentlessly speeding up. ...



So... The fabric of our space and time is forever being stretched farther and thinner?

What does that do to time itself as our universe expands further? Is perhaps time itself a function of our universe expanding?...

What all that does mean is that we will forever see more and more material forever disappearing over a 'light-speed' event horizon. We will see ourselves always centred in that surrounding event horizon.

Noting the apparent recursive and consistent nature of nature: Are we yet another universe expanding as the black hole and event horizon in a prior 'surrounding' universe? And our own black holes each themselves form a new universe as our universe and themselves continue to expand forever?


The "Horizon Problem" and the cone of causality may suggest that we can never know...


I don't suppose either ML that man will be around long enough to be able to prove or disprove it. I get the impression from reading Stephen Hawkins that the universe will one day stop expanding and then start to collapse again...hmm?

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 7945
Credit: 4,009,346
RAC: 773
United Kingdom
Message 1159009 - Posted: 5 Oct 2011, 11:00:44 UTC - in response to Message 1158993.
Last modified: 5 Oct 2011, 11:01:54 UTC

I don't suppose either ML that man will be around long enough to be able to prove or disprove it. I get the impression from reading Stephen Hawkins that the universe will one day stop expanding and then start to collapse again...hmm?

Not necessarily so...

Who knows, we may discover alternate dimensions, or even something else more 'funky' or 'subtle'.

The accelerating expansion suggests that the expansion continues forever, ever faster, until we are all smeared out into a cold nothingness.


Time and space are tied together in various ways. I just wonder if the expansion drives (or is in some way instrumental) with what we perceive to be time.

Note that in an absolute sense, we have no idea whether time is 'constant'. We are very much a part of the time ourselves, as are all our experiments.


Keep searchin',
Martin
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 7945
Credit: 4,009,346
RAC: 773
United Kingdom
Message 1159015 - Posted: 5 Oct 2011, 11:22:43 UTC - in response to Message 1158989.
Last modified: 5 Oct 2011, 11:29:55 UTC

Not just expanding... Expanding and accelerating:


Nobel physics prize honours accelerating Universe find

... The trio studied what are called Type 1a supernovae, determining that more distant objects seem to move faster.

Their observations suggest that not only is the Universe expanding, its expansion is relentlessly speeding up. ...



So... The fabric of our space and time is forever being stretched farther and thinner?

What does that do to time itself as our universe expands further? Is perhaps time itself a function of our universe expanding?...

What all that does mean is that we will forever see more and more material forever disappearing over a 'light-speed' event horizon. We will see ourselves always centred in that surrounding event horizon.

Noting the apparent recursive and consistent nature of nature: Are we yet another universe expanding as the black hole and event horizon in a prior 'surrounding' universe? And our own black holes each themselves form a new universe as our universe and themselves continue to expand forever? ...


By how much must our universe expand such that the density of the material in a black hole becomes low enough such that subatomic repulsive forces and/or internal pressure causes a big bang for that black hole?

The big questions for that are:

Whether atoms and subatomic particles are themselves expanding with the expansion of our universe?

And whether energy coalesces into the same zoo of particles regardless of universal scale?

Is there a limited range of scale where only our presently observed atoms can exist, and other scales where other particle zoos exist?

Do you get existence and then non-existence and then a new existence for particles as the universe expands through zones of particle stability?


And all tied together by time and energy?

E = M c^2


Across our universe, is the density of energy (energy per unit volume) constant or reducing?


Keep searchin',
Martin
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

Profile Michael John Hind
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 6 Feb 07
Posts: 1300
Credit: 2,539,394
RAC: 2,745
United Kingdom
Message 1159050 - Posted: 5 Oct 2011, 13:45:00 UTC

Is there a limited range of scale where only our presently observed atoms can exist, and other scales where other particle zoos exist?

Do you get existence and then non-existence and then a new existence for particles as the universe expands through zones of particle stability?


Comes down to string theory. On the smaller scale the atomic structure of the atom finally breaks down to a vibrating string, I assume this string to be a string of energy. Ml, how long before we manage to split the atom on Seti?

Profile ML1
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 25 Nov 01
Posts: 7945
Credit: 4,009,346
RAC: 773
United Kingdom
Message 1159116 - Posted: 5 Oct 2011, 16:09:31 UTC - in response to Message 1159050.
Last modified: 5 Oct 2011, 16:13:20 UTC

... how long before we manage to split the atom on Seti?

I'm doing that right now.

4 threads on a D510

;-)

Keep searchin',
Martin
____________
See new freedom: Mageia4
Linux Voice See & try out your OS Freedom!
The Future is what We make IT (GPLv3)

1 · 2 · Next

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : The Horizon Problem

Copyright © 2014 University of California