Look 88 billion years into future with the A20 tabular calculator

marcus

Quote by Jorrie

Marcus, the latter two values are correct as defined for the calculator, but they may need a little more explanation...

I am just so pleased with this calculator! It's versatile like a swiss jackknife, you can do a lot of things with.

And that leads to opportunities to explain more stuff, like what you just did. For instance the idea of proper distance (distance at a certain moment with expansion stopped).

Also I guess I should be restrained and not try to bring in TOO MUCH. Introduce concepts slowly. But it's tempting to also mention the idea of the COMOVING DISTANCE which is simply Dnow. The comov. distance of some matter is a way of tagging the matter with a serial number that never changes. So it can be useful. By convention it is the now distance (as of today).

When I did those simple calculations before, conceptually I was working in comoving distance, and then at the end, converting to proper distance at "recombination time" simply by dividing by 1090. That is always how one converts comoving distance to distance at the moment the CMB flash was emitted.

==quote==
... suggested earlier, you know that the two distances we need are 2.9 and 4.4
those are the addition distances the light has to travel to get to the people in Years 17 and 19 billion who are going to receive it. But it already traveled 45.9 by the time it got to us. (In Dnow terms.)

(45.9+2.9) billion/1090 = 44.8 million
(45.9+4.4) billion/1090 = 46.1 million
==endquote==

I guess I am actually talking to people who might be reading (not to you Jorrie). You have to click on the "A27" link and put in something like
upper=1
lower=.6
step=.1
and actually see that for those Years the Dnow distances 2.9 and 4.4

So after the light has covered a comov. distance of 45.9, and has passed the way station (us) and is racing on towards the people who are to receive it in Year 17 billion,
then how far, in comov. terms, does it have to travel?
Well it is just as if we sent them a message today--a flash of a different color to travel neck and neck all the way to them. And the comov. distance from us to them is 2.9

So to get the total comov. diet you just add 45.9 and 2.9. That is the comov. dist between them and the source matter of the CMB which they will see in Year 17 billion.

Now since it is the comov. distance you just have to divide by 1090, and bingo.

Jorrie forgive me if I'm revealing too much enthusiasm, but AFAIK this is unique. I don't know of any online cosmo calculator that has future as well as past, and none of the others give the Event Horizon. In fact they don't do half the things this one does. There's only one other I've seen that tabulates. (A recent one by someone at Oxford in the UK, as I recall.)
The trouble is we have a distribution bottleneck. More beginning astronomy students should get to use it. I don't know how to get the word out. Maybe there are some active academics here at PF who would be willing to pass the link along to colleagues in the astronomy department.

Naty1

None of the columns seem to have the 41 Million light years distance in there.

edit: oops, did not realize we have a page two...and two more posts befoe this. [We shall have to slow Marcus down as in "Curb that enthusiasm." as he is posting faster than I am reading [LOL]....

If I understand what I am looking at in the chart, 41/42 mly is way,way off to the right, via the purple curve, 'distance then'..

As I recall that is about 380,000 years after the big bang and a redshift of about 1090.

[The chart uses S =1+z, and only goes to S =10, redshift of z = 9. ]

In fact I started to try to calculate the distance at z =10, and never found a simple formula....I suspect that's why we have the calculator....

marcus

Quote by Naty1

edit: oops, did not realize we have a page two...and two more posts befoe this. [We shall have to slow Marcus down as in "Curb that enthusiasm." as he is posting faster than I am reading [LOL]....

If I understand what I am looking at in the chart, 41/42 mly is way,way off to the right, via the purple curve, 'distance then'..

As I recall that is about 380,000 years after the big bang and a redshift of about 1090.

[The chart uses S =1+z, and only goes to S =10, redshift of z = 9. ]

In fact I started to try to calculate the distance at z =10, and never found a simple formula....I suspect that's why we have the calculator....

It's great you are using the calculator, I find it really "empowering" (as they say).

As you know, and most other readers as well, YOU decide the range that the table covers. for example if you want it to cover all of history since the CMB flash (which gets stretch 1090) and if you want the table to have 10 downsteps from there to the present (i.e. 11 rows) then you put in:

upper=1090
lower=1
step= -10

You can also make it show more, or fewer, decimal places in the answers. So it can give more precision in some columns and round off in other columns. You just type the number of decimal places you want the answer to have, in that column, in the box at the head of the column.

marcus

Here's a result I just now got, to demo the feature where you control the precision. I set it to show 1 decimal place for the Stretch, 4 for the scalefactor a, 6 for the Year, 4 for the Hubbletime, 1 for Dnow, 4 for Dthen, and 3 decimal places for Dhor the event horizon distance:

Code:

