How can the Observable Universe be a closed system?

In summary, the conversation discusses the concept of the universe being a closed system and whether the observable universe can be considered as such. It is explained that the observable universe can be considered a closed system because anything outside of it has not had enough time to affect it due to the finite speed of light. However, there is a misconception that galaxies can leave the observable universe due to the expansion of space, when in reality their past light will always be visible to us. The idea of the observable universe being a closed system is debated and ultimately, it is suggested to ignore previous claims and seek confirmation from someone with more knowledge on the subject.
  • #36
PeterDonis said:
Unfortunately, the "ant on a rubber rope" analogy is useless in our actual universe, in which the expansion is accelerating (or, more precisely, has been since a few billion years ago).

Furthermore, that analogy is not necessary to explain why new objects are continually entering our observable universe. The latter does not just happen with non-accelerating expansion. It happens with accelerating expansion as well. The only difference with accelerating expansion is that there is an event horizon, which imposes an upper limit on how many objects will ultimately be inside our OU; but that limit is approached asymptotically, so new objects are always entering our OU, just fewer per unit proper time as we move into the future.
Ok, so back to where we were.

I retract what I wrote 54 minutes ago, having misunderstood things.

There is no longer any confusion.

Objects can still enter the light cone of our OU as it's base widens over time.

Therefore, the OU cannot be considered a closed system.

Thank you.

Cerenkov.
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #37
Cerenkov said:
the diagrams employ non-accelerating expansion.
The ant on a rubber rope exercise, where the rope is steadily stretched (as on the animation), is what shows non-accelerating expansion.
The lightcone diagrams are for the LCDM model, the best-fit description of our actual universe.

With the ant, if you imagine the end of the rope being stretched at a varying speed, it will change how the ant traverses the rope.
If you gradually slow down the stretching, it's similar to what happens in the matter-dominated expansion phase in our universe: the ant still gets however far it wants, only faster.
If you gradually speed up the stretching, it's similar to the dark energy-dominated phase: the ant still always moves further on the rope, always passing more marks (i.e. the emitted light passes by more comoving galaxies, i.e. particle horizon grows, i.e. the observable universe grows), but now there will be a distance which it can never reach (the cosmological event horizon).
 
  • #38
Bandersnatch said:
The ant on a rubber rope exercise, where the rope is steadily stretched (as on the animation), is what shows non-accelerating expansion.
The lightcone diagrams are for the LCDM model, the best-fit description of our actual universe.

With the ant, if you imagine the end of the rope being stretched at a varying speed, it will change how the ant traverses the rope.
If you gradually slow down the stretching, it's similar to what happens in the matter-dominated expansion phase in our universe: the ant still gets however far it wants, only faster.
If you gradually speed up the stretching, it's similar to the dark energy-dominated phase: the ant still always moves further on the rope, always passing more marks (i.e. the emitted light passes by more comoving galaxies, i.e. particle horizon grows, i.e. the observable universe grows), but now there will be a distance which it can never reach (the cosmological event horizon).
Thank Bandersnatch. :smile:

That's useful. Knowing the the light cone diagrams are configured for the LCDM model, I mean.

All the best,

Cerenkov.
 

Similar threads

Replies
44
Views
1K
Replies
15
Views
1K
Replies
38
Views
5K
Replies
29
Views
6K
Replies
29
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Back
Top