I How Do You Derive Transverse Comoving Distance?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter S0uris
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Transverse
AI Thread Summary
To derive the transverse comoving distance, it's essential to understand the Friedmann-Robertson-Walker (FRW) metric, as it involves coordinate transformations to hyperspherical coordinates due to potential singularities. The transverse comoving distance is linked to angular diameter distance through the scale factor, which equals one at the current time. The original poster expressed difficulty in starting the derivation, indicating a need for more accessible explanations beyond the linked paper. Familiarity with Einstein notation is recommended, particularly focusing on specific sections of the document for clarity. A thorough understanding of these concepts is crucial for successfully deriving the desired distance.
S0uris
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi, i need derive the comoving distance (transverse)

im working with https://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/9905116.pdf

I've had trouble starting, please help :)

Captura de pantalla de 2020-06-03 19-12-29.png
 
Last edited:
Space news on Phys.org
Could you go into more details? You cannot expect the readers read the entire paper.
 
ok :) i just need this form, i don't know how to start.

Captura de pantalla de 2020-06-03 19-12-29.png
 
S0uris said:
i need derive the comoving distance (transverse)

What do you mean by "derive" and what information that you need to do so isn't in the paper you linked to?
 
S0uris said:
Hi, i need derive the comoving distance (transverse)

im working with https://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/9905116.pdf

I've had trouble starting, please help :)

View attachment 264089

I think you need to read up on the Friedmann-Robertson-Walker metric. If you do you will know those trigonometric terms come from the coordinate transformation to hyperspherical coordinates. This is done because the FRW metric (which is really the metric of a 3-sphere in spacetime) has a coordinate singularity when the curvature of the universe is non-zero.

The second point is that transverse comoving distance is related to angular diameter distance via the scale factor and in fact in the current time the scale factor is equal to one.

This explanation is terrible I know, but It's difficult to explain without actually deriving everything. If you are familiar with Einstein notation, then pages 3 to 6 inclusive of this document might help.
 
Last edited:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
The formal paper is here. The Rutgers University news has published a story about an image being closely examined at their New Brunswick campus. Here is an excerpt: Computer modeling of the gravitational lens by Keeton and Eid showed that the four visible foreground galaxies causing the gravitational bending couldn’t explain the details of the five-image pattern. Only with the addition of a large, invisible mass, in this case, a dark matter halo, could the model match the observations...
Why was the Hubble constant assumed to be decreasing and slowing down (decelerating) the expansion rate of the Universe, while at the same time Dark Energy is presumably accelerating the expansion? And to thicken the plot. recent news from NASA indicates that the Hubble constant is now increasing. Can you clarify this enigma? Also., if the Hubble constant eventually decreases, why is there a lower limit to its value?
Back
Top