Calculating Luminosity Distance in an Empty Cosmology

In summary, the conversation discusses the concept of empty cosmology and its effects on luminosity distance. It also delves into the friedman equations and their relation to Hubble parameter, curvature, and scale factor. The concept of luminosity distance as a function of redshift is also explored, with references to relevant resources. Overall, the conversation concludes that without any matter or radiation, luminosity distance holds no significance and can be defined arbitrarily.
  • #1
jc09
45
0
If had empty cosmology?

What would happen if we had no matter or radiation or dark energyand only had curvature?

How would this effect luminosity distance?

From the friedman equations I get that H2=-k/R2. Is this right?
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #2


http://www.lightandmatter.com/html_books/genrel/ch08/ch08.html#Section8.2

See subsection 8.2.7, "The vacuum-dominated solution."

If you want a simple cosmology with only one component (radiation, dust, or vacuum energy), then this one is actually the one that's the best approximation to the universe we live in right now.

jc09 said:
From the friedman equations I get that H2=-k/R2. Is this right?
Could you define your notation?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #3


H is the Hubble parameter, k is the curvature constant and R is the scale factor.
 
  • #4


So if I want to get luminosity distance as a function of redshift how would I do that?
 
  • #5


I get [itex]H=R'/R=\sqrt{\Lambda/3}[/itex]. See the link in #2.
 
  • #7


bcrowell said:
I get [itex]H=R'/R=\sqrt{\Lambda/3}[/itex]. See the link in #2.

If Lambda=0 though ??
 
  • #9


jc09 said:
What would happen if we had no matter or radiation or dark energyand only had curvature?

How would this effect luminosity distance?

From the friedman equations I get that H2=-k/R2. Is this right?
Understand that if you have no matter, radiation, or dark energy, the terms 'k', 'H', and 'R' become meaningless, and you're left with just a reparameterization of flat Minkowski space-time (the space-time described by Special Relativity). This is the Milne model (linked above).
 
  • #10


To add on Chalnoth's post, if there is no matter and no radiation, luminosity of what can one measure?
 
  • #11


What if K the curvature did not equal zero. What if it could be equal to +1 or -1 does this make a difference. Then I get k=-H2R2 where we are in units of c equals one. Can we then find a luminosity distance as a function of z even though there is empty cosmology
 
  • #12


jc09 said:
What if K the curvature did not equal zero.
It doesn't make a difference. Either way, it's just a reparameterization of flat Minkowski space-time.

The crucial difference between k and the space-time curvature is that k only includes the spatial components. So in essence what you're doing by setting k to be nonzero is adding some spatial curvature (represented by k) and some curvature in time (represented by H), such that the total space-time curvature remains zero.

jc09 said:
Can we then find a luminosity distance as a function of z even though there is empty cosmology
Well, you certainly can. The problem is that it's quite arbitrary, as without any matter there is nothing to sort of "nail down" the cosmology to anything physical. So you can define a wide variety of luminosity distances as a function of z, and they'd all be equally valid as one another (and just as uninformative).
 
  • #13


Ok I think I understand so I could write luminosity as a function of z but it won't really mean anything to me. So if I was to do that would it be the normal definiton for luminosity:
dLH0=z+1/2(1-q0)z2+...?
 
  • #14


jc09 said:
Ok I think I understand so I could write luminosity as a function of z but it won't really mean anything to me. So if I was to do that would it be the normal definiton for luminosity:
dLH0=z+1/2(1-q0)z2+...?
This expansion isn't often used. Rather we usually use the luminosity distance defined here:
http://arxiv.org/abs/astroph/9905116

But yes, you could certainly make use of the normal luminosity distance in FRW. It's just that it doesn't mean anything because it's not tied to any actual expansion (since there's nothing in the universe to expand, the expansion rate itself is whatever you define it to be).
 

1. What is empty cosmology?

Empty cosmology is a theoretical model that describes a universe with no matter or energy, meaning there are no galaxies, stars, planets, or even light. It is a simplified version of the standard cosmological model and is used to study the early stages of the universe before matter and energy existed.

2. Is empty cosmology a realistic representation of the universe?

No, empty cosmology is a simplified theoretical model and does not accurately represent the universe we live in. It is used as a tool for scientists to understand the early stages of the universe and make predictions about its evolution.

3. What are the implications of empty cosmology?

The implications of empty cosmology are mainly focused on the early stages of the universe, such as the Big Bang and the formation of the first structures. It helps scientists understand the evolution of the universe and make predictions about its future.

4. How is empty cosmology different from the standard cosmological model?

The main difference between empty cosmology and the standard cosmological model is the absence of matter and energy in empty cosmology. The standard model includes matter and energy, which shape the universe and its evolution, while empty cosmology is a simplified version used for theoretical studies.

5. What are the current limitations of empty cosmology?

One of the main limitations of empty cosmology is that it does not account for the effects of dark matter and dark energy, which are believed to make up a significant portion of the universe. Additionally, it does not explain the observed large-scale structures of the universe, such as galaxies and galaxy clusters.

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
34
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
375
Replies
6
Views
935
  • Cosmology
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
764
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
765
Replies
153
Views
10K
Back
Top