In computer science, a software agent or software AI is a computer program that acts for a user or other program in a relationship of agency, which derives from the Latinagere (to do): an agreement to act on one's behalf. Such "action on behalf of" implies the authority to decide which, if any, action is appropriate. Some agents are colloquially known as bots, from robot. They may be embodied, as when execution is paired with a robot body, or as software such as a chatbot executing on a phone (e.g. Siri) or other computing device.
Software agents may be autonomous or work together with other agents
or people. Software agents interacting with people (e.g. chatbots, human-robot interaction environments) may possess human-like qualities such as natural language understanding and speech, personality or embody humanoid form (see Asimo).
Related and derived concepts include intelligent agents (in particular exhibiting some aspects of artificial intelligence, such as reasoning), autonomous agents (capable of modifying the methods of achieving their objectives), distributed agents (being executed on physically distinct computers), multi-agent systems
(distributed agents that work together to achieve an objective that
could not be accomplished by a single agent acting alone), and mobile agents (agents that can relocate their execution onto different processors).
Concepts
The basic attributes of an autonomous software agent are that agents:
are not strictly invoked for a task, but activate themselves,
may reside in wait status on a host, perceiving context,
may get to run status on a host upon starting conditions,
do not require interaction of user,
may invoke other tasks including communication.
The term "agent" describes a software abstraction, an idea, or a concept, similar to OOP terms such as methods, functions, and objects.
The concept of an agent provides a convenient and powerful way to
describe a complex software entity that is capable of acting with a
certain degree of autonomy in order to accomplish tasks on behalf of its host. But unlike objects, which are defined in terms of methods and attributes, an agent is defined in terms of its behavior.
Various authors have proposed different definitions of agents, these commonly include concepts such as
persistence (code is not executed on demand but runs continuously and decides for itself when it should perform some activity)
autonomy (agents have capabilities of task selection,
prioritization, goal-directed behavior, decision-making without human
intervention)
social ability (agents are able to engage other components
through some sort of communication and coordination, they may
collaborate on a task)
reactivity (agents perceive the context in which they operate and react to it appropriately).
Distinguishing agents from programs
All
agents are programs, but not all programs are agents. Contrasting the
term with related concepts may help clarify its meaning. Franklin &
Graesser (1997)
discuss four key notions that distinguish agents from arbitrary
programs: reaction to the environment, autonomy, goal-orientation and
persistence.
Expert systems are not designed for reactive, proactive behavior.
Expert systems do not consider social ability.
Distinguishing intelligent software agents from intelligent agents in AI
Intelligent agents (also known as rational agents) are not just computer programs: they may also be machines, human beings, communities of human beings (such as firms) or anything that is capable of goal-directed behavior.
Software agents may offer various benefits to their end users by automating complex or repetitive tasks.
However, there are organizational and cultural impacts of this
technology that need to be considered prior to implementing software
agents.
Organizational impact
Work contentment and job satisfaction impact
People
like to perform easy tasks providing the sensation of success unless
the repetition of the simple tasking is affecting the overall output. In
general implementing software agents to perform administrative
requirements provides a substantial increase in work contentment, as
administering their own work does never please the worker. The effort
freed up serves for a higher degree of engagement in the substantial
tasks of individual work. Hence, software agents may provide the basics
to implement self-controlled work, relieved from hierarchical controls
and interference. Such conditions may be secured by application of software agents for required formal support.
Cultural impact
The
cultural effects of the implementation of software agents include trust
affliction, skills erosion, privacy attrition and social detachment.
Some users may not feel entirely comfortable fully delegating important
tasks to software applications. Those who start relying solely on
intelligent agents may lose important skills, for example, relating to
information literacy. In order to act on a user's behalf, a software
agent needs to have a complete understanding of a user's profile,
including his/her personal preferences. This, in turn, may lead to
unpredictable privacy issues. When users start relying on their software
agents more, especially for communication activities, they may lose
contact with other human users and look at the world with the eyes of
their agents. These consequences are what agent researchers and users
must consider when dealing with intelligent agent technologies.
History
The concept of an agent can be traced back to Hewitt's Actor Model
(Hewitt, 1977) - "A self-contained, interactive and
concurrently-executing object, possessing internal state and
communication capability."
To be more academic, software agent systems are a direct evolution of Multi-Agent Systems (MAS). MAS evolved from Distributed Artificial Intelligence
(DAI), Distributed Problem Solving (DPS) and Parallel AI (PAI), thus
inheriting all characteristics (good and bad) from DAI and AI.
