Cosmology Questions: Show Max Size in Expanding Universe w/o Quotes

  • Thread starter Thread starter roam
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cosmology
roam
Messages
1,265
Reaction score
12

Homework Statement


(a)[/B] From the continuity equation show that if ##P=\omega \rho## and ##\omega > -1/3##, show that an expanding universe will eventually reach a maximum size. Take ##k=1## (closed universe).

(b) Show that if ##\omega <-1##, the energy density ##\rho## will increase as the universe expands.

Homework Equations



Continuity equation: ##\dot{\rho}+3 \frac{\dot{a}}{a} (\rho +P)=0##

First Friedmann equation:

##\left( \frac{\dot{a}}{a} \right)^2 = \frac{8 \pi G}{3} \rho - \frac{k}{a^2}##

The Attempt at a Solution



(a)[/B] The hint says I must first solve for ##a## when ##\dot{a}=0## the first Friedmann equation and then consider ##\ddot{a}##. So solving that equation yields:

##a=\sqrt{\frac{3k}{8 \pi G \rho}}=\sqrt{\frac{3}{8 \pi G \rho}}##

To find ##\ddot{a}##, I substitute this into the second Friedmann equation:

##\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}= - \frac{4 \pi G}{3} (\rho + 3P) \implies \ddot{a} = \frac{-4 \pi G}{3} (\rho +3P). \sqrt{\frac{3}{8\pi G \rho}}##

Using the equation of state ##\rho=P/\omega##

##\ddot{a} = \frac{-4 \pi G}{3} ((P/\omega)+3P). \sqrt{\frac{3}{8\pi G (P/\omega)}}##

Do I need to show that we have positive acceleration (i.e. ##\ddot{a}>0##)? I think the equation above shows that acceleration is reduced as the universe expands (##\ddot{a}## decreases as P decreases).

Also, how can I use the continuity equation here? :confused:

(b) Do I need to be looking at the expression I found previously with negative P?

Any corrections or explanation is greatly appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I would use the equation of state to remove P instead of ##\rho##. Pressure can be negative, energy density is not.
 
  • Like
Likes roam
Orodruin said:
I would use the equation of state to remove P instead of ##\rho##. Pressure can be negative, energy density is not.

Thank you. I got

##\ddot{a}=\frac{-4\pi G}{3}(\rho+3\rho \omega) \sqrt{\frac{3}{8 \pi G \rho}}##

So, for the case ##\omega = -1/3##, we have ##\ddot{a}=\sqrt{\frac{3}{8 \pi G \rho}}>0##. So the acceleration is always positive.

But how could we use the continuity equation in this case?
 
I assume you mean for ##\omega < -1/3##. Why would you not expect the continuity equation to hold? A component with negative pressure simply behaves very differently from ordinary matter or radiation. In particular, the case of ##\omega = -1## corresponds to a cosmological constant.

Also note that you have assumed that ##\dot a = 0## in your expression. This is not necessary to know the sign of the acceleration, but it will be true in particular when this holds.
 
No, I meant for the case when ##\omega >-1/3##. How does one explain that such a universe reaches a maximum size with reference to the continuity equation?
 
The second Friedmann equation is derived by inserting the continuity equation into the first Friedmann equation so when you are applying the second Friedmann equation you are implicitly assuming the continuity equation.

If ##\omega > -1/3## you have ##\ddot a \propto - \rho (1 + 3\omega) < 0## so deceleration. In order to have ##\ddot a## positive, ##1+3\omega## must be negative, i.e., ##1 + 3\omega < 0 \Rightarrow \omega < -1/3##. What is the nature of the local extrema (where ##\dot a## is zero) if the second derivative is negative?
 
  • Like
Likes roam
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top