What is the horizon problem?
About | Information | History | Online | Facts | Discovery
In this 3 Minute Thinking video, Dr Malcolm Fairbairn from the Department of Physics at King's College London explains the horizon problem. He takes us back to the birth of the universe to examine the Big Bang Theory and horizon problem. 3 Minute Thinking is a brand new series of bite-size videos that explore curious topics like climate change, artificial intelligence and Shakespeare. Please visit the 3 Minute Thinking webpage for more information - http://www.kcl.ac.uk/3Mint/Physics-Malcolm-Fairbairn.aspx Dr Fairbairn is a part of the Theoretical Particle Physics & Cosmology research group. His research is concerned with the interaction between cosmology, particle physics and astrophysics. In particular Dr Fairbairn is interested in dark matter, dark energy, cosmological inflation and particle astrophysics. To read more about his work visit his research profile on the King's College London website: http://www.kcl.ac.uk/nms/depts/physics/people/academicstaff/fairbairn.aspx Learn more about studying Physics at King's College London here - http://www.kcl.ac.uk/nms/depts/physics/index.aspx
Comments
-
"Then there was a period called cosmological inflation when the universe expanded quickly, effectively faster than the speed of light, where A got zoomed out over there and B got zoomed out over there even though that appears to be impossible. And that's how we've got the solution to the horizon problem!"
... That's not a solution. -
soooo, where did the fire come from ?
-
gee whiz! you got any evidence of that
-
That why I love physics,it give confidante meaning for living
-
Excellent Dr Malcolm.
-
Honest question: how do you look in two directions at once? Professor said when we look back in time (and then drew an arrow) and then we look in this other direction (and drew a second line). So, how are they physically looking in these two planes?
-
Hi Malcolm.. Nice Video.. very interesting indeed.. Let me ask you one thing and what you think.. What would happen to our Universe if a new Big Bang would take place in our already existing universe.. as we know it..? please try to answer me.. this question keeps me awake night after another... My Best regards / The Thinker
-
Its a guess not a solution
-
see the big bang never happened( youtube)
-
Why does it matter that they have the same temperature? "because they didn't have enough time to reach each other" Yeah I know that but I am saying why cant it just be a coincidence?
-
However, in opposition to the point A and B separation (the solution to cosmological expansion and the big bang), their seems to be an odd sense of milky-way centrism that contributes to the homogeneity problem (in reference to the "observable universe"). Also, structures are being analyzed that are too large and fully formed for a universe age of 14-ish billion years… which was a major dependent value of the big bang. Humans do seem to try and consider everything too often in a specific singularity. I'm not trying to negate what could be called "the big bang" so much as I am negating or arguing against "the" big bang. Aside from big bang(s), there still is dark energy, supernovas, quasars, other radiation sources (i.e. solar wind), centripetal force, Lorentz transformations (and by that I mean large scale, long distance accelerations coupled with dark energy… i.e. galaxy rotation mechanisms and galaxy acceleration), and gravitational slingshot effects which go against an otherwise inevitably highly concentrated source… from the effects of gravity.
-
The real solution is found in the Bible.
Isaiah 45:12
"I am the one who made the earth and created people to live on it. With my hands I STRETCHED out the heavens. All the stars are at my command." -
Well thanks, very understandable comparing to other people's explanation.
-
What about the flatness problem and its relation to the horizon problem?
-
The problem is it either makes the hypothsis wrong or it says that period of time science does not apply rendering it a bad hypothsis not a Science Theory .... My more sensible solution would be that rather than adding an inflation period , realise that because of the massive gravity and speed of expansion that TIME moves so much more slowly that the universe expanded much more than people realised then .... what is my proof of the inacurate calculation ? Well obviously if time runs more slowly but light moves at the same speed from the observers point of view inside the universe ,,,,, light move move further at the beginning of time because it moves the same distance but time is essentialy slower allowing for that to happen ..... So my proof is that Planck says that light in 10X-43 sec moves 1.06x10-73 Meters ,,,,, So if light moves that far in that time TODAY it would have moved MUCH further when time ran MUCH slower back then making the inflationairy problem not a problem .... Their is a calculation obviously that takes some of my theroy into account because the hubble consant would put the universe at 60 billion years not 13.7 , it's my contention that the "inflationairy period" would not be necesary if you calculate the speeding up of time as the gravatational pull , less mass, and slowing velocoty correctly , because you would have your basic expodential curve of time ..... speeding up VERY slowly in the beginning and then accelerating very quckly later an the stabalising .... the same essential outcome but using actual SCIENCE not making a period of time outside of science and calling it a scientific answer ..... which it's NOT .... it's a hypothsis at best .... one I claim to be unnecessary and absurd as well.
-
Loving the effort on increasing the uni's exposure through media.
Keep it up!
2m 51sLenght
74Rating