Text Size


I don't quite understand why so many are having trouble seeing the amazing result here. I will keep trying to make it clear.

On Feb 9, 2011, at 12:28 AM, jfwoodward@juno.com wrote:

As I understand Jack's argument, he invokes Susskind's horizon "complimentarity"

Yes in a more generalized sense than Lenny has used.

to claim that, while photons observed near the horizon do indeed appear to local observers to be heavily redshifted

NO, they are heavily BLUE SHIFTED for static LNIFS!

RED SHIFTED for co-moving LIFS sitting still in the Hubble flow.

There is no event horizon in the comoving FRW metric for our early universe in contrast to the static de Sitter metric (our future universe)

g00 = 1 - /\r^2   for static LNIF detectors

observer is at r = 0

horizon is at r = /\^-1/2

static LNIF acceleration is

g(r) = 2c^2/\rg00^-1/2 = 2c^2/\r(1 - /\r^2)^-1/2  ---> infinity classically at the horizon.

The corresponding Unruh temperature is

kBTUnruh = hg(r)/c ---> infinity classically at the horizon.

This is obviously a blue shift.

Now let  r = /\^-1/2 - d

d/\^-1/2 << 1

g(d) ~  c^2/\^1/4/d^1/2 = c^2/(RHd)^1/2   as d ---> 0

i.e. c^2/(geometric mean of horizon scale with d)

Use Lp as minimum d

Planck's black body law gives

energy density ~ sigmaT^4 ---> hc/(RHLP)^2 = observed value from Type 1a supernovae.

Now this can hardly be a coincidence.

BTW same geometric mean formula obtains even in the Schwarzschild black hole case g00 = 1 - rs/r.