Ok, so this is a trippy thought, but you may be aware of one theory that stars are opposite ends of the universe might be moving apart with a relative velocity greater than C, but that this is ok since space in this case is considered to be moving along too...
I could find a reference but it is a theory that is taken at least somewhat seriously. And one of the implications of this is meant to be if I have it right, is that light from a star at one endge of the universe could never reach the other side due to this. And this then seems to quality it as an event horizon! And one made from moving space whatever that means. But an object falling into gravity is considered not to be accelerating relative to space since space is in effect accelerating and the mass is just going with it, this is pretty close to what has been said by other before about gravity... So then in what way is a conventional black hole event horizon fundamentally different to an expanding universe???? Sure, geometrically it might be the inverse, but that could be seen as being in the inside of a black hole instead of the outside. And you could argue that it occurs over a larger swath of space, namely a universe sized swath of space, but what we don't know of the geometry of space from the inside of an event horizon is, well everything. So I am not taking this seriously, really just a jab at the Frankenstein's monster created by extending the little we know of physics to the little we know of cosmology and have the cheek to think it is somehow a science. John
