0
$\begingroup$

In cosmology, studying the evolution of the matter perturbations for structure formation, one frequently mentions "horizon entry", meaning that a perturbation of (fixed) wavelength is super-horizon at first, but since the particle horizon evolves with time, it eventually becomes sub-horizon and causal connections are allowed.

Now, probably my misunderstanding is in the definition of "particle horizon", but what I have is that if one would have emitted a photon right at the big bang, the particle horizon $R_H$ is the distance that photon would have traveled, taken the expansion of the universe into account.

How can there be matter on a scale larger than the particle horizon at any set time? What does one mean when saying "before entering the horizon, the perturbation collapses at a rate $\Delta \propto a^{-2}$"?

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ Are you asking about the horizon problem? $\endgroup$
    – PM 2Ring
    Commented Jun 9, 2020 at 11:37
  • $\begingroup$ @PM2Ring no, I'm not. The horizon problem claims that the universe must have been all casually connected (inside the particle horizon) at the time of the CMB for it to be so homogenous. My question is how can there even be something outside of the said horizon, since for it to be there one must assume that it went there faster than light or that it was already there $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 9, 2020 at 13:01
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If the universe is flat (as it appears to be), then it's infinite in size, and it has always been infinite for all time $t>0$ (the size at the $t=0$ instant of the Big Bang is an indeterminate form, $0×\infty$). See physics.stackexchange.com/q/136860/123208 So at the end of Big Bang nucleosynthesis, when the universe was about 20 minutes old, all of space was filled with matter, mostly hot hydrogen & helium. There were no empty regions that matter hadn't reached yet. $\endgroup$
    – PM 2Ring
    Commented Jun 9, 2020 at 15:08
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Also see people.smp.uq.edu.au/TamaraDavis/papers/SciAm_BigBang.pdf or the related paper by Davis & Lineweaver, Expanding Confusion: common misconceptions of cosmological horizons and the superluminal expansion of the Universe. $\endgroup$
    – PM 2Ring
    Commented Jun 9, 2020 at 15:16
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @PM 2Ring: the universe could be finite and bounded and still be flat if it has toroidal topology. $\endgroup$
    – bapowell
    Commented Jun 9, 2020 at 18:17

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

Inflation. The expansion rate during inflation is such that $\ddot{a}>0$, and this has the bizarre result that physical length scales, $\lambda \propto a(t)$, grow faster than the horizon, given by the Hubble scale $H^{-1} \approx {\rm const}$. Quantum fluctuations born in the vacuum on sub horizon scales, $\lambda \ll H^{-1}$, get redshifted by the exponential inflationary expansion to super horizon scales, $\lambda \gg H^{-1}$. When inflation ends, the expansion proceeds at a decelerated rate and length scales grow slower than the horizon. For example, for radiation dominated expansion, we have $$\frac{d}{dt}(\lambda H) \propto -a^{-3}<0$$ and we say that these fluctuations fall back inside the horizon.

Now, the end of inflation is effectively the hot big bang, as the inflaton decays to reheat the universe. So, in an operational sense at least, yes, there was matter and, specifically--perturbations--before the big bang.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ @PM2Ring both of your answers make sense, but I can't see how they can both be right. It is because of the inflation (and the fact that the universe had an exponential growth before the big bang, making it plausible for perturbation to exist outside the particle horizon that starts at the big bang) or is it because the universe has always been infinite and therefore as soon as matter can form then there is matter everywhere even if the causal connection from the big bang hasn't reached there yet? $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 9, 2020 at 17:46
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You are asking about 2 different things: whether 1) matter and 2) perturbations exist outside the horizon. For 1), PM2Ring is correct in that the big bang populates the observable universe (and probably beyond) with matter. The big bang happened everywhere at the same time, don't forget. For 2), one needs a causal mechanism to generate the perturbation, which is a super-horizon correlation. This is where inflation comes in. $\endgroup$
    – bapowell
    Commented Jun 9, 2020 at 18:23
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, this comment really clarifies it. If my exam goes well, it will also be thanks to you! $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 9, 2020 at 19:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Mauro BTW, I didn't get notified of your comment here because I hadn't yet commented on this answer. I should mention that there is not a unique particle horizon. Because the Big Bang happened everywhere, there's a particle horizon for every location. Astronomers in some distant galaxy have a different particle horizon to us. $\endgroup$
    – PM 2Ring
    Commented Jun 10, 2020 at 2:59
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @PM2Ring thanks for the comment, I was thinking about this yesterday and it was probably what I was missing about the correlations-versus-scalefactor diagrams. I think I got it now! $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 10, 2020 at 6:12

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.