John Sculley's 1987 “Knowledge Navigator”
video portrayed an image of a relationship between end-users and
agents. Being an ideal first, this field experienced a series of
unsuccessful top-down implementations, instead of a piece-by-piece,
bottom-up approach. The range of agent types is now (from 1990) broad:
WWW, search engines, etc.
Buyer agents
travel around a network (e.g. the internet) retrieving information
about goods and services. These agents, also known as 'shopping bots',
work very efficiently for commodity products such as CDs, books,
electronic components, and other one-size-fits-all products. Buyer
agents are typically optimized to allow for digital payment services
used in e-commerce and traditional businesses.
User agents (personal agents)
User
agents, or personal agents, are intelligent agents that take action on
your behalf. In this category belong those intelligent agents that
already perform, or will shortly perform, the following tasks:
Check your e-mail, sort it according to the user's order of preference, and alert you when important emails arrive.
Play computer games as your opponent or patrol game areas for you.
Assemble customized news reports for you. There are several versions of these, including CNN.
Find information for you on the subject of your choice.
Fill out forms on the Web automatically for you, storing your information for future reference
Scan Web pages looking for and highlighting text that constitutes the "important" part of the information there
Discuss topics with you ranging from your deepest fears to sports
Facilitate with online job search duties by scanning known job
boards and sending the resume to opportunities who meet the desired
criteria
Profile synchronization across heterogeneous social networks
Monitoring-and-surveillance (predictive) agents
Monitoring and surveillance agents
are used to observe and report on equipment, usually computer systems.
The agents may keep track of company inventory levels, observe
competitors' prices and relay them back to the company, watch stock manipulation by insider trading and rumors, etc.
For example, NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory has an agent that
monitors inventory, planning, schedules equipment orders to keep costs
down, and manages food storage facilities. These agents usually monitor
complex computer networks that can keep track of the configuration of
each computer connected to the network.
A special case of Monitoring-and-Surveillance agents are
organizations of agents used to emulate the Human Decision-Making
process during tactical operations. The agents monitor the status of
assets (ammunition, weapons available, platforms for transport, etc.)
and receive Goals (Missions) from higher level agents. The Agents then
pursue the Goals with the Assets at hand, minimizing expenditure of the
Assets while maximizing Goal Attainment. (See Popplewell, "Agents and
Applicability")
Data-mining agents
This
agent uses information technology to find trends and patterns in an
abundance of information from many different sources. The user can sort
through this information in order to find whatever information they are
seeking.
A data mining agent operates in a data warehouse discovering
information. A 'data warehouse' brings together information from many
different sources. "Data mining" is the process of looking through the
data warehouse to find information that you can use to take action, such
as ways to increase sales or keep customers who are considering
defecting.
'Classification' is one of the most common types of data mining,
which finds patterns in information and categorizes them into different
classes. Data mining agents can also detect major shifts in trends or a
key indicator and can detect the presence of new information and alert
you to it. For example, the agent may detect a decline in the
construction industry for an economy; based on this relayed information
construction companies will be able to make intelligent decisions
regarding the hiring/firing of employees or the purchase/lease of
equipment in order to best suit their firm.
Mail transfer agent - For serving E-mail, such as Microsoft Outlook. Why? It communicates with the POP3 mail server, without users having to understand POP3
command protocols. It even has rule sets that filter mail for the user,
thus sparing them the trouble of having to do it themselves.
Wireless beaconing agent is a simple process hosted single tasking entity for implementing wireless lock or electronic leash in conjunction with more complex software agents hosted e.g. on wireless receivers.
Use of autonomous agents (deliberately equipped with noise) to optimize coordination in groups online.
Software bots are becoming important in software engineering.
Security agents
Agents
are also used in software security application to intercept, examine
and act on various types of content. Example include:
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) Agents[13]
- examine user operations on a computer or network, compare with
policies specifying allowed actions, and take appropriate action (e.g.
allow, alert, block). The more comprehensive DLP agents can also be
used to perform EDR functions.
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) Agents - monitor all activity
on an endpoint computer in order to detect and respond to malicious
activities
Cloud Access Security Broker (CASB) Agents - similar to DLP Agents, however examining traffic going to cloud applications
Design issues
Issues to consider in the development of agent-based systems include
how tasks are scheduled and how synchronization of tasks is achieved
how tasks are prioritized by agents
how agents can collaborate, or recruit resources,
how agents can be re-instantiated in different environments, and how their internal state can be stored,
how the environment will be probed and how a change of environment leads to behavioral changes of the agents
how messaging and communication can be achieved,
what hierarchies of agents are useful (e.g. task execution agents, scheduling agents, resource providers ...).
For software agents to work together efficiently they must share semantics of their data elements. This can be done by having computer systems publish their metadata.