S	a	T	       T_Hub	D_now	D_then	D_hor
1090.0	0.0009	0.000381	0.0006	45.9	0.0421	0.056
981.1	0.0010	0.000455	0.0008	45.8	0.0467	0.063
872.2	0.0011	0.000554	0.0009	45.7	0.0524	0.070
763.3	0.0013	0.000691	0.0011	45.6	0.0598	0.080
654.4	0.0015	0.000889	0.0015	45.5	0.0695	0.093
545.5	0.0018	0.001196	0.0019	45.3	0.0830	0.112
436.6	0.0023	0.001712	0.0027	45.0	0.1032	0.139
327.7	0.0031	0.002704	0.0043	44.7	0.1363	0.184
218.8	0.0046	0.005103	0.0080	44.0	0.2012	0.273
109.9	0.0091	0.014809	0.0227	42.6	0.3875	0.530
1.0	1.0000	13.754712	13.8999	0.0	0.0000	15.622

I checked the calculator's "copy/paste friendly version" box to get a table output in a format that I could copy and paste easily. But the normal output looks better, in the grid designed for it. So try it yourself
just set upper=1090, lower=1, step=-10
1090 being the stretch factor for the CMB flash and 1 being the stretch factor for the present (i.e. no change in distances or wavelengths, the identity)

Jorrie

Quote by marcus

The trouble is we have a distribution bottleneck. More beginning astronomy students should get to use it. I don't know how to get the word out. Maybe there are some active academics here at PF who would be willing to pass the link along to colleagues in the astronomy department.

I've got some feedback that our use of the Hubble times Ynow and Yinf as the primary input parameters are off-putting to some teachers. They say it brings in the idea of the Hubble time too early for beginners and they would like to start with the Omegas; students do not find the Y's in published results, only the Omegas. Some also prefer z rather than S as an input, but this is not really an important issue. Maybe having negative z for the future is more intuitive than our 0 < S < 1?

Actually in my calculator I immediately convert the Ys to Omegas, so apart from the user interface and "front-end", nothing else need to change. I will look into the possibility of a B-model, returning it to the legacy input parameters, giving people a choice.

What do you think?

Jorrie

Quote by Naty1

In fact I started to try to calculate the distance at z =10, and never found a simple formula....I suspect that's why we have the calculator....

Yes, if you look at the equations in http://www.physicsforums.com/showpos...3&postcount=29, they all have integrals - hence the need for a numerical integrator...

(Now CosmoLean_A27, no longer A22).

mfb

Some different scaling for the scale factor entries would be interesting - maybe equidistant logarithm or equidistant scale factor (+optional?). If you want to look at the range of 1090 to 1, for example, you just have a single entry in the stelliferous era, unless you want 100+ lines as output. Entries like (1090, 545, ..., 2, 1) +- rounding errors would be more relevant I think.

Jorrie

Quote by mfb

Some different scaling for the scale factor entries would be interesting - maybe equidistant logarithm or equidistant scale factor (+optional?). If you want to look at the range of 1090 to 1, for example, you just have a single entry in the stelliferous era, unless you want 100+ lines as output. Entries like (1090, 545, ..., 2, 1) +- rounding errors would be more relevant I think.

Yes, good idea. I will look into that as an option during the next update.

What do you think of working with Hubble time inputs vs. standards density parameters and Hubble constant as input?

mfb

I think if you want to change those parameters, you usually know how to do that. Density parameters are probably easier to manipulate, however.

Jorrie

Quote by mfb

Some different scaling for the scale factor entries would be interesting - maybe equidistant logarithm or equidistant scale factor (+optional?). If you want to look at the range of 1090 to 1, for example, you just have a single entry in the stelliferous era, unless you want 100+ lines as output. Entries like (1090, 545, ..., 2, 1) +- rounding errors would be more relevant I think.

I have done a first attempt at an optional nonlinear scaling of the stretch (scale) factor. It divides S by any S_step larger than 1, with 2 probably the most useful. There is a tick box in the latest version, which I have renamed to TabCosmoC1 (for Tabular Cosmological Calculator).

After a bit of forum testing and perhaps tuning, we can make it more visible again.

Naty1

Jorrie...this model: cool. Thanks for your efforts.!!

mfb

Very nice, thanks.

