Deceleration parameter and critical densities

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the deceleration parameter \( q_0 \) using the Friedmann equations and relative densities \( \Omega_M, \Omega_R, \Omega_\Lambda \). Participants are exploring the relationships between these variables and the equations governing cosmic expansion.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss differentiating equations related to the Friedmann equations to derive the deceleration parameter. There are questions about the complexity of the resulting expressions and the implications of treating certain variables as constants.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on differentiating the equations and simplifying terms, while others are confirming their understanding of the assumptions regarding the scale factor at the present time. There is a sense of progress as participants clarify their approaches, but no explicit consensus has been reached.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of the Friedmann equations and the definitions of the deceleration parameter, with some expressing uncertainty about the role of the parameter \( w \) in their calculations.

dingo_d
Messages
199
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Using Friedmann equations find the parameter of deceleration q_0 using relative densities \Omega_M,\ \Omega_R,\ \Omega_\Lambda.

Homework Equations



Friedmann equations, deceleration parameter:

q_0=-\frac{\ddot{a_0}a_0}{\dot{a_0}^2}

The Attempt at a Solution



So from second Friedmann equation (the one with k parameter which tells us whether the Universe is open, flat or close) and got to this point:

\left(\frac{\dot{a}}{\dot{a_0}}\right)^2 = \left(\frac{a_0}{a}\right)^2\Omega_R+\left(\frac{a_0}{a}\right)\Omega_M+\Omega_K+\left(\frac{a}{a_0}\right)^2\Omega_\Lambda

a is the scale factor (sometimes denoted as R in the books).

And I'm stuck. The book here

equation (11.55)

Says that I should get

q=\frac{\Omega_M}{2}+\Omega_R-\Omega_\Lambda

I tried using first Friedmann equation, but then my equation depends on parameter w, which connects pressure and density: p=w\rho, and I don't get correct answer :\

I found one presentation which says that I should somehow (no explanation, of course -.-") connect the equation I got with the deceleration parameter using: "a bit of math".

I tried connecting the second derivative of the scale factor in the definition of deceleration parameter, so that I don't need to use the equation which has w in it, but I really have no idea what to do.

Any help would be appreciated...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
From this, I get the correct result.

What do you get when you differentiate with respect to time the equation in "The Attempt at a solution"?
 
You mean I should differentiate the expression with omegas? But that would give me really complicated expression on the right, wouldn't it?

\frac{2 \dot{a}<br /> \ddot{a}}{\dot{a_0}^2}-\frac<br /> {2 \dot{a}^2<br /> \ddot{a_0}}{\dot{a_0}^3}

Hmmm...

If the a_0 is scale factor at the present time, than it's constant, no? That means that it doesn't depend on time, and I just derive the numerator, right? And if, after that I put that I am looking at t=t_0 than I get deceleration parameter.

Am I going in the right direction?
 
Last edited:
When differentiating, \dot{a}_0 = \dot{a} \left( t_0 \right) and a_0 = a \left( t_0 \right) are constants.
 
Last edited:
Oh that simplifies things :D Thanks, I dk why I thought it depended on time :\
 
So when I do the derivation and when I simplify things a bit, I need to presume that I'm looking at the t=t_0, so that my scale factors would all cancel out, right?
 
dingo_d said:
So when I do the derivation and when I simplify things a bit, I need to presume that I'm looking at the t=t_0, so that my scale factors would all cancel out, right?

Yes.
 
I got the correct answer :) Thanks for all the help ^^ thumbs up :D
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K