The definition of agent processing can be approached from two interrelated directions:
internal state processing and ontologies for representing knowledge
Agent systems are used to model real-world systems with concurrency or parallel processing.
Agent Machinery – Engines of various kinds, which support the varying degrees of intelligence
Agent Content – Data employed by the machinery in Reasoning and Learning
Agent Access – Methods to enable the machinery to perceive content and perform actions as outcomes of Reasoning
Agent Security – Concerns related to distributed computing, augmented by a few special concerns related to agents
The agent uses its access methods to go out into local and remote
databases to forage for content. These access methods may include
setting up news stream delivery to the agent, or retrieval from bulletin
boards, or using a spider to walk the Web. The content that is
retrieved in this way is probably already partially filtered – by the
selection of the newsfeed or the databases that are searched. The agent
next may use its detailed searching or language-processing machinery to
extract keywords or signatures from the body of the content that has
been received or retrieved. This abstracted content (or event) is then
passed to the agent's Reasoning or inferencing machinery in order to
decide what to do with the new content. This process combines the event
content with the rule-based or knowledge content provided by the user.
If this process finds a good hit or match in the new content, the agent
may use another piece of its machinery to do a more detailed search on
the content. Finally, the agent may decide to take an action based on
the new content; for example, to notify the user that an important event
has occurred. This action is verified by a security function and then
given the authority of the user. The agent makes use of a user-access
method to deliver that message to the user. If the user confirms that
the event is important by acting quickly on the notification, the agent
may also employ its learning machinery to increase its weighting for
this kind of event.
Bots can act on behalf of their creators to do good as well as
bad. There are a few ways which bots can be created to demonstrate that
they are designed with the best intention and are not built to do harm.
This is first done by having a bot identify itself in the user-agent
HTTP header when communicating with a site. The source IP address must
also be validated to establish itself as legitimate. Next, the bot must
also always respect a site's robots.txt file since it has become the
standard across most of the web. And like respecting the robots.txt
file, bots should shy away from being too aggressive and respect any
crawl delay instructions.
Cosmic expansion is a key feature of Big Bang cosmology. It can be modeled mathematically with the Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker metric, where it corresponds to an increase in the scale of the spatial part of the universe's spacetimemetric
(which governs the size and geometry of spacetime). Within this
framework, stationary objects separate over time because space is
expanding. However, this is not a generally covariant description but rather only a choice of coordinates.
Contrary to common misconception, it is equally valid to adopt a
description in which space does not expand and objects simply move apart
under the influence of their mutual gravity. Although cosmic expansion is often framed as a consequence of general relativity, it is also predicted by Newtonian gravity.
According to inflation theory, during the inflationary epoch about 10−32 of a second after the Big Bang, the universe suddenly expanded, and its volume increased by a factor of at least 1078 (an expansion of distance by a factor of at least 1026 in each of the three dimensions). This would be equivalent to expanding an object 1 nanometer (10−9m, about half the width of a molecule of DNA) in length to one approximately 10.6 light years (about 1017
m or 62 trillion miles) long. Cosmic expansion subsequently decelerated
down to much slower rates, until at around 9.8 billion years after the
Big Bang (4 billion years ago) it began to gradually expand more quickly, and is still doing so. Physicists have postulated the existence of dark energy, appearing as a cosmological constant
in the simplest gravitational models, as a way to explain this
late-time acceleration. According to the simplest extrapolation of the
currently favored cosmological model, the Lambda-CDM model, this acceleration becomes more dominant into the future.
Swedish astronomer Knut Lundmark
was the first person to find observational evidence for expansion in
1924. According to Ian Steer of the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database of
Galaxy Distances, "Lundmark's extragalactic distance estimates were far
more accurate than Hubble's, consistent with an expansion rate (Hubble
constant) that was within 1% of the best measurements today."
Astronomer Walter Baade recalculated the size of the known universe in the 1940s, doubling the previous calculation made by Hubble in 1929. He announced this finding to considerable astonishment at the 1952 meeting of the International Astronomical Union in Rome. For most of the second half of the 20th century, the value of the Hubble constant was estimated to be between 50 and 90 (km/s)/Mpc.
On 13 January 1994, NASA formally announced a completion of its repairs on the main mirror of the Hubble Space Telescope allowing for sharper images and, consequently, more accurate analyses of its observations. Briefly after the repairs were made, Wendy Freedman's 1994 Key Project analyzed the recession velocity of M100 from the core of the Virgo cluster, offering a Hubble constant measurement of 80±17 km s−1 Mpc−1 (Mega Parsec). Later the same year, Adam Riess et al used an empirical method of visual band light shape curves to more finely estimate the luminosity of Type Ia supernova. This further minimized the systemic measurement errors of the Hubble constant to 67±7 km s−1 Mpc−1.