Yinf standard is 16.3, but the tooltip gives 16.9 as best fit?

marcus

Indeed it is very nice! Here's something I just tried with the nonlinear step box checked.
I wanted 20 steps down from 1090 to 1 (from recombination to present)
so I put this into google calculator:
"1090^.05"
and got 1.41863714

That is the 20th root of 1090.
So I put in S upper = 1090
S lower = anything less than 1 would do, I happened to put 0.15
step = 1.41863714 (just pasted in from the calculator)

Code:

S	a	T	T_Hub	D_now	D_then	D_hor
1090.00	0.001	0.000	0.001	45.890	0.042	0.056
768.34	0.001	0.001	0.001	45.617	0.059	0.080
541.61	0.002	0.001	0.002	45.280	0.084	0.112
381.78	0.003	0.002	0.003	44.870	0.118	0.158
269.12	0.004	0.004	0.006	44.373	0.165	0.223
189.70	0.005	0.006	0.010	43.773	0.231	0.313
133.72	0.007	0.011	0.017	43.051	0.322	0.439
94.26	0.011	0.019	0.029	42.186	0.448	0.613
66.44	0.015	0.032	0.049	41.151	0.619	0.855
46.84	0.021	0.054	0.082	39.913	0.852	1.186
33.02	0.030	0.092	0.140	38.436	1.164	1.638
23.27	0.043	0.157	0.236	36.673	1.576	2.248
16.40	0.061	0.265	0.399	34.571	2.107	3.061
11.56	0.086	0.449	0.675	32.066	2.773	4.125
8.15	0.123	0.759	1.140	29.084	3.568	5.486
5.75	0.174	1.282	1.917	25.541	4.445	7.167
4.05	0.247	2.159	3.200	21.353	5.272	9.133
2.86	0.350	3.607	5.224	16.474	5.770	11.247
2.01	0.497	5.913	8.091	10.988	5.460	13.230
1.42	0.705	9.312	11.326	5.272	3.716	14.739
1.00	1.000	13.755	13.900	0.000	0.000	15.622
0.70	1.419	18.895	15.324	-4.341	-6.158	16.025
0.50	2.013	24.378	15.937	-7.598	-15.292	16.178
0.35	2.855	29.998	16.170	-9.954	-28.419	16.225
0.25	4.050	35.670	16.254	-11.630	-47.105	16.254
0.17	5.746	41.360	16.284	-12.816	-73.637	16.284

Jorrie

Quote by mfb

Yinf standard is 16.3, but the tooltip gives 16.9 as best fit?

Yes, tooltip in error. Thanks for heads-up, will fix.

Jorrie

Quote by marcus

I wanted 20 steps down from 1090 to 1 (from recombination to present)
so I put this into google calculator:
"1090^.05"
and got 1.41863714

I thought about putting something like this in the calculator, but in order to retain flexibility, it clutters the relatively 'clean' look and feel a little. Maybe I should put it in the accompanying tooltip...

Edit: Done. Also fixed the tooltip mistake.

If your cache prevents modified version from loading, try TabCosmoC2.html. It is the same as C1.

marcus

One of the luxuries associated with using the new online Cosmic Tabulator is you can (in seconds) get a whole history of the universe from recombination (the origin of the Background) down to today and on far into the future.
I just tried this to see how it would look if I set it to use 30 steps to get from recombination to Now, and then let it do a dozen or so steps beyond that into the future.

What I like about this (besides that it is very quick to get once you decide you want to start at S=1090 and get to the present in 30 steps) is that you see in context a lot of the numbers that we are always hearing about--that keep coming up in Cosmo Forum threads. For instance right in the first row you see that the CMB was emitted in year 380,000, by matter that was then 42 million LY away, and is now 45.89 billion LY from us.

And you see, from the bottom row, that both the distance to the cosmic event horizon AND the Hubble distance are converging together to 16.3 billion LY. In fact that's what they'll essentially be by year 62 billion.

And the Hubble times give you a convenient handle on the expansion rates now, and in the past, and in the future.
You can see the present Hubble time (in the S=1 row) is 13.9 billion years---this means distances are increasing by 1/139 of a percent every million years.

Far in the future, when the Hubble time is stabilizing at 16.3 billion years, distances will of course be increasing by 1/163 of a percent every million years. Then again, if you check out the row around S=2.5 you'll see that, back around year 4 billion, expansion was considerably faster---around 1/60 of a percent per million years.

And the nice thing is you get to see how all these numbers gradually change over time.

Code:

