Can Empty Space Curve? FRW Cosmology Equations Explored

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion explores the implications of the Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) cosmology equations when considering an empty universe, specifically examining the conditions under which empty space can exhibit curvature. Participants analyze the equations under different values of the curvature parameter k and discuss the nature of the Milne universe.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the FRW equations and explores the case where both energy density and pressure are set to zero, questioning the implications of different values of k on the expansion of the universe.
  • Another participant identifies the solution for k=-1 as describing the Milne universe, which has curved spatial sections but flat spacetime, and notes that this solution is often overlooked due to assumptions about the relationship between k and mass/energy.
  • There is a discussion about the nature of spatial curvature being somewhat arbitrary and dependent on the choice of hypersurfaces, while spacetime curvature is tied to the presence of mass/energy.
  • A participant inquires about distinguishing between spacetime curvature and spatial curvature, suggesting the calculation of the curvature tensor from the metric.
  • Another participant comments on the theoretical implications of an empty universe and how the introduction of light could alter the perceived curvature by introducing a mass equivalent.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of curvature in an empty universe, with some supporting the idea that spatial curvature can exist independently of mass/energy, while others emphasize the role of mass/energy in defining spacetime curvature. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the interpretation of k and its implications for cosmological models.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the assumptions regarding the relationship between curvature and mass/energy may limit the analysis, and the discussion reflects a range of interpretations of the FRW equations under specific conditions.

copernicus1
Messages
98
Reaction score
0
If I start with the standard FRW cosmology equations,
$${\eqalign{
3\dot a^2/a^2&=8\pi\rho-3k/a^2\cr
3\ddot a/a&=-4\pi\left(\rho+3P\right),}}$$
and set [/tex]\rho=P=0[/itex] (or $T^{\mu\nu}=0$), I have
$${\eqalign{
3\dot a^2/a^2&=-3k/a^2\cr
3\ddot a/a&=0.}}$$
The second equation gives $$\ddot a=0,$$ but $$\dot a$$ seems to depend on the value of k.

Namely, if I set k=0, then $$\dot a=0$$ and this leads to an ordinary Minkowski space metric. If I choose k=+1, then a is complex and that doesn't seem physical, but if I set k=-1, then I can get $$3\dot a^2/a^2=3/a^2~~~~\Longrightarrow~~~~\dot a=1~~~~\Longrightarrow~~~~a=t,$$ which I suppose describes a spatially hyperbolic universe (k=-1) with no energy/matter content, where spatial distances increase linearly in time.

Do we just ignore this solution based on the assumption that nonzero k implies the presence of mass/energy by definition, or have I gone wrong in my reasoning somewhere?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
copernicus1 said:
if I set k=-1, then I can get $$3\dot a^2/a^2=3/a^2~~~~\Longrightarrow~~~~\dot a=1~~~~\Longrightarrow~~~~a=t,$$ which I suppose describes a spatially hyperbolic universe (k=-1) with no energy/matter content, where spatial distances increase linearly in time.

Do we just ignore this solution based on the assumption that nonzero k implies the presence of mass/energy by definition, or have I gone wrong in my reasoning somewhere?

This is the Milne universe, which has curved 3-dimensional spatial sections, and which also has zero spacetime curvature.

George Jones said:
Just a short, redundant comment for clarity.
nutgeb said:
For example, an empty FRW model is characterized by hyperbolic spatial curvature.

Here spacetime is flat and space is curved.

nutgeb said:
For a more plausible kinematic analysis, one might want to compare the supernova data to an FRW Omega=1 spatially flat dust model using light travel distance from time of emission.

Here spacetime is curved and space is flat.

Mass/energy (the stress-energy tensor) is the source of spacetime curvature. Spatial curvature is somewhat arbitrary, i.e., it depends on how the particular 3-dimensional hypersurfaces are chosen.

George Jones said:
You're talking about the Milne universe, which is a a patch of Minkowski spacetime in somewhat unusual coordinates.

Start with Minkowski spacetime in spherical coordinates,

[tex] ds^2 = dt'^2 - dr^2 - r^2 d \Omega^2 ,[/tex]

and make the coordinate transformation

[tex] t' = t \cosh \chi[/tex]

[tex] r = t \sinh \chi.[/tex]
 
Last edited:
Awesome thanks. How can I tell what the spacetime curvature is, as opposed to just the spatial curvature?
 
copernicus1 said:
Awesome thanks. How can I tell what the spacetime curvature is, as opposed to just the spatial curvature?

Calculate the spacetime curvature tensor (from the metric). Note that if all the components of a tensor are zero in one coordinate system, then they are all zero in all coordinate systems.

In this case, because the components of the Minkowski metric are constant in an inertial coordinate system, the components of the curvature tensor are all zero in inertial coordinates, are zero in spherical coordinates, and are all zero in cosmological coordinates for the Milne universe.
 
Thanks this is very helpful.
 
Without going through the mathematics as posted above, it would appear that a theoretical totally empty universe with nothing in it would have no mass to "bend" it. Once light is introduced to observe this, a theoretical "mass equivalent" m=E/c^2 is brought in, which would change that and curvature would be effected.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K