Reiss's measurements on the recession velocity of the nearby Virgo
cluster more closely agree with subsequent and independent analyses of Cepheid variable calibrations of 1a supernovae, which estimates a Hubble Constant of 73±7km s−1 Mpc−1. In 2003, David Spergel's analysis of the Cosmic microwave background during the first year observations of the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe satellite (WMAP) further agreed with the estimated expansion rates for local galaxies, 72±5 km s−1 Mpc−1.
Structure of cosmic expansion
The
universe at the largest scales is observed to be homogeneous (the same
everywhere) and isotropic (the same in all directions), consistent with
the cosmological principle. These constraints demand that any expansion of the universe accord with Hubble's law,
in which objects recede from each observer with velocities proportional
to their positions with respect to that observer. That is, recession
velocities scale with (observer-centered) positions according to
where the Hubble rate quantifies the rate of expansion. is a function of cosmic time.
Dynamics of cosmic expansion
The expansion of the universe can be understood as a consequence of an initial impulse (possibly due to inflation),
which sent the contents of the universe flying apart. The mutual
gravitational attraction of the matter and radiation within the universe
gradually slows this expansion over time, but expansion nevertheless
continues due to momentum left over from the initial impulse. Also,
certain exotic relativistic fluids, such as dark energy and inflation, exert gravitational repulsion in the cosmological context, which accelerates the expansion of the universe. A cosmological constant also has this effect.
Mathematically, the expansion of the universe is quantified by the scale factor, ,
which is proportional to the average separation between objects, such
as galaxies. The scale factor is a function of time and is
conventionally set to be at the present time. Because the universe is expanding,
is smaller in the past and larger in the future. Extrapolating back in
time with certain cosmological models will yield a moment when the scale
factor was zero; our current understanding of cosmology sets this time at 13.787 ± 0.020 billion years ago.
If the universe continues to expand forever, the scale factor will
approach infinity in the future. It is also possible in principle for
the universe to stop expanding and begin to contract, which corresponds
to the scale factor decreasing in time.
The scale factor is a parameter of the FLRW metric, and its time evolution is governed by the Friedmann equations. The second Friedmann equation,
shows how the contents of the universe influence its expansion rate. Here, is the gravitational constant, is the energy density within the universe, is the pressure, is the speed of light, and is the cosmological constant. A positive energy density leads to deceleration of the expansion, , and a positive pressure further decelerates expansion. On the other hand, sufficiently negative pressure with leads to accelerated expansion, and the cosmological constant also accelerates expansion. Nonrelativisticmatter is essentially pressureless, with , while a gas of ultrarelativistic particles (such as a photon gas) has positive pressure . Negative-pressure fluids, like dark energy, are not experimentally confirmed, but the existence of dark energy is inferred from astronomical observations.
In an expanding universe, it is often useful to study the evolution of structure with the expansion of the universe factored out. This motivates the use of comoving coordinates, which are defined to grow proportionally with the scale factor. If an object is moving only with the Hubble flow
of the expanding universe, with no other motion, then it remains
stationary in comoving coordinates. The comoving coordinates are the
spatial coordinates in the FLRW metric.
The universe is a four-dimensional spacetime, but within a universe that obeys the cosmological principle,
there is a natural choice of three-dimensional spatial surface. These
are the surfaces on which observers who are stationary in comoving
coordinates agree on the age of the universe. In a universe governed by special relativity, such surfaces would be hyperboloids, because relativistic time dilation
means that rapidly-receding distant observers' clocks are slowed, so
that spatial surfaces must bend "into the future" over long distances.
However, within general relativity, the shape of these comoving synchronous
spatial surfaces is affected by gravity. Current observations are
consistent with these spatial surfaces being geometrically flat (so
that, for example, the angles of a triangle add up to 180 degrees).
An expanding universe typically has a finite age.
Light, and other particles, can only have propagated a finite distance.
The comoving distance that such particles can have covered over the age
of the universe is known as the particle horizon, and the region of the universe that lies within our particle horizon is known as the observable universe.
If the dark energy that is inferred to dominate the universe
today is a cosmological constant, then the particle horizon converges to
a finite value in the infinite future. This implies that the amount of
the universe that we will ever be able to observe is limited. Many
systems exist whose light can never reach us, because there is a cosmic event horizon induced by the repulsive gravity of the dark energy.
When studying the evolution of structure within the universe, a natural scale emerges, known as the Hubble horizon. Cosmological perturbations
much larger than the Hubble horizon are not dynamical, because
gravitational influences do not have time to propagate across them,
while perturbations much smaller than the Hubble horizon are
straightforwardly governed by Newtonian gravitational dynamics.