S	a	T	T_Hub	D_now	D_then	D_hor
1090.0	0.001	0.00038	0.001	45.890	0.042	0.056
863.33	0.001	0.00056	0.001	45.714	0.053	0.071
683.80	0.001	0.00083	0.001	45.512	0.067	0.089
541.60	0.002	0.00121	0.002	45.280	0.084	0.112
428.97	0.002	0.00176	0.003	45.016	0.105	0.141
339.77	0.003	0.00255	0.004	44.715	0.132	0.178
269.11	0.004	0.00369	0.006	44.373	0.165	0.223
213.15	0.005	0.00532	0.008	43.985	0.206	0.280
168.82	0.006	0.00764	0.012	43.547	0.258	0.351
133.72	0.007	0.01095	0.017	43.051	0.322	0.439
105.91	0.009	0.01567	0.024	42.492	0.401	0.549
83.889	0.012	0.02239	0.034	41.861	0.499	0.685
66.444	0.015	0.03196	0.049	41.151	0.619	0.855
52.627	0.019	0.04555	0.069	40.350	0.767	1.064
41.683	0.024	0.06488	0.098	39.449	0.946	1.322
33.015	0.030	0.09233	0.140	38.436	1.164	1.638
26.150	0.038	0.13132	0.198	37.295	1.426	2.024
20.712	0.048	0.18667	0.281	36.013	1.739	2.494
16.405	0.061	0.26525	0.399	34.571	2.107	3.061
12.993	0.077	0.37676	0.567	32.950	2.536	3.739
10.291	0.097	0.53495	0.804	31.129	3.025	4.544
8.151	0.123	0.75926	1.140	29.084	3.568	5.486
6.456	0.155	1.07696	1.613	26.790	4.149	6.571
5.114	0.196	1.52614	2.277	24.220	4.736	7.794
4.050	0.247	2.15887	3.200	21.353	5.272	9.133
3.208	0.312	3.04392	4.454	18.176	5.666	10.540
2.541	0.394	4.26571	6.093	14.701	5.786	11.940
2.013	0.497	5.91316	8.091	10.988	5.460	13.230
1.594	0.627	8.05254	10.269	7.165	4.495	14.305
1.263	0.792	10.6898	12.304	3.428	2.715	15.101
1.000	1.000	13.7547	13.900	0.000	0.000	15.622
0.792	1.263	17.1291	14.965	-3.021	-3.814	15.929
0.627	1.594	20.6981	15.594	-5.540	-8.831	16.095
0.497	2.013	24.3777	15.937	-7.598	-15.292	16.178
0.394	2.541	28.1165	16.117	-9.255	-23.516	16.216
0.312	3.208	31.8857	16.208	-10.578	-33.934	16.230
0.247	4.050	35.6702	16.254	-11.630	-47.105	16.254
0.196	5.114	39.4625	16.277	-12.465	-63.743	16.277
0.155	6.456	43.2586	16.289	-13.127	-84.754	16.289
0.123	8.151	47.0568	16.294	-13.652	-111.28	16.294
0.097	10.291	50.8558	16.297	-14.068	-144.77	16.297
0.077	12.993	54.6553	16.299	-14.397	-187.06	16.299
0.061	16.405	58.4551	16.299	-14.658	-240.46	16.299
0.048	20.712	62.2551	16.300	-14.865	-307.87	16.300

Time now (at S=1) or present age in billion years:	13.7547

Again looking at the bottom row, to give an example of telling yourself stories to interpret the numbers, suppose today we decide to send a message (an intense flash of light) to a galaxy which is NOW 14.865 billion LY from us. there are lots of galaxies like that, most of those we see with a telescope are that far or farther. So imagine we pick out an especially pretty one and decide to send them a message today. How long will the message take to reach them? Well today is year 13.75 billion and the table says the message gets there in year 62.25 billion, so you do the arithmetic.
And how far will they be from us when the message actually "catches up" to them and gets there? The table says they will be 20.7 times farther than they are today, and that means they will be at a distance of 307.87 billion LY.

I keep the link to the calculator in my signature to have it handy. But here it is, a little more visibly:
http://www.einsteins-theory-of-relat...abCosmoC1.html
As always, thanks Jorrie. It's neat.

marcus

I mentioned that if you look down to the last row of the table, around year 60 billion when distances are 20 times what they are at present you will see the important distance 16.3 billion LY.

Both the Hubble distance and the Cosmic Event Horizon distance are converging to that important 16.3---you can see that in the table very clearly.

That 16.3 billion LY distance is a physical substantive visible form of the cosmological constant Λ. Just take the reciprocal of that distance, and square it, and you have Λ.

There is nothing "dark" or mysterious about it. It was a mistake, I think, to ever refer to it as "dark energy". Technically it is a small intrinsic curvature which naturally appears in the Einstein GR equation and whose value was not known until recently (the 1990s). The value might have turned out to be exactly zero, but there was no reason it had to be zero, and as it turned out, it wasn't.

Similar Threads for: Look 88 billion years into future with the A20 tabular calculator
Thread	Forum	Replies
13.7 billion years...	General Astronomy	7
12.5 billion years ago what did...	Astrophysics	1
What will the universe look like in 15 billion years from now ?	Astrophysics	3
Light from 14 Billion Years Ago	Cosmology	58
The Next 100 Billion Years...	General Discussion	43

mfb Mentor	Some different scaling for the scale factor entries would be interesting - maybe equidistant logarithm or equidistant scale factor (+optional?). If you want to look at the range of 1090 to 1, for example, you just have a single entry in the stelliferous era, unless you want 100+ lines as output. Entries like (1090, 545, ..., 2, 1) +- rounding errors would be more relevant I think.

Naty1 Recognitions: Gold Member	Jorrie...this model: cool. Thanks for your efforts.!!