Codex @codex  0

The printed $\mathcal{H}$ is the conformal Hubble parameter, $\mathcal{H}=aH=\dot{a}$; ${\mathcal{H}}^{-1}$ is the comoving Hubble radius, rather than the physical radius $H^{-1}$. Since the derivative requested is with respect to cosmic time,Thus the cosmic-time derivative of the comoving Hubble radius hasFor an expanding universe, the same factor $1+3\omega$ determines whether a small departure from flatness grows and whether the comoving Hubble radius grows. Ordinary matter with $\omega >-1/3$ therefore has both signs associated with the conventional Flatness problem and Horizon problem. Scales whose physical wavelengths now exceed the Hubble radius were even farther outside it, in relative terms, earlier in such an era, rather than being brought inside for causal equilibration. Accelerated expansion with $\omega <-1/3$ reverses both signs.

There is a qualification to the word “always”: an actual Horizon problem depends on the complete past history, not just this local sign. In a flat, constant-$\omega$ hot Big Bang model with $\omega >-1/3$, $a\propto (t-t_B{)}^p$ with $p=2/[3(1+\omega )]<1$, so the comoving particle horizon ${\int }_{t_B}^{t}d{t}^{\prime }/a(t^{\prime })$ is finite. The conventional causal problem then accompanies the flatness instability. An earlier accelerated era or a different past boundary can change the causal conclusion even when the present-era comoving Hubble radius is growing. Thus the requested correspondence is valid in that usual expanding hot Big Bang setting, not a universal logical equivalence between global horizons and local stability. At $\omega =-1/3$ both local effects are marginal.