Consequences of cosmic expansion
Velocities and redshifts
An object's peculiar velocity
is its velocity with respect to the comoving coordinate grid, i.e.,
with respect to the average motion of the surrounding material. It is a
measure of how a particle's motion deviates from the Hubble flow
of the expanding universe. The peculiar velocities of nonrelativistic
particles decay as the universe expands, in inverse proportion with the
cosmic scale factor.
This can be understood as a self-sorting effect. A particle that is
moving in some direction gradually overtakes the Hubble flow of cosmic
expansion in that direction, asymptotically approaching material with
the same velocity as its own.
More generally, the peculiar momenta
of both relativistic and nonrelativistic particles decay in inverse
proportion with the scale factor. For photons, this leads to the cosmological redshift.
While the cosmological redshift is often explained as the stretching of
photon wavelengths due to "expansion of space", it is more naturally
viewed as a consequence of the Doppler effect.
Temperature
The
universe cools as it expands. This follows from the decay of particles'
peculiar momenta, as discussed above. It can also be understood as adiabatic cooling. The temperature of ultrarelativistic fluids, often called "radiation" and including the cosmic microwave background, scales inversely with the scale factor (i.e. ). The temperature of nonrelativistic matter drops more sharply, scaling as the inverse square of the scale factor (i.e. ).
Density
The
contents of the universe dilute as it expands. The number of particles
within a comoving volume remains fixed (on average), while the volume
expands. For nonrelativistic matter, this implies that the energy
density drops as , where is the scale factor.
For ultrarelativistic particles ("radiation"), the energy density drops more sharply as . This is because in addition to the volume dilution of the particle count, the energy of each particle (including the rest mass energy) also drops significantly due to the decay of peculiar momenta.
In general, we can consider a perfect fluid with pressure , where is the energy density. The parameter is the equation of state parameter. The energy density of such a fluid drops as
Nonrelativistic matter has while radiation has . For an exotic fluid with negative pressure, like dark energy, the energy density drops more slowly; if it remains constant in time. If , corresponding to phantom energy, the energy density grows as the universe expands.
Inflation is a period of accelerated expansion hypothesized to have occurred at a time of around 10-32 seconds. It would have been driven by the inflaton, a field that has a positive-energy false vacuum state. Inflation was originally proposed to explain the absence of exotic relics predicted by grand unified theories, such as magnetic monopoles,
because the rapid expansion would have diluted such relics. It was
subsequently realized that the accelerated expansion would also solve
the horizon problem and the flatness problem. Additionally, quantum fluctuations
during inflation would have created initial variations in the density
of the universe, which gravity later amplified to yield the observed spectrum of matter density variations.
During inflation, the cosmic scale factor
grows exponentially in time. In order to solve the horizon and flatness
problems, inflation must have lasted long enough that the scale factor
grew by at least a factor of e60 (about 1026).
Radiation epoch
The history of the universe after inflation but before a time of about 1 second is largely unknown. However, the universe is known to have been dominated by ultrarelativisticStandard-Model particles, conventionally called radiation, by the time of neutrino decoupling at about 1 second.
During radiation domination, cosmic expansion decelerated, with the
scale factor growing proportionally with the square root of the time.
Matter epoch
Since radiation redshifts as the universe expands, eventually nonrelativistic matter
comes to dominate the energy density of the universe. This transition
happened at a time of about 50 thousand years. During the
matter-dominated epoch, cosmic expansion also decelerated, with the
scale factor growing as the 2/3 power of the time ().
Also, gravitational structure formation is most efficient when
nonrelativistic matter dominates, and this epoch is responsible for the
formation of galaxies and the large-scale structure of the universe.
Around 3 billion years ago, at a time of about 11 billion years, dark
energy began to dominate the energy density of the universe. This
transition came about because dark energy does not dilute as the
universe expands, instead maintaining a constant energy density.
Similarly to inflation, dark energy drives accelerated expansion, such
that the scale factor grows exponentially in time.
Measuring the expansion rate
The most direct way to measure the expansion rate is to independently
measure the recession velocities and the distances of distant objects,
such as galaxies. The ratio between these quantities gives the Hubble
rate, in accordance with Hubble's law. Typically, the distance is measured using a standard candle, which is an object or event for which the intrinsic brightness is known. The object's distance can then be inferred from the observed apparent brightness. Meanwhile, the recession speed is measured through the redshift. Hubble used this approach for his original measurement of the expansion rate, by measuring the brightness of Cepheid variable stars and the redshifts of their host galaxies. More recently, using Type Ia supernovae, the expansion rate was measured to be H0 = 73.24 ± 1.74 (km/s)/Mpc. This means that for every million parsecs of distance from the observer, objects at that distance are receding at about 73 kilometres per second (160,000 mph).
