Graduate Can an Oscillating Eternal Universe be Described without Singularity?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the feasibility of describing an oscillating eternal universe without singularity using a specific scale factor defined as a(t)=sin(t)(1+sgn(sin(t)) + ε. Participants emphasize the necessity of formulating the entire line element rather than merely providing a scale factor. The Standard Model of cosmology, particularly the Friedmann Equations, is referenced as a framework that already incorporates a scale factor, suggesting that any new metric must align with established cosmological principles.

PREREQUISITES
  • Friedmann Equations
  • FLRW metric
  • Standard Model of cosmology
  • Differentiable manifolds
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the derivation of the Friedmann Equations
  • Study the implications of the FLRW metric in cosmology
  • Explore the concept of differentiable manifolds in mathematical physics
  • Investigate alternative metrics for cosmological models
USEFUL FOR

Astronomers, theoretical physicists, and cosmologists interested in advanced models of the universe and the mathematical frameworks that describe cosmic phenomena.

victorvmotti
Messages
152
Reaction score
5
Consider the FLRW metric.

We pick a specific definition for the scale factor as suggested bellow.

Suppose we have a hypothetical metric having the scale factor defined by

## a(t)=\sin(t) (1+ \text {sgn}(\sin(t)) +\epsilon ##

Does this make sense, mathematically (and physically)?

Like having a continuous smooth (differentiable) manifold. Or relating to the geometric properties of homogeneity and isotropy, an expanding and contracting universe?

Can this describe an oscillating eternal infinite universe without singularity?

If it does not, how to write a metric that can do so?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
victorvmotti said:
Suppose we have a hypothetical metric having the scale factor
Just giving a scale factor doesn't tell us what the metric is. You need to write down the entire line element.
 
PeterDonis said:
Just giving a scale factor doesn't tell us what the metric is. You need to write down the entire line element.
Actually, I meant that the Standard Model of cosmology and its metric to be used, only that we pick a specific definition for the scale factor as suggested.
 
victorvmotti said:
Actually, I meant that the Standard Model of cosmology and its metric to be used, only that we pick a specific definition for the scale factor as suggested.
The Standard Model of cosmology already includes a definition for the scale factor, which is not yours.

If you mean the general FRW metric, you should be able to write it down. And you should also be able to plug your ansatz for the scale factor into the equations that that metric gives (the Friedmann Equations) to see whether they make sense. Anyone with the background knowledge for an "A" level thread on this topic should be able to do that.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K