Conservation of Energy in Friedman Equation

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of the first law of thermodynamics to the expansion of the universe, specifically in the context of the Friedman Equations. Participants explore the implications of energy conservation during cosmic expansion, particularly when considering regions of space with varying pressure.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that applying the first law of thermodynamics to the universe's expansion leads to a specific form of the Friedman Equation, suggesting that energy density decreases due to both dilution and work done against pressure.
  • Another participant questions whether including a cosmological constant could resolve the issue of energy conservation in this context.
  • A different participant argues that the cosmological constant is irrelevant to the discussion, proposing instead that the problem is one of local energy conservation, where energy flows out of a small region to neighboring areas.
  • One participant emphasizes that energy conservation must hold, but points out that defining energy as an integral over a 3-volume is problematic in an expanding universe.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the role of the cosmological constant and the nature of energy conservation in an expanding universe. There is no consensus on how to resolve the apparent issues with energy conservation.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in defining energy in an expanding universe and the implications of local versus global energy conservation, but do not resolve these complexities.

paultsui
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
The first law of thermodynamics states that dU = -PdV + dQ
We can apply this to the expansion of the universe by assuming the expansion of space is a adiabatic process, i.e. dQ = 0. Together with the FW metric, we end up with one of the Friedman Equations: \dot{\rho} = -\frac{3\dot{a}}{a}(p + P/c^{2})

Now let's focus on a cubic region of space. In the case P=0, this means that \dot{\rho} = -\frac{3\dot{a}}{a}(p). This makes sense because this accounts for the fact that when the universe expands, the energy density within get diluted. However, when P != 0, we also have the term -\frac{3\dot{a}}{a}(P/c^{2}). This terms correspond to the -pdV term in the thermodynamics equation. In other words, the energy in the region decreases not just because of dilution, but also because part of the energy is used to "push" the matter outside the region.

My question is, where has the energy that used to "push" the matter outside the region gone? Obviously energy has to be conserved. So the lost energy must have gone to somewhere.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Can this be fixed by including a cosmological constant ?

If not, it looks like a case of lack of global energy conservation in GR.
 
What do you mean by including a cosmological constant?
This equation can be obtained by eliminating the cosmological constant from the other two Friedman Equations. So I guess cosmological constant is irrelavant here.

I think this is a local energy conservation problem - we are considering a "small" region in space, where energy flow out of the region to its neighbour.

Please correct me if I am wrong.
 
paultsui said:
What do you mean by including a cosmological constant?
This equation can be obtained by eliminating the cosmological constant from the other two Friedman Equations. So I guess cosmological constant is irrelavant here.
OK.

I think this is a local energy conservation problem - we are considering a "small" region in space, where energy flow out of the region to its neighbour.

Please correct me if I am wrong.
Locally the energy has gone to some neighbours. I guess the divergence of the flow is zero so it must be escaping at the boundary.
 
paultsui said:
Obviously energy has to be conserved.
Unfortunately energy as an integral over a 3-volume cannot even be defined in an expanding universe.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 36 ·
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
7K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
4K