Supernovae are observable at such great distances that the light
travel time therefrom can approach the age of the universe.
Consequently, they can be used to measure not only the present-day
expansion rate but also the expansion history. In work that was awarded
the 2011 Nobel Prize in Physics, supernova observations were used to determine that cosmic expansion is accelerating in the present epoch.
By assuming a cosmological model, e.g. the Lambda-CDM model, another possibility is to infer the present-day expansion rate from the sizes of the largest fluctuations seen in the Cosmic Microwave Background.
A higher expansion rate would imply a smaller characteristic size of
CMB fluctuations, and vice versa. The Planck collaboration measured the
expansion rate this way and determined H0 = 67.4 ± 0.5 (km/s)/Mpc. There is a disagreement between this measurement and the supernova-based measurements, known as the Hubble tension.
A third option proposed recently is to use information from gravitational wave events (especially those involving the merger of neutron stars, like GW170817) to measure the expansion rate. Such measurements do not yet have the precision to resolve the Hubble tension.
In principle, the cosmic expansion history can also be measured
by studying how redshifts, distances, fluxes, angular positions, and
angular sizes of astronomical objects change over the course of the time
that they are being observed. These effects are too small to have been
detected yet. However, changes in redshift or flux could be observed by Square Kilometre Array or Extremely Large Telescope in the mid-2030s.
At cosmological scales, the present universe conforms to Euclidean space, what cosmologists describe as geometrically flat, to within experimental error.
"Geometrically flat" space has 3 dimensions and is consistent with Euclidean space. However, spacetime on the other hand, is 4 dimensions; it is not flat according to Einsten's general theory of relativity.
Einstein's theory postulates that "matter and energy curve spacetime,
and there are enough matter and energy lying around to provide for
curvature."
In part to accommodate such different geometries, the expansion of the universe is inherently general relativistic. It cannot be modeled with special relativity alone: though such models exist, they are at fundamental odds with the observed interaction between matter and spacetime seen in our universe.
The images to the right show two views of spacetime diagrams that show the large-scale geometry of the universe according to the ΛCDM
cosmological model. Two of the dimensions of space are omitted, leaving
one dimension of space (the dimension that grows as the cone gets
larger) and one of time (the dimension that proceeds "up" the cone's
surface). The narrow circular end of the diagram corresponds to a cosmological time
of 700 million years after the Big Bang, while the wide end is a
cosmological time of 18 billion years, where one can see the beginning
of the accelerating expansion
as a splaying outward of the spacetime, a feature that eventually
dominates in this model. The purple grid lines mark off cosmological
time at intervals of one billion years from the Big Bang. The cyan grid
lines mark off comoving distance
at intervals of one billion light years in the present era (less in the
past and more in the future). Note that the circular curling of the
surface is an artifact of the embedding with no physical significance
and is done purely for illustrative purposes; a flat universe does not
curl back onto itself. (A similar effect can be seen in the tubular
shape of the pseudosphere.)
The brown line on the diagram is the worldline
of Earth (or more precisely its location in space, even before it was
formed). The yellow line is the worldline of the most distant known quasar.
The red line is the path of a light beam emitted by the quasar about 13
billion years ago and reaching Earth at the present day. The orange
line shows the present-day distance between the quasar and Earth, about
28 billion light years, which is a larger distance than the age of the
universe multiplied by the speed of light, ct.
According to the equivalence principle of general relativity, the rules of special relativity are locally valid in small regions of spacetime that are approximately flat. In particular, light always travels locally at the speed c;
in the diagram, this means, according to the convention of constructing
spacetime diagrams, that light beams always make an angle of 45° with
the local grid lines. It does not follow, however, that light travels a
distance ct in a time t, as the red worldline illustrates. While it always moves locally at c,
its time in transit (about 13 billion years) is not related to the
distance traveled in any simple way, since the universe expands as the
light beam traverses space and time. The distance traveled is thus
inherently ambiguous because of the changing scale of the universe.
Nevertheless, there are two distances that appear to be physically
meaningful: the distance between Earth and the quasar when the light was
emitted, and the distance between them in the present era (taking a
slice of the cone along the dimension defined as the spatial dimension).
The former distance is about 4 billion light years, much smaller than ct, whereas the latter distance (shown by the orange line) is about 28 billion light years, much larger than ct.
In other words, if space were not expanding today, it would take 28
billion years for light to travel between Earth and the quasar, while if
the expansion had stopped at the earlier time, it would have taken only
4 billion years.
The light took much longer than 4 billion years to reach us
though it was emitted from only 4 billion light years away. In fact, the
light emitted towards Earth was actually moving away from Earth
when it was first emitted; the metric distance to Earth increased with
cosmological time for the first few billion years of its travel time,
also indicating that the expansion of space between Earth and the quasar
at the early time was faster than the speed of light. None of this
behavior originates from a special property of metric expansion, but
rather from local principles of special relativity integrated over a curved surface.
Topology of expanding space
Over time, the space that makes up the universe is expanding. The words 'space' and 'universe',
sometimes used interchangeably, have distinct meanings in this context.
Here 'space' is a mathematical concept that stands for the
three-dimensional manifold
into which our respective positions are embedded while 'universe'
refers to everything that exists including the matter and energy in
space, the extra-dimensions that may be wrapped up in various strings,
and the time through which various events take place. The expansion of
space is in reference to this 3-D manifold only; that is, the
description involves no structures such as extra dimensions or an
exterior universe.
The ultimate topology of space is a posteriori
– something that in principle must be observed – as there are no
constraints that can simply be reasoned out (in other words there can
not be any a priori constraints) on how the space in which we live is connected or whether it wraps around on itself as a compact space. Though certain cosmological models such as Gödel's universe even permit bizarre worldlines that intersect with themselves, ultimately the question as to whether we are in something like a "Pac-Man
universe" where if traveling far enough in one direction would allow
one to simply end up back in the same place like going all the way
around the surface of a balloon (or a planet like the Earth) is an observational question that is constrained as measurable or non-measurable by the universe's global geometry.
At present, observations are consistent with the universe being
infinite in extent and simply connected, though we are limited in
distinguishing between simple and more complicated proposals by cosmological horizons. The universe could be infinite in extent or it could be finite; but the evidence that leads to the inflationary model of the early universe also implies that the "total universe" is much larger than the observable universe,
and so any edges or exotic geometries or topologies would not be
directly observable as light has not reached scales on which such
aspects of the universe, if they exist, are still allowed. For all
intents and purposes, it is safe to assume that the universe is infinite
in spatial extent, without edge or strange connectedness.
Regardless of the overall shape of the universe, the question of
what the universe is expanding into is one that does not require an
answer according to the theories that describe the expansion; the way we
define space in our universe in no way requires additional exterior
space into which it can expand since an expansion of an infinite expanse
can happen without changing the infinite extent of the expanse. All
that is certain is that the manifold of space in which we live simply
has the property that the distances between objects are getting larger
as time goes on. This only implies the simple observational consequences
associated with the metric expansion explored below. No "outside" or
embedding in hyperspace is required for an expansion to occur. The
visualizations often seen of the universe growing as a bubble into
nothingness are misleading in that respect. There is no reason to
believe there is anything "outside" of the expanding universe into which
the universe expands.
Even if the overall spatial extent is infinite and thus the
universe cannot get any "larger", we still say that space is expanding
because, locally, the characteristic distance between objects is
increasing. As an infinite space grows, it remains infinite.
Density of universe during expansion
Despite being extremely dense when very young and during part of its early expansion – far denser than is usually required to form a black hole – the universe did not re-collapse into a black hole. This is because commonly used calculations for gravitational collapse are usually based upon objects of relatively constant size, such as stars, and do not apply to rapidly expanding space such as the Big Bang.
Effects of expansion on small scales
The
expansion of space is sometimes described as a force that acts to push
objects apart. Though this is an accurate description of the effect of
the cosmological constant, it is not an accurate picture of the phenomenon of expansion in general.
In addition to slowing the overall expansion, gravity causes local
clumping of matter into stars and galaxies. Once objects are formed and
bound by gravity, they "drop out" of the expansion and do not
subsequently expand under the influence of the cosmological metric,
there being no force compelling them to do so.
There is no difference between the inertial expansion of the
universe and the inertial separation of nearby objects in a vacuum; the
former is simply a large-scale extrapolation of the latter.
Once objects are bound by gravity, they no longer recede from
each other. Thus, the Andromeda galaxy, which is bound to the Milky Way
galaxy, is actually falling towards us and is not expanding away. Within the Local Group,
the gravitational interactions have changed the inertial patterns of
objects such that there is no cosmological expansion taking place. Once
one goes beyond the Local Group, the inertial expansion is measurable,
though systematic gravitational effects imply that larger and larger
parts of space will eventually fall out of the "Hubble Flow" and end up as bound, non-expanding objects up to the scales of superclusters
of galaxies. We can predict such future events by knowing the precise
way the Hubble Flow is changing as well as the masses of the objects to
which we are being gravitationally pulled. Currently, the Local Group is
being gravitationally pulled towards either the Shapley Supercluster or the "Great Attractor" with which, if dark energy were not acting, we would eventually merge and no longer see expand away from us after such a time.
A consequence of metric expansion being due to inertial motion is
that a uniform local "explosion" of matter into a vacuum can be locally
described by the FLRW geometry, the same geometry that describes the expansion of the universe as a whole and was also the basis for the simpler Milne universe, which ignores the effects of gravity. In particular, general relativity predicts that light will move at the speed c with respect to the local motion of the exploding matter, a phenomenon analogous to frame dragging.
The situation changes somewhat with the introduction of dark
energy or a cosmological constant. A cosmological constant due to a vacuum energy
density has the effect of adding a repulsive force between objects that
is proportional (not inversely proportional) to distance. Unlike
inertia it actively "pulls" on objects that have clumped together under
the influence of gravity, and even on individual atoms. However, this
does not cause the objects to grow steadily or to disintegrate; unless
they are very weakly bound, they will simply settle into an equilibrium
state that is slightly (undetectably) larger than it would otherwise
have been. As the universe expands and the matter in it thins, the
gravitational attraction decreases (since it is proportional to the
density), while the cosmological repulsion increases. Thus, the ultimate
fate of the ΛCDM universe is a near vacuum expanding at an
ever-increasing rate under the influence of the cosmological constant.
However, gravitationally bound objects like the Milky Way do not expand,
and the Andromeda galaxy is moving fast enough towards us that it will
still merge with the Milky Way in around 3 billion years.
While special relativity prohibits objects from moving faster than light with respect to a local reference frame where spacetime can be treated as flat and unchanging, it does not apply to situations where spacetime curvature or evolution in time become important. These situations are described by general relativity,
which allows the separation between two distant objects to increase
faster than the speed of light, although the definition of "distance"
here is somewhat different from that used in an inertial frame. The
definition of distance used here is the summation or integration of
local comoving distances, all done at constant local proper time. For example, galaxies that are farther than the Hubble radius, approximately 4.5 gigaparsecs or 14.7 billion light-years, away from us have a recession speed that is faster than the speed of light.
Visibility of these objects depends on the exact expansion history of
the universe. Light that is emitted today from galaxies beyond the
more-distant cosmological event horizon,
about 5 gigaparsecs or 16 billion light-years, will never reach us,
although we can still see the light that these galaxies emitted in the
past. Because of the high rate of expansion, it is also possible for a
distance between two objects to be greater than the value calculated by
multiplying the speed of light by the age of the universe. These details
are a frequent source of confusion among amateurs and even professional
physicists.
Due to the non-intuitive nature of the subject and what has been
described by some as "careless" choices of wording, certain descriptions
of the metric expansion of space and the misconceptions to which such
descriptions can lead are an ongoing subject of discussion within the
fields of education and communication of scientific concepts.
Common analogies for cosmic expansion
The
expansion of the universe is often illustrated with conceptual models
where an expanding object is taken to represent expanding space. Note
that these models can be misleading to the extent that they give the
false impression that expanding space can carry objects with it. In
reality, the expansion of the universe corresponds only to the inertial
motion of objects away from one another.
In the "ant on a rubber rope
model" one imagines an ant (idealized as pointlike) crawling at a
constant speed on a perfectly elastic rope that is constantly
stretching. If we stretch the rope in accordance with the ΛCDM scale
factor and think of the ant's speed as the speed of light, then this
analogy is numerically accurate – the ant's position over time will
match the path of the red line on the embedding diagram above.
In the "rubber sheet model" one replaces the rope with a flat
two-dimensional rubber sheet that expands uniformly in all directions.
The addition of a second spatial dimension raises the possibility of
showing local perturbations of the spatial geometry by local curvature
in the sheet.
In the "balloon model" the flat sheet is replaced by a spherical
balloon that is inflated from an initial size of zero (representing the
big bang). A balloon has positive Gaussian curvature
while observations suggest that the real universe is spatially flat,
but this inconsistency can be eliminated by making the balloon very
large so that it is locally flat to within the limits of observation.
This analogy is potentially confusing since it wrongly suggests that the
big bang took place at the center of the balloon. In fact points off
the surface of the balloon have no meaning, even if they were occupied
by the balloon at an earlier time.
In the "raisin bread model" one imagines a loaf of raisin bread
expanding in the oven. The loaf (space) expands as a whole, but the
raisins (gravitationally bound objects) do not expand; they merely grow
farther